&es*i 
 
 
 vwW^, 
 
 
 Wflj 
 
 taAW-'W 
 
 A ^ ^ 
 
 
 -'AAA' 
 
 
 
 
 
 DUKE 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 "' ~ * * ', 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 
 
 ! 
 
 Treasure %oom 
 
 " 
 
 
 
 ^/>^np^'^- 
 

 ^<m,hw 
 
 *^r* ■**«. 
 
 
 m 
 
 
 rtrtAn** - _ - . * 
 
 
 %>*^;./ 
 
 ->**«■' 
 
 
 
 * *■ ^ ,» .» »- 
 
 StfS' 
 
 
 
 
 »K 
 
 ■£?- ' 
 
 ^ ---.;- i? &f$& Sir 
 
IETTE 
 
 to tRe 
 
 fc O N O U R A B L E 
 
 THOMAS ERSKINE, 
 
 024 YHK 
 
 PROSECUTION 
 
 OF 
 
 THOMAS WILLIAMS, 
 
 FOR 
 
 PUBLISHING THE AGE OF REASON; 
 
 By THOMAS PAINE, 
 
 ASTKOR OF COMMON SINSI, RIGHT* OF MAN, AGRARIAN JV§TJC3, &C. fcfc 
 
 PARIS: 
 
 PRINTED FOtt THE AUTHOR* 
 
 1797- 
 
■02 
 
! 
 
 » ■ - 
 
 
 INTRODUCTION- 
 
 IT is a matter of furprife to fome people to fee 
 Mr. Erfkine act as counfelfor a crown profecution 
 commenced againft. the right of opinion, I confefs it is 
 none to me, notwithstanding all that Mr, Erfkine has 
 faid before ; for it is difficult to know when a lawyer 
 is to be believed: I have always obferved that # Mr. 
 Erfkine, when contending as a counfel for the right 
 
 i 
 
 of political opinion, frequently took pecafions, and thofe 
 often dragged in head and moulders, to lard, what he 
 called the Britim Conftitution, with a great deal of 
 praife. Yet the fame Mr. Erfkine faid to me in con- 
 veriation, were government to -begin de novo in Eng- 
 land, they never would eftablifh fuch a damned ab- 
 furdity, (it was exactly his expreffion) as this is, ought 
 I then to be furprifed at Mr. Erfkine for incon- 
 fiftency. 
 
 A 2 In 
 
Iv iNTRornrcTrdNc 
 
 In this profecution Mr. Erskine admits the right of 
 controverfy ; but fays, that the Chriftian religion is 
 not to be abufed. This is fomewhat fophiftical, be- 
 caufe while he admits the right of controverfy, he re» 
 ferves the right of calling that controverfy, abufe : 
 and thus, lawyer-like, undoes by one word, what he 
 fays in the other. I will, however, in this letter keep 
 within the limits he prefcribes ; he will find here 
 nothing about the Chriflian religion ; he will find only 
 a Statement of a few cafes, which ihew the neceffity 
 of examining the books, handed to us from the Jews* 
 in order to difcover if we have not been impofed 
 upon ; together with fome obfervations on the manner 
 in which the trial of Williams has been conducted. 
 If Mr. Erskine denies the right of examining thofe 
 books, he had better profefs himfelf at once an advo-. 
 eate for the eftabliihment of an inquifition, and the 
 re-eftablifhment of the ftar chamber. 
 
 THOMAS PAINE, 
 
 A LETTER 
 
LETTER, &c. 
 
 /"\F all the tyrannies that afflict mankind tyranny in religion is the 
 ^-^ wurft ; Every other fpeeies of tyranny is limited to the world we 
 live in ; but this attempts a ftride beyond the grave, and feeks to pur- 
 fue us into eternity. It is there, and not here, it is to God and not 
 to man, it is to a heavenly and not to an earthly tribunal, that we are 
 to account for our belief; if then we believe falfely and difhonourably 
 of the Creator, and that belief ib forced upon us, as far as force can 
 operate, by human laws and human tribunals, on whom is the crimi- 
 nality of that belief to fall i on thofe who impofe it, or on thofe on 
 whom it is impofed ? 
 
 A bookfeller of the name of Williams has been profecuted in Lon- 
 don on a charge of blafphemy, for publifiiing a book intuled the 
 4tge of Reafon : Blafphe ny is a word of vaft found, but of equivocal 
 and ^lmoft indefinite fignincation ; unlets we confine it to the fimple 
 idea of hurting or injuring the reputation of any one, which was its 
 original meaning. As a word, it exifted before Chriftianity exifted, 
 being a Greek word, or Greek anglohed, as all the etymological 
 dictionaries will fhew. 
 
 But behold how various and contradictory has been the fignincation 
 and application of this equivocal word : Socrates, who lived more 
 than four hundred )ears before the Chriftian aera, was convicted of 
 blafphemy, for preaching againft ifie belief of a plurality of gods, and 
 for preaching the belief oi one god, and was condemned to fuffer 
 death by poifon : Jefus Chriit. was convicted of blafphemy under the 
 Jewiih law, and was crucified. Calling Mahomet an impoftor 
 would be blafphemy in Turkey ; and denymg the infallibility of the 
 Pope and the Church would be blafphemy at Rome. What then is 
 to be underftood by this word blafphemy ? We fee that in the cafe of 
 Socrates, truth was condemned as blafphemy. Are we fure that 
 truth is not blafphemy in the prefent day ? Woe, however, be to 
 thofe who make it fo, whoever they may be, 
 
 A book 
 
( 6 ) 
 
 A book called the bible has been voted by men, and decreed by hu« 
 man laws, to be the word of God, and the difbelief of this is called 
 blafphemy. But if the bible be not the word of God, it is the laws, and 
 the execution of them, that is blafphemy, and not the difbelief. Strange 
 ftories are told of the Creator in that book. He is represented as 
 acting under the influence of every human paflion, even of the moil 
 malignant kind. If thefe ftories are falfe, we err in believing them 
 to be true, and ought not to believe them. It is therefore a duty, 
 which every roan owes to himfelf, and reverentially to his Maker, to 
 afcertain by every poffible enquiry, whether there be fufficient evi- 
 dence to believe them or not. 
 
 My own opinion is decidedlv, that the evidence does not warrant 
 the belief, and thac we fin in forcing that belief upon ourfelves, and 
 upon others, in faying this, I have no other object in view, than 
 truth. But that I may not be accufed o''~ refting upon bare aflertion> 
 with refpetSt to the equivocal Mate of the bible, j will produce an ex- 
 ample, and I will not pick and cull the bibh: for the purpofe. I will 
 go fairly to the cafe. I,will take the two fxrft chapters of Genefis, as 
 
 'they ftand, and fhew from thence the truth of what 1 fay, that is, that 
 the evidence does not warrant the belief, that the bible is the word 
 of God. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 I In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth* 
 *2 And the earth was without form and void, and darknefs was Upon 
 
 ■the face of the deep : and the fpirit of God moved upon the face of the 
 
 -Waters. 
 
 3 And God faid, Let there be light : and there was light. 
 
 4 And God faw the light, that it was igood : and God divided the 
 light from the darknefs. 
 
 5 And God called the light day, and the darknefs he called night : 
 and the evening and the morning were the firft day. 
 
 6 % And God faid, Let there be a firmament in the midft of the 
 waters, and let it divide the wa'ers from the waters. 
 
 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters wbioh 
 were under the firmament, from the Waters which were above the 
 firmament : and it was fo. 
 
 8 And God called the firmament Heaven : and the evening and 
 the morning were the fecond day. 
 
 9 f And God faid, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered 
 together unto one place, and let the dry land appear : and it was fo. 
 
 10 And God called the dryland Earth, and the gathering together 
 ef the waters called he Seas : and God faw that it was good, t 
 
 il And God faid, Let the earth bring forth grais, the herb yielding 
 feed, and the fruit-tree yielding fruit after his kind, whofe feed is in U- 
 felfj upon the earth : and it was fo, 
 
 12 And the earth brought forth grafs, and herb yielding feed after 
 Ris kind, and the free yielding fruit, whofefecd was ill itfelf, after his 
 kind ; and God &w that it Was good. 
 
 13 j&nd 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 13 And the evening and the morning were die third day. 
 
 14 % And God faid, Let there" be lights in the firmament of th» 
 heaven, to divide the day from the night: and let them be for figns, 
 and for feafon-s, and for days, and years. 
 
 15 And let them be tor lights in the firmament of the heaven, to 
 give light upon the earth : and it was fo. 
 
 16 And God made two great lights; the greater right to rule the 
 day, and the lefler light to rule the night : he made the ftars alfo. 
 
 17 And God fet them in the firmament of the heaven, to give 
 light upon the earth, 
 
 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide tha 
 light from the darknefs : and God faw that it was good. 
 
 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 
 
 20 And God laid, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the mov- 
 ing creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in 
 the open firmament of heaven. 
 
 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that 
 movcth, which the waters brought forth abundantly after their kind, 
 and every winged fowl after his kind : and God faw that it was good. 
 
 22 And God blefied them, faying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and 
 fill the waters in the feas, and let fowl multiply in the earrh. 
 
 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 
 
 24 % And God faid, Let the earth bring forth the living creature 
 after his kind, cattle and creeping thing and beaft of the earth after 
 his kind : and it was fo. 
 
 25 And God made the beaft of the earth after his kind, and cattle 
 after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after hi* 
 kind : and God faw that it was good. 
 
 26 1[ And God foid, Let us make man in our image, after our 
 likenefs : and let them have dominion over the fifh of the fea, and over 
 the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and 
 over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, 
 
 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created 
 he him : male and female created he them. 
 
 28 And God bleffed them, and' God faid unto them, Be fruitful, and 
 multiply, and replenijh the earth, -andjubdue it : and have dominion over 
 the fijh of the fea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living 
 thing that movrth upon the earth. 
 
 29 % And God faid, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing 
 feed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the 
 which is the fruit of a tree yielding feed : to you it mail be for meat. 
 
 30 And to every beaft of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, 
 and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, 
 I have given every green herb for meat.: and it was fo. 
 
 31 And God faw every thing that he had made, and behold it was 
 very good. And the evening and the morning were the fixth day. 
 
 CHAPTER 
 
( 8 ) 
 
 CHAPTER il. 
 
 t Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the httft 
 •f them. 
 
 2 And on the feventh day God ended his work which he ha^|1iade t 
 and he refted on the feventh day from all his work which he had made* 
 
 3 And God bleflfed the feventh day, and fan&ified it : becaufe that 
 in it he had refted from all his Work, which God created and made* 
 
 4. H Thefe are the generations of the heavens and of the earthy 
 when they were created ; in the day that the Lord God made the earth 
 and the heavens, 
 
 5 And every plant of the field, before it was in the earth* and every 
 herb of the field, before it grew : for the Lord God had not caufed it 
 to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 
 
 6 But there went up a mift from the earth, and watered the whole 
 face of the ground. 
 
 7 And the Lord God formed man of the d'ift of the ground, and 
 breated into his noftrils the breath of life ; and man became a living 
 foul. 
 
 8 5f And the Lord God planted a garden caft Ward in Eden j arid 
 there he put the man whom he had formed. 
 
 9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree 
 that is pleafant to the fight, and good for food : the tree of life alfo in 
 the midft of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 
 
 io And a river went out of Eden to water the garden j and from 
 thence it was parted, and became into four heads. 
 
 ii The name of the firft is Pifon : that is it which compafleth \kt 
 whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. 
 
 12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the 
 onyx-ftone. 
 
 13 And the name of the fecond river is Gibon i the fame is it that 
 compafleth the whole land of Ethiopia. 
 
 14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel : that is it which 
 goeth toward the eaft of AfTyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. 
 
 15 And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden 
 of Eden, to drefs it and to keep it. 
 
 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, faying, Of ever J 
 tree of the garden thou mayeft freely eat : 
 
 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou (halt not 
 eat of it : for in the day that thou eateft thereof, thou (halt furely die. 
 ^ 18 <|f And the Lord God fcid, It is not good that the man Ihould 
 be alone : I will make him an help meet for him. 
 
 19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every bear! of the 
 field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam to fee 
 
 what 
 
t 9 ) 
 
 Vrhat he would call them : and whatfoever Adam called every living 
 tr-eature, that was the name thereof 
 
 20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, 
 and to every bead of the field : but for Adam there was not found an 
 help meet for him. 
 
 21 And the Lord God caufed a deep fleep to fall upon Adam, and 
 he flept : and he took, one of his ribs, and clofed up the flefli inftead 
 thereof. 
 
 22 And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man, made 
 he a womni,, ,1 brought her unto the man. 
 
 23 And Adam laid, This is now bone of my bones, and flefli of 
 my fleih : (he (hall be calied woman, becaufe (he was taken out of 
 man. 
 
 24 Therefore (hall a man leave his father and his mother, and (hall 
 cleave unto h:s wife: and they (hall be one fle(h. 
 
 25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were 
 not afhamed. 
 
 Thefe two chapters are called the Mofaic account of the creation ; 
 and we are told, nobody knows bv whom, that Mofes was inftructed 
 by God to write thac account. 
 
 Jt has happened that every nation of people has been world- 
 makers ; and each makes the world to begin his own way, as if they 
 had all been brought upj as Hudibrafs f i. ;> s , to the trade. There are 
 hundreds of different opinions and traditions how the world began. 
 My bufinefs, however, in this place, is only with thofe two chapters. 
 
 I begin then by laying, that thofe two chapters, inftead of contain- 
 ing, as has been believed, one continued account of the Creation, 
 written by Mofes, contain two different and contradictory (lories o£ 
 a creation, made by two different perfons, and written in two differ- 
 ent ftiles of expreftion. The evidence that (hews this, is fo clear 
 when attended towthout prejudice, that, did we meet with the 
 fame evidence in any Arabic or Chinefe account of a creation, we 
 fhould not hefitate in pronouncing it a forgery. 
 
 I proceed to diftinguifh the two (fores from each other. 
 
 The firft (lory be ; ins at the firff verfe of the firft chapter, and ends 
 at the end of the third verfe of the fecond chapter ; for the adverbial 
 conjunction, THUS, with which the fecond chapter begins, (as the 
 reader will fee) connects Itfelfto the laft verfe of the firft chapter, 
 and thofe three verfes belong to, and make the conclufion of, the 
 firft ftory 
 
 The fecond ftory begins at the fourth verfe of the fecond chapter* 
 and ends with that chapter. Thofe two (lories have been confufed 
 into one, by cutting off the three laft verfes of the firft ftory, and 
 throwing them to the fecond chapter. 
 
 I go now to (hew that thofe dories have been written by two dif- 
 ferent perfons. 
 
 B From 
 
t '<» ) 
 
 From- the firft verfe of the frrft chapter, to the end of the thrr# 
 verfe of the fecond chapter, wh ch makes the whole of the firft ftory, 
 the word GOD is ufed without any epithet or additional word con- 
 joined" with it, as the reader will fee; and this frile of expreflion is 
 invariably, ufed throughout the whole of this (lory, and is repeated no 
 lefs than thirty five times, viz. * c In the beginning God created the 
 ** heavens, and the earth, and the fpirit of Goi> moved on the face 
 <c of the waters, and God faid, Let there be. light, and God faw 
 « the light, Sec. &c." 
 
 But immediately from the beginning of the fourth verfe of the 
 (fccond chapter, where the (econd ftory begins, the {file of expiefilon 
 is always the Lord-God, and this Mile "f exprefllon is invariably ufed 
 tp the end of the chapter, and is repeated eleven times ; in the one it 
 is always God, and never the Lord-God, in the other it is always the 
 Lord-God, and never God. The fir ft ftory contains thirty-four 
 verfes, and repeats the fingle word God thirty-five times. The fe- 
 cond ftory contains twenty two verfe?, and repeats the compound word- 
 ■hordrGod eleven t'me<- ; thisdifFersriKe of ftile, fo often repeated, and 
 (6 uniform'y continued, fhews, that thole two chapters, containing two 
 different ftories, are w;itttn by difFcren*' pcrfons, it is the fame in alt 
 the different editions of the bible, in ah tne languages J have (cen. 
 
 Having thus fhewn from the difference of ftile, that thofe two 
 chapt rs divided, as thev properly divide themfelves, at the end of the. 
 third verfe of the fecond tbaprer, are th* work of two different per- 
 fbns, i con e to fhew from the contradictory matter 5 , thev contain, that 
 they cannot be the. work of one perfon, and are two differenr ftories. 
 
 It is imp iliole, unl Is frje writer was a lunatic, without memory, 
 that one and the fame perfon could fa\, as is laid in the 27 and 28- 
 Verfes of the fhft chapter — " Bo God creat d man in his own image, in 
 ct the imaze of God created be bim : male ana female created hi thejn, 
 u and God blijjed thtm, and God laid unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, 
 w and teplen Jh the earth, and fubdue it, and have dominion over the fijh 
 ** ofthefea, and over th, fowls of the air, and over every living things 
 u that movetb on the face of the earth.'''' It is, 1 fay, impoflible, that 
 the fame per on, who f. id thK, could afterwards fay, as is laid in the 
 |econd chaptet, ver. 5, and there was not a man to till the ground ; and 
 then proceed in the 7th \erfe to give another account of the making 
 a man for the nrft time, and afterwards of the making a woman out 
 of his rib. 
 
 Again, one and the fame perfon could not write, as is written in the 
 29th verfe of the frrft chapter; behold 1 .God) have given you every 
 herb bearing feed, which is on the face of all the earth ; and every 
 tree, in wh'ch is the fruit of a tree bearing feed, to you it fhall be 
 for me;t and afterwards fay, as is fad in the fecond chapter, that the 
 Lord-God pLnted a tree in the midft of a garden, and forbad man to 
 cat thereof. 
 
 Again, one and the fame perfon could not fay, " Thus the heavens 
 ** and the earth were fnijhed, and all the hojl of them, and on thefeventh 
 * day God ended all bis work) which bt bad made," and immediately 
 
 after, 
 
( H ) 
 
 after, fet the Creator to work again, to plant a garden, to make a 
 man and a woman, &:c. a 1 - is done in the (econd ch.-pter. 
 
 Here are evidently two different (torus contradicting each o.her— *- 
 According to the firft, the two texts, trie male and the fe male, wert 
 made at the fame time. According to the fecond, they were made 
 at different times. The man firft, toe woman afterwards. Accord- 
 ing to the firft itorv, they were to have dominion over all the earth/. 
 According to the fecond, their dominion was limited to a garderv 
 How laige a garden it could be, that one m...-i and one woman couht 
 *lrefs and keep in or Jet, I leave to the profecutor, the judge, the 
 jury, and Mr. rrfkinc, to determine. 
 
 The itory of the talking ferpent, and its tete a tete with Eve : th£ 
 doleful adventure, called the Fall of Man ; and how he was turned 
 out o! this fine garden, and how the garden was afterwards locked up 
 and guarded by a flaming ("word, (if any one 'can te'l what a flaming 
 (word is) belong altogether to the fecond ftory. Theyh<ive no con- 
 nection with the fiitt itorv. According to the firft there was no gar- 
 den of E'len ; no forbidden tree : The fcene was the whole earth, 
 and the nut of ail trees was allowed to be eaten. 
 
 In giving this example of the ftrange ttate of the bible, it cannot be 
 iaid 1 have gone out -of my wav to feck it, for t have token the be» 
 ginning of the book ; not can it be lad : have m.de more of it, than 
 it makes of itielf. That there are two {lories is as viftble to the eye, 
 when attended to, as that there are two chapteis, and that they hav« 
 been written by different perk ns, lobody know- by whom. If this, 
 then, is the Itrange condition, the beginning of the bible is in, it 
 leads to a juft fuipicion, th t the uiher parts are no better, and confe- 
 quently it becomes every man's duty to examine the cafe. 1 hav« 
 «lone it for myielf, and am fa hfieel, that the bible i-- fabulous. 
 
 Perhaps 1 (hall be told in the cant- language of the dav, as I have 
 often been told by the biihop o Landaff and others, of the great and 
 laudable pains, that many piou- and 1 .rarned men have taken to explain 
 the obfeure, and recon ile the contradictory, or as they fay, the 
 feemingly contradifiory pailages of the bib.'e. It is becaufe the b'ble 
 needs fuch an undertaking, that is one of the firft caufes to fufpedt, it 
 is not the word or God : this finale reflection, when carried home to 
 the mind, is in uferf a volume 
 
 What! does not the Cr ator of the Univerfe, the Fountain of all 
 Wifdom, the Origin of all Science, the Author of all Knowledge, 
 the Godot Order and of Harmony, know how to write ? When we 
 contemplate the vaft oe.onomv o the creation, when we behold the 
 unerring regularity of the vifible folar fyftem, the perfection with 
 which all its feveral part* revolve, and by correfponding aflemblage, 
 form a whole j — when we launch or eye into the boundlefs ocean of 
 fpace, and feeourfelves furrounded by innumera 1 le worlds, not one of 
 which varies from its appointed place — when we trace the power of 
 a Creator, from a mite to an elephant ; from an atom to an univerfe ; 
 can wc fuppofe that the mind that could conceive fuch ft defign, and 
 
 B 2 the 
 
( 12 ) 
 
 the power that executed it with incomparable perfection, cannot writ© 
 without inconfiftencc ; or that a book fo written can be the work of 
 fuch a powe r ? The writings of Thomas Paine, even of Thomas 
 Paine, need no commentator to explain, expound, derange, and re-, 
 arrange their feveral pares, to render them intelligible — he can relate 
 a fact, or write an efTay, without forget^ng in one page what he has 
 •written in another ; certainly then, did the God of all perfection con- 
 defcend to write or dictate a book, that book would be as perfect as 
 himfelf is perfect : The bible is not {o x and it is confefledly not fo, by- 
 the attempts- to amend it. 
 
 Perhaps f (hall be told, that though I have produced one inftance, 
 I cannot produce another of equal f< rce. One is fufficient to call in 
 queftion the genuinenefs or authenticity of any book that pretends to; 
 be the word of God : for fuch a book would, as before faid, be as per- 
 fect as its author i- perfect. 
 
 - I will, however, advance only four chapters further into the book 
 of Genefis and produce another example that is fufficient to invali- 
 date the ftory to which it belongs. 
 
 We have all heard of Noah's Flood ; and it is impoffible to think 
 of the whole human race, men, women, children, and infants (ex r 
 cept one family J deliberately drowning, without feeling a painful fen- 
 fation ; that heart mull be a heart of flint thatcan contemplate fuch a 
 feene with tranquility. 7'here is nothing in the ancient mythology, 
 nor in the religion of any people we know of upon the globe, that re- 
 cords a fentence of their God, or of their God?, fo tremendously fe- 
 vere and mercilefs. If the ftory be not true, we blafphemioufly dif- 
 honour God by believing it, and ftill moie fo, in forcing, by laws and 
 penalties, that belief upon others. I go now to (hew from the face of 
 the ftory, that it carries the evidence of not being true. 
 
 I know not if thejudge, the jury, and Mr. Erlkine, who tried and 
 convicted Williams, ever read the bible, or know any thing of its 
 contents, and therefore I will ftate die cafe precnely : 
 
 There were no fuch people, as Jews or Ifraehtes, in the time that 
 Noah is faid to have lived, and confequently, there was no fuch 
 law as that which is called the Jewifh or Mofiic Law It is, accord- 
 ing to the bible, more than fix hundred years from the time the flood 
 is faid to have happened, to the time of Mofes, and confequently the 
 time the flood is faid to have happened, was more than fix hundred 
 years prior to the law, called the Law of Mofes, even admitting Mofes 
 to have been the giver of that law, of which there is great caufe to 
 doubt. 
 
 We have here two different epochs, or points of time ; that of the 
 flood, and that of the law of Mofes ; the former more than fix hundred 
 years prior to the latter. But the maker of the ftory of the flood, 
 whoever he was, has betrayed himfelf by blundering, for he has re- 
 veifed the order of the times. He has told the ftory, as if the law of 
 Mofes was prior to -the flood j for he has made God to fay to Noah, 
 Cenefis, chap. vii. ver, 2, W Of every clean heart, thou (halt take 
 
 H untq 
 
( i3 ) 
 
 * { unto thee by fevens, male and his female, and of beads that ar« 
 <c not clean by two, the male and his female." This is the Mofaic 
 law, and could only be faid after that law was given, not before : 
 There was no fuch thing as beafts clean and unclean in the time of 
 Noah — jt is no where faid, they were created fo. They were only 
 declared to be fo, as meats, by the Mofaic law, and that to the Jews 
 only, and there were no fuch people as Jews in the time of Noah. 
 This is the blundering condition in which this ftrange ftory ftands. 
 
 When we reflect on a fentence, fo tremendoufly fevere, as that of 
 conligning the whole human race, eight perfons excepted, to de- 
 liberate drowning ; a fentence, which reprefents the Creator, in a 
 more mercilefs character than any of thofe, whom we call Pagans, 
 ever reprefented the Creator to be, under the figure of any of their 
 deities, we ought at lcaft to fufpcnd our belief of it, on a comparifon 
 of the beneficent character of the Creator, with the tremendous 
 feverity of the fentence ; but when we fee the ftory told with fuch an 
 evident contradiction of circumftances, we ought to fet it down for 
 nothing better than a Jewifh fable, told by nobody knows whom, and 
 nobody knows when. 
 
 It is a relief to the genuine and fenfible foul of man to find the 
 ftory unfounded. It frees us from two painful fenfations at once ; 
 that of having hard thoughts of the Creator, on account of the 
 feverity of the fentence ; and that of fympathifing in the horrid 
 tragedy of a drowning world. He who cannot feel the force of what 
 I mean, is not, in my eftimation of character, worthy the name of a 
 human being. 
 
 I have juft faid there is great caufe to doubt, if the law, called the 
 law of Mofes, was given by Mofes ; the books, called books of 
 Mofes, which contain among other things, what is called the Mofaic 
 law, are put in front of the bible, in the manner of a conftitution, 
 with a hiftory annexed to it. Had thefe books been written by Mofes, 
 they would undoubtedly have been the oldeft books in the bible, and 
 entitled to be placed firft, and the law and the hiftory they contain, 
 would be frequently referred to in the books that follow ; but this is 
 not the cafe. From the time of Othniel, the firft of the judges 
 (Judges, chap. iii. ver. 9) to the end of the book of Judges, which 
 contains a period of four hundred and ten years, this law, and thofe 
 books were not in practice, nor known among the Jews, nor are 
 they fo much as alluded to throughout the whole of that period. And 
 if the reader will examine the 22d and 23d chapters of 2d book of 
 Kings, and 34th chapter 2d Chron. he will find, that no fuch law, 
 nor any fuch books were known in the time of the Jewifh monarchy, 
 and that the Jews were Pagans during the whole of that time, and 
 of their judges. 
 
 The firft time the law, called the law of Mofes, made its ap- 
 pearance, was in the time of Jofiah, about a thoufand years after 
 Mofes was dead, it is then faid to have been found by accident. 
 The account pf this finding, or pretended rinding, is given, 
 
 2d Chron, 
 
( H ) 
 
 ad Chron. chap, xxxiv. ver. 14, 15, 16, 18. " Hilkiah the prieft 
 u found the book of the law of the Lord, given by Mofes, and 
 *' Hilkiah anfwered, and faid, to Shaphan the fcribe, I have found 
 c< the book of the law in the houfe of tne Lord, and Hilkiah delivered 
 * c the book to Snaphan, and Shaphau carried the book to the king, 
 14 and Shaphan told the king, I Jofian, laying, Hilkiah the ptiefi 
 " hath given me a book." 
 
 Inconfequence of this finding, which much refemHles that of poor 
 Chatterton finding manuscript poems of Rowleythe ivlon:: in the 
 Cathedral Church at Briltol, or the late finding manufcripts of 
 Shakefpeare in an old cheft, (two weil known fraud- . Julian abolifhed 
 the Pagan rel'gion of the Jew.-, n.aliacred all toe Pagan prieffs, 
 though he hmfelf had been a Pagan, as the re*d r will f e in the 
 23d chap. 2d Kin^s, and thus eftabii ihed in b^ood, trie iaw that is. 
 there called the law of iVrbfes* and ir.ftituied a paiTover in com- 
 memoration thereof. The 2?.d ver. in (peaking of this paflbver fays, 
 " furely there was not holden fach a paflbver, from tne d«ys of the 
 w judges, that judged Ifrael, nor in all the d y, of the kings of fracl, 
 " nor the Kings of Judah ." and the 25th ver. in fpeaking of this prieft- 
 idlling Jofiah, fays, u Like unto htm there was no king before hun y that 
 •* turned to the Lord with all his heart, and with all his foul, and 
 *' with all his might, according to all the law of Alofes ; neither after 
 w him arofe there any like him " This veife 1 ke the former one, is a 
 general declaration again ft all the preceding kings without exception. 
 It is alfo a declaration aga nil all that reigned after him, o; which 
 there were four, the whole time of whole reigning make but twenty- 
 two years and fix months, before the Jews were entirely broken up 
 as a nation and th'ir monarchy deitroyed. It is therefore evident 
 that the law, called the law of Mofes, of which the jews talk fo 
 much, was promulgated and eftablifhed only in the latter time of the 
 Jewiih monarc'yj and it is very remarka le, that no fooner had 
 they eftablifhed it than they were a deitroyed people, as if they were 
 punifhed for acting an impofition and affixing the name of the Lord 
 to it, and maflacreing their former prielts under pretence of religion. 
 The fum or' the hiflory of the Jews is this — they continued to be a 
 T»ation about a thoufand years they then eftablifhed a law which 
 they called the law of the Lord given by Mofes, and were deftroyed. 
 This is not opinion but hiftorical evidence. 
 
 Levi, the J^v>\ who has written an anfwer to the Age of Reafon y 
 gives a ftrange account of the law called the law of Mofes. 
 
 In fpeaking of the ftory of the fun and moon Handing ftill, that the 
 Israelites might cut the throats of all their enemies, and hang all 
 their kings as told in Jolhua, Chap. x. he fays, M There is alfo 
 <c another proof of the reality of this miracle, which is the appeal 
 tl that the author of the book of Jofhua makes to the book of fajher^ 
 tc is not this written in the book of Jafoer. Hence continues Levi, it 
 " is manifeft that the book, commonly called the book of Jaflier 
 " exilled and was well known at the time (he book of Jofhua was 
 
 « written j" 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 « written j" and pray, Sir, continues Levi, " what book Joyovt thtofc 
 * c this was ? why no other than the law of Afofes j" Levi, like the 
 bifhop of LandafF and man/ other guTs-work commentators, either 
 forgets, or doc; not know, what there is in one part or the bible 
 when he is giving his opinion upon another part. 
 
 I did not, however, expect to find fo much ignorance in a Jew 
 with refpect to the hiitory or' his nation, though 1 might not be fur- 
 prifed at it in a biftv p. If Levi will look into the account given in 
 the tint C'ap 2d too* of s amuel, of the <\m dakite flaying Saul and 
 bringing the crown and bracelets to David, he will find the following 
 recital, ver. 15, 17, 18, u and David called one of the young men 
 " and faid, go near and fall upon him the Amalakite) and he fmote 
 u him that he died, and David lamented wi;h this lamentation over 
 " Saul and o\er Jonathan his fon ; alio he bad them teach the chil- 
 '* dren the ule of the bow ; behold it i. written in the book ofjajher.'* 
 If the booc of Jaflier were what Levi calls it, the law of Mofes, writ- 
 ten by Moles, it is not poffible that any thing tnat David faid or did 
 couid be written in that law, fince Moles died more than five hun- 
 dred years before David was born ; and on the other hand admitting 
 the book of Jalher to be the law, cal ed the law of Mofes, that law 
 muft have been written more than five hundred years after Mofes was 
 dead, or it could not relate any thing faid or done by David. Levi 
 may take which of thc<e cafes he pleafe^, for both are againft him. 
 
 I am not going, in the courle of this letter, to write a commen- 
 tary on the bible. The two inftances I have produced, and which 
 are taken from the beginning of the bible, (hew the neceffitv of 
 examining it. It is a book that has been read more, and examined 
 lefs, than anv book that ever exifted. Had it cone to us as an Arabic 
 or Chinefe book, and faid to have been a facred book by the people 
 from whom it came, no apology would have been made for the con- 
 fufed and disorderly ftate it is in. The tales it relates of the Creator 
 would have been cenfured, and our pity been excited for thofe who 
 believed them. We fhould have vindicated the goodnefs of God 
 againft fuch a book, and preached up the difbelief cf it out of reve- 
 rence to him. Why then do we not acl as honorably by the Creator 
 in the one cafe, as we would do in the other. As a Chinefe book we 
 wouid have examined it ; ought we not then to examine it as a Jewifh 
 book ? The Chinefe are a people who have all the appearance of far 
 greater amiquity than the Jews, and in point of permanency, there is 
 rio comparifon. They are alio a people of mild manners, and of good 
 morals, except where they have been corrupted by European com- 
 merce. Yet we take the word of a reftlefs bloody-minded people, as 
 the Jews of Paleftine were, when we would reject the fame authority 
 from a better people We ought to fee it is habit and prejudice that, 
 have prevented people from examining the bible. Thofe of the 
 church of England call it holy, becaufe the Jews called it fo, and 
 beaaufe cuftom and certain acts of parliament call it fo, and they read 
 it from cuftom. Diilcnters read it for the purpofe of doctrinal con- 
 
 troverfy,. 
 
t *6 ) 
 
 troverfy, and are very fertile in difcoveries and inventions. But rtorid 
 ©Fthem read it for the pure purpofe of information, and of rendering juf- 
 tice to the Creator by examining if the evidence it contains warrants the 
 belief of its being what it is called. Inftead of doing this, they take 
 it blindfolded, and will have it to be the word of God whether it be 
 fo or not. For my own part, my belief in the perfection of the Deity, 
 will not permit me to believe that a book fo manifeftly obfeure, dis- 
 orderly, and contradictory, can be his work. I can write a better 
 book myfelf. This difbelief in me proceeds from my belief in tha 
 Creator. I cannot pin my faith upon the fay fo of Hilkiah the prieftj 
 •who faid he found it, or any part of it, nor upon Shaphan the fcribe* 
 nor upon any prieft nor any icribe, or man of the law of the prefent 
 day. 
 
 As to a£ts of parliament, there are fome that fay, there are witchey 
 and wizzards; and the perfons who made thole ad-ts (it was in the? 
 time of James the Firft) made alio fome a£t.s which call the bible the 
 holy fcriptures or word of God. But acts of parliament decide 
 nothing with refpeel to God ; and as thefe acts of parliament-makers 
 were wrong with refpedf. to witches and wizzards, they may alfo be 
 wrong with refpecT: to the book in queftion. It is therefore neceffary 
 that the book be examined, it is our duty to examine it; and to fup- 
 prefs the right of examination is (inful in any government or in any 
 judge or jury. The bible makes God to fay to Mofes, Deut. chap, 
 vii. 2dver. " And when the Lord the God (hall deliver them before 
 Ct thee, thou (halt finite them, and utterly deftroy them, thou (halt 
 " make.no covenant with them, nor foew mercy unto them,'" Not all 
 the priefts, nor fcribes, nor tribunals in the world, nor all the autho- 
 rity of man, fhall make me believe that God ever gave fuch a 
 Robefperian precept as that of (hewing no mercy ; and confequently it is 
 impofiible that I, or any perfon who believes as reverentially of the 
 Creator as I do, can believe fuch a book to be the word of God. 
 
 There have been, and (till are, thofe, who whilft they profefs to 
 believe the bible to be the word of God affect, to turn it into ridicule. 
 Taking their profeflion and conduct together, they a6t blafphemoufly ; 
 becaufe they a& as if God hbnfelf was not to be believed. The cafe is 
 exceedingly different with refpe£t to the Age of Re af on. That book is 
 written to (hew from the bible itfelf, that there is abundant matter to 
 fufpect. it is not the word of God, and that we have been impofed 
 upon, firft by Jews, and afterwards by priefts and commentators. 
 
 Not one of thofe who have attempted to write anfwers to the Agt 
 c? Reafon have taken the ground upon which only an anfwer could be 
 written. The cafe in queftion is not upon any point of do&rine, but 
 altogether upon a matter of fait. Is the book called the bible the 
 word of God or is it not ? If it can be proved to be fo, it ought to be 
 believed as fuch ; if not, it ought not to be believed as fuch. This 
 is the true ftate of the cafe. The Age ofReafon produces evidence to 
 (hew, and I have in this letter produced additional evidence, that it is 
 not the word of God. Thofe who take the contrary fide, (hould 
 
 prove 
 
( *7 ) 
 
 prove that it is. But this they have not done nor attemp'el to do, and 
 Consequently they have done nothing to the purpofe. 
 
 Tl pfofecutors of Williams nave (h.runk from the point as the 
 anfwerers have done. They have availed themfelves of prejudice 
 inftead of proof. If a writing was produced in a court of judica- 
 ture, feid to 'ie the writing of a certain perfon, and upon the reality 
 >n-reality of which, foma matter at ifi'ue depended, the point to 
 be proved would he, that fuch writing was the w.iting of fuch per- 
 fon Or if the iflue d.-p^nded uj)on e.-rt.in words, which fume cer- 
 tain perfon was fain to have fpoken, the point to be proved would be, 
 that I :ch words were fpoken by fuch perfon ? and Air. F.rfkine would 
 com- id the cafe upon this ground A certain book is f'.id to be the 
 vv J of God, what is the proof that it is fo, for upon this the whole 
 depends ; and If it cannot be proved to be fo, the prolecution fails 
 for want of evidence. 
 
 The profecution againfl Williams charges him with publishing a 
 . entitled the Age of Peafon y which, it fays, is an impious blaf- 
 phemous pamphlet, tending to ridicule and bring into contempt the 
 holy fcriptures. Nothing is more eafy rhan to find >.bufive words, 
 and Englifh prosecutions a r e famous for this fpecies o.' vulgarity. 
 The charge however is fophiflical ; for the charge as growing out of 
 the pampnlet fhouid have ftated, not as ir now {fates, to ridicule and 
 bring into contempt the ho'y fcriprures, but to (hew, that the books 
 called the holy fciiptures a;e not the holy fcriptures. It is one thing 
 if I ridicule a w rk as bei»g written by a certain perfon j but it is 
 quite a different thing, if . write to prove that i'ch work was not 
 written by fuch perfon. In the fir ft cafe, i attack the pi ion through, 
 the work ; in the other cafe, I defend the honor of the perfon againit 
 the work. This is what the Age ofReafon does, and confequently 
 the charge in the indictment is fophiftically ftated. Every one will 
 admit, that if the bible be not the wo d Qt God, we err in believing it 
 to be his word, and ought not to believe it. Cer.ainly, then, the 
 ground the profecution fhould take, would be to prove that the bible 
 is in fact what it is called. But this the prufecution has not done and 
 cannot do. 
 
 In all cafes the prior fact muft be proved, before the fuhfequent 
 facts can be admitted in evidence. In a profecution for adultery, the 
 fa£t of marriage, which is the prior fact, mull: be proved before the 
 facts to prove a.luicery can be received. If the fact of" marriage can- 
 not be proved, adultery cannot be proved ; and if the profecution can- 
 not prove the bible to be the word of God, the charge of blafphemy 
 is vifionary and groundlefs. 
 
 In Turkey they might prove, if the cafe happened, that a certain 
 book was bou^nt of a certain b >okfeller, and that the laid bo >k was 
 written againft the koran. In Spain and Portugal they might prove, 
 that a certain book was bought of a certain boo.<fell r, and that the 
 faid book was written againit tne infallibility of the p >oe. Under 
 the ancient mythology they might have proved, that a certain writing 
 
 C was 
 
I 18 ) 
 
 Was bought of a certain perfon, and that the faid writing was written 
 againft the belief of a plurality of gods, and in the fupport of the 
 belief of one God: Socrates was condemned for a work of this kind. 
 
 All thefe are but fubfequent fadts and amount to nothing, unlefs 
 the prior facts be proved. The, prior fact with refpeft to the tirft 
 cafe is, Is the koran the word of God ? with relpedt to the fecond, Is 
 the infallibility of the pope a truth ? with refpect to the third, Is the 
 belief of a plurality of gods a true belief? and in like manner with 
 refpe£t to the pre lent ptofecution, Is the book called the bible the 
 word of God ? if the prefent irofecution prove no more than could 
 be proved in any or all of thefe cales, it proves only as they do, or 
 as an inquifition would prove ; and, in this view of the caie, the 
 profecutors ought at leall 10 leave off reviling that internal inltitu- 
 tion, the inquifition. The piofecution, however, though it may 
 injure the individual may promote ihe caufe of truth; becaufe the 
 manner in which it has been conducted appears a confelfion to the 
 world, that there is no evidence to prove tnat the bible is the word 
 of Cod. On what author. ty then do we believe the many ftrange ftories 
 that the bible tells of God. 
 
 7 his proiecution has been carried on through the medium of what 
 is called a fpecial jury, and the whole of a fpecial jury is nominated 
 by the mafter of the crown oih.ee. Mr. Erfkine vaunts himfelf upon 
 the bill he brought into parliament with refpect to trials, for what the 
 government-party calls, libels. But if in crown profecutions the 
 mafter of the crown office is to continue to appoint the whole fpecial 
 jury, which he does by nominating the forty-eight perfons from 
 which the lolicitor of each party is to ftrike out twelve, Mr. Erlkine's 
 bill is only vapour and fmoke. The root of the grievance lies in the 
 manner or forming the jury, and to this Mr. Erlkine's bill applies no 
 remedy. 
 
 When the trial of Williams came on, only eleven of the fpecial 
 jurymen appeared, and the trial was adjourned. In cafes where the 
 whole number do not appear, it is cuitomary to make up the deficiency 
 by taking jurymen from perfons prefent in court. T his, in the law 
 term, is called a Tales. Why was not this done in this cafe ? Reafon 
 will fuggeft, that they did not chafe to depend on a man accidentally 
 taken. When the trial recommenced the whole of the fpecial jury ap» 
 peared, and Williams was convicted : it is folly to contend a caufe 
 where the whole jury is nominated by one of the parties. I will relate 
 a recent cafe that explains a great deal with refpedt to fpecial juries 
 in crown profecutions. 
 
 On the trial of Lambert and others, printers and proprietors of the 
 Morning Chronicle, for a libel, a fpecial jury was ftruck on the 
 prayer of the attorney-general, who ufed to be called Diabolus Regis 
 or King's Devil. 
 
 Only feven or eight of the fpecial jury appeared, and the attorney- 
 general not praying a Tales, the trial flood over to a future day, when 
 it was to be brought on a fecond time, the attorney-general prayed 
 
 for 
 
i 19 ) 
 
 for a new fpecial jury, but as this was not admiflible, the originaj 
 fpecial jury was fummoned. Only eight of them appeared, on which, 
 the attorney-general faid, as I cannot, on a fecond trial, have a 
 fpecial jury, I will pray a Tales. Four perfons were then taken from 
 perfons prefent in court, and added to the eight fpecial jurymen. The 
 jury went out at two o'clock to confult on their verdict, and the 
 judge (Kenyon) underftanding they were divided, and likely to be 
 Come time in making up their minds, retired from the bench, and 
 went home. At feven, the jury went, attended by an officer of the 
 court, to the judge's houfe, and delivered a verdict, ^' Guilty of pub' 
 ° lifting, but with no malicious intention." The judge faid, " I can- 
 <c not record this verdiSi; it is no verdict at all." The jury withdrew, 
 and after fetting in confutation till five in the morning, brought in a 
 verdiet, NOT GUILTY. Would this have been the cafe, had 
 they been all fpecial jurymen nominated by the mafter of the crown- 
 office ? This is one of the cafes that ought to open the eyes of people 
 with refpectto the manner of forming fpecial juries. 
 
 On the trial of Williams, the judge prevented the counfel for the 
 defendant proceeding in the defence. The profecution had felected a 
 number of pafTages from the Age of Reafon, and inferted them in the 
 indictment. The defending counfel was (electing other paflages to 
 fhew, that the paflages in the indictment were concluftons drawn 
 from premifes, and unfairly feparated therefrom in the indictment. 
 The judge (aid, he did not know how to act; meaning thereby, whether 
 to let the counfel proceed in the defence or not; and afked the jury, 
 if they wifhed to hear the pafTages read which the defending counfel 
 had felected. The jury faid, no, and the defending counfel was in 
 confequence filence. Mr. Erskine then, FalltafF-like, having all the 
 field to himfelf, and no enemy at hand, laid about him moft heroicly, 
 and the jury found the defendant guilty. I know not if Mr. Erskine 
 ran out of court and hallooed, huzza for the bible and the trial by 
 jury. 
 
 Robefpiere caufed a decree to be parted during the trial of Briflbt 
 and others, that after a trial had lafted three days, (the whole of which 
 time, in the cafe of Briflbt, was taken up by the profecuting party) 
 the judge fhould ask the jury (who were then a packed jury) if they 
 were fatisfied ? If the jury faid Yes, the trial ended, and the jury 
 proceeded to give their verdict, without hearing the defence of the 
 accufed party. It needs no depth of wifdom to make an application 
 of this cafe. 
 
 I will now ftate a cafe to fhew, that the trial of Williams is not a 
 trial according to Kenyon's own explanation of law. 
 
 On a late trial in London (Selthens, verfus Hooflman) on a policy 
 of infurance, one of the jurymen, Mr. Dunnage, after hearing one 
 fide of the cafe, and without hearing the other fide, got up and faid, 
 it was as legal a policy of infurance as ever was written. The judge, 
 whowas the fame as prefided on the trial of Williams, replied, that it 
 was a great misfortune when any gentleman of tht jury makes up his mind 
 
 C 2 Oft 
 
( 20 J 
 
 en a caufe before it was fnijhed. Mr. Erskirie, who in that cafe was 
 counfel for the defendant ; < in this, he was a'gainft the defendant) cried 
 out, it is worfe than a misfortune, it is a fault. The judge in his ad- 
 drefs to the jurv, in fumrriing up the evidence, expatiated upon, and 
 explained the parts, which the law affigned to the counfel on each 
 fide, to the witneffe?., and to the judge, and faid, " When all this was 
 « 'done, AND NOT UNTIL THEN, it was the bufmefs of the 
 " jury to declare what thejujlice of the cafe was \ and thai it iva; extremely* 
 <c rajh an i imprudent in any man to draw a conclufion before ail the ■pre-' 
 cc mijes were laid before them., upon which that conclufion was to be 
 " grounded.'" — According then to Kenyon's ov: , thd trial of 
 
 "Williams is an irregular trial, the verdict an irregular verdict, and as 
 fuch, is not recordable. 
 
 As to f, eciai juries, they are but modern ; and were inftituted for 
 the purpofe of determining cafes at law between merchants ; becaufe, 
 as the method of keeping merchants accounts differs from that of com- 
 mon tradefmen, and their bufn efs by lying much in foreign bills of 
 exchange, infurances, 3cc. is of a different defcription to that of com- 
 mon tradefmen, it ni^ht happen that a common jury might not be 
 competent to form a judgment. The law that inftituted fpecial juries 
 make> it neceflary that the jurors be merchants, or of the degree of 
 fquires. A fpecial jury in London is generally compofed of merchants > 
 and in the country of men called country fquires, that is, fox hunters, 
 or men qualified to hunt foxes. The one may decide very well upon a 
 cafe of pound?, (hillings, and pence, or of the counting- hou fe ; and 
 the other cf the jockey-dub or the chace. But who would not laugh, 
 that becaufe fuch men can decide fuch cafes, they can alfo be jurors 
 upon theology. Talk with fame London merchants about fcripture, 
 and they will underfhmd you mean fcrip, and tell you how much it is 
 worth at the Stock Exchange. Ask them about theology, and they 
 will fay, they know of no fuch gentleman upon Change. Tell fome 
 country fquires of the fun and moon Handing ft.il], the one on the 
 top of a hill, and the other in a valley, and they will fwear it is a lie 
 of one's own making. Tell them that God-Almighty ordered a 
 man to make a cake and bake it with a t — d and eat it, and they will 
 fey, it is one of Dean Swift's blackguard ftories. Tell them it is 
 in the bib'e, and they will lay a bowl of punch it is not, and leave it 
 to the parfon of the parifh to decide. Ask them alfo about theology, 
 and they will fay, they know of no fuch a one on the turf. An appeal 
 to fuch juries, ftrves to bring the bible into more ridicule than any 
 thing the author of the Age of Reafon has written ; and the manner 
 in which the trial has been conducted, fhews, that the profecutor dares 
 not come to the point, nor meet the defence of the defendant. But 
 all other cafes apart, on what ground of right, otherwife than on the 
 right affumed by an inquifition, do fuch profecutions ftand. Religion 
 is a private affair between every man and his Maker, and no tribunal 
 or third party has a right to interfere between them. It is not pro- 
 perly a thing of this world \ it is only practifed in this world ; but 
 
 its 
 
( *«• ) 
 
 its object is In a future world j and it is no otherwife an object of jure 
 laws than for the purpofe of protecting the equal rights of all, however 
 various their beliefs may be. If one man chufe to believe the book 
 called the bible to be the word of God ; and another, from a con- 
 vinced idea of the purity and perfection of God, compared with the 
 contradictions the book contains ; from the lafcivioufnefs of fome of 
 its ftories, like that of Lot setting drunk and debauching his two 
 daughters, which is notfpoken of as a crime, and for which the moft 
 abfurd apologies ar^ made ; from the immorality of fome of its pre- 
 cepts, like that of (hewing no mercy ; and from the total want of 
 evidence on the cafe, thinks he ought not to believe it to be the word 
 of God : each of them has an equal right ; and if the one has a right 
 to give his reifons for believing it to be fo, the other has an equal 
 right to give his reafons for believing the contrary. Any thing that 
 goes beyond this rule is an inquifition. Mr, Erskine talks of his 
 moral education ; Mr. Erskine is very little acquainted with theologi- 
 cal fubjects, if he does not know there is fuch a thing as a fincere and 
 re/h'ous belief that the bible is not the word of God. This is my be- 
 lief; it is the belief of thoufands far more learned than Mr. Erskine; 
 and is a belief that is every day increafing. It is not infidelity, as Mr. 
 Erskine prophaiuly and abufively calls it : it is the direct reverfe of 
 infidelity. It is a pure religious' belief, founded on the idea of the 
 perfection of the Creator. If the bible be the word of God, it needs 
 not the wretched aid of ptofecutions to fupport it ; and you might 
 with as much propriety make a law to protect the funfbine as to pro- 
 tect the bible, if the bible, like the fun, be the work of God. We 
 fee that God takes good care of the Creation he has made. He fuffers 
 no part of it to be extinguifhed ; and he will take the fame care of 
 his word, if he ever gave one. But men ought to be reverentially 
 careful and fufpicious how r they afcribe books to him as his word t 
 which from this confufed condition, would difhonour a common 
 fcribbler, and againft which there is abundant evidence, and every 
 caufe to fufpecf. impofition. Leave then the bible to itfelf. God will 
 take care of it if he has any thing to do with it, as he takes care of 
 the fun and the moon, which need not your laws for their better pro- 
 tection. As the two inftances I have produced in the beginning of 
 this letter, from the book of Genefis, the one reflecting the account 
 called the Mofaic account of the Creation ; the other of the flood, 
 fufficiently mew the neceffity of examining the bible, in order to 
 afcertain what degree of evidence there is for receiving or rejecting it as 
 a facred book. I mail not add more upon that fubject ; but in order 
 to fhew Mr. Erskine that there are religious eftablifhments for public 
 worfhip which make no profeffion of faith of the books called the 
 holy fcriptures, nor admit of priefts, I will conclude with an account 
 of a fociety lately began in Paris, and which is very rapidly extending 
 itfelf. 
 
 The fociety takes the name of Theophilantropes, which would be 
 rendered in Englifh by the word Theophilanthropifts, word com- 
 pounded 
 
( 22 ) 
 
 pounded of three Greek words, fignifying God, Love, and Man. The 
 explanation given to this word is, Lovers of God and Man, or 
 Adorers of God and Friends of Man, adrateurs de dieu et armis des 
 hommes. The fociery propofes to publifh each year a volume, in- 
 titled Armie Religieufe des Theoj-hilantropes, Year religious of the 
 Theophilantropifts j the firft volume is juft published, intitled 
 
 HEAR RELIGIOUS OF THE THE0PH1LANTHR0PISTS % 
 
 OR 
 
 ADORERS OF GOD AND FRIENDS OF MAN; 
 
 Being a collection of the difcourfes, lectures, hymns, and canticles, 
 for all the religious and moral feftivJs of the Theophilanthropifts 
 during the courfe of thf* year, whether in their public temples or in 
 their private fami'ies, publiflied by the author of the Manuel of the 
 Theophilanthropifts. 
 
 The volume of this year, which is the firft, contains 214 pages 
 duodecimo. 
 
 The following is the table of contents : 
 
 1. Precife hiftory of the Theophilanthropifts. 
 
 2. Exercifes common to all the feftivals. 
 
 3. Hymn, No. I. God of whom the univerfe fpeaks. 
 
 4. Difcourfe upon the exiftence of God. 
 
 5. Ode II. The heavens inftruct the earth. 
 
 6. Precepts of wifdom, extracted from the book of the Adorateurs. 
 
 7. Canticle, No. 111. God Creator, foul of nature. 
 
 o. Extracts from divers moralifts upon the nature of God, and 
 upon the phyfical proofs of his exiftence. 
 
 9. Canticle, No. IV. Let us blefs at our waking the God who 
 gives us light. 
 
 10. Moral thoughts extracted from the bible. 
 
 11. Hymn, No. V. Father of the univerfe. 
 
 12. Contemplation of nature on the firft days of the fpring. 
 
 13. Ode, No. VI. Lord in thy glory adorable. 
 
 14. Extracts from the moral thoughts of Confucius. 
 
 15. Canticle in praife of actions, and thanks for the works of the 
 creation. 
 
 16. Continuation from the moral thoughts of Confucius. 
 
 17. Hymn, No. VII. All the univerfe is full of thy magnificence. 
 
 18. Extracts from an arjcient fage of India upon the duties of 
 families. 
 
 19. Upon the fpring. 
 
 20. Thoughts moral of divers Chinefe authors. 
 
 2 It Cantic/e, 
 
( 2 3 ) 
 
 21. Canticle, No. VIII. Every thing celebrates the glory of th* 
 eternal. 
 
 22. Continuation of the moral thoughts of Chinefe authors. 
 
 23. Invocation for the country. 
 
 24. Extracts from the moral thoughts of Theognis. 
 
 25. Invocation, Creator of man. 
 
 26. Ode, No. IX. Upon death. 
 
 27. Extra&s from the book of the Moral Univerfal, upon 
 happinefs. 
 
 28. Ode, No. X. Supreme Author of Nature. 
 
 INTRODUCTION, 
 
 ENTITLED, 
 
 PRECISE HISTORY OF THE THEOPHILANTHROPISTS. 
 
 u Towards the month of Vendimiaire, of the year 5, (Sept. 1796) 
 there appeared at Paris, a fmall work, entitled, Manuel of the 
 Theoantropophiles, fince called, for the fake of eafier pronunciation, 
 Theophilantropes ( Theophilanthropifts) publifhed by C— — — ; 
 
 ** The worfhip fet forth in this Manuel, of which the origin is 
 from the beginning of the world, was then profefTed by fome- families 
 in the filence of domeftic life. But fcarcely was the Manuel pub- 
 lifhed, than fome perfons, refpectable for their knowledge and their 
 manners, faw, in the formation of a fociety open to the public, aa 
 eafy method of fpreading moral religion, and of leading by degrees, 
 great numbers to the knowledge thereof, who appear to have for- 
 gotten it. This confideration ought of itfelf not to leave indifferent 
 thofe perfons who know that morality and religion, which is the moft 
 folid fupport thereof, are neceflary to the maintenance of fociety as 
 well as to the happinefs of the individual. Thefe confiderations deter-r 
 mined the families of the Theophilantropifts to unite publicly for the 
 exercife of their worfhip. 
 
 " The firft fociety of this kind opened in the month of Nivofe, 
 year 5, (Jan. 1797,} in the ftreet Denis, No. 34, corner of Lom- 
 bard-ftreet. The care of conducting this fociety was undertaken by 
 five fathers of families. They adopted the Manuel of the Theophilan- 
 thropifts. They agreed to hold their days of public worfhip on the 
 days correfponding to Sundays, but without making this a hindrance 
 to other focieties to chule fuch other day as they thought more con- 
 venient. Soon after this more focieties were opened, of which fome 
 celebrate on the decadi tenth day) and others on the Sunday: It was 
 alfo refolved, that the committee fhould meet one hour each week for 
 the purpole of preparing or examining the difcourfes and le&ures pro- 
 pofed for the next general aflembly. That the general afTemblies 
 fliQuld be called Fetes (fcittvals) religious and moral. That thofe 
 
 feftivals 
 
( *4 ) 
 
 feftivals £hould be conduced in principle and form, in a manner, a's 
 not to be confidered as the feftivals of an exclufive worfhip ; and that 
 in recalling thofe who might not be attached to any particular wor- 
 (hip, thofe feftivals might alfo be attended as moral exerctfes by dis- 
 ciples of every feci, andconfequently avoid, by fcrupulous care, every 
 thing that might make the fociety appear under the name of a feci:. 
 The fociety adopts neither rites nor priefihood^ and it will never lofe 
 fight of the refolution not to advance any thing as a fociety incon- 
 venient to any feci or feets, in any time or country, and under any 
 government. 
 
 " It will be feen that it is fo much the more eafy for the fociety to 
 Iceep within this circle, becaufe, that the dogmas of the Theophilan- 
 thropifts are thofe upon which all the feels have agreed, that their moral 
 is that upon which there has never been the leaft diffent; and that the 
 name they have taken expreffes the double end of all the feels, that of 
 leading to the adoration of God and love of man. 
 
 u The Theophilantropifts do not call themfelves the difciples of 
 fuch or fuch a man. They avail themfelves of the wife precepts that 
 have been tranfmitted by writers of all countries and in all ages. The 
 reader will find in the difcourfes, leclures, hymns, and canticles, 
 which the Theophilanthropifts have adopted for their religious and 
 moral feftivals, and which they prefent under the title of ' rmee 
 Religieufe, extracts from mcralifts, ancient and modern, diverted of 
 maxims too fevere, or too loofely conceived, or contrary to piety, 
 whether towards God or towards man." 
 
 Next follow the dogmas of the Theophilanthropifts or things they 
 profefs to believe. Thefe are but two, and are thus expreflt-d, les 
 Theophilanttopes croitent a l'exiftence de dieu et a l'immorralite dc 
 Tame. The Theophilanthropifts believe in the exiftence of God, 
 and the immortality of the foul. 
 
 The manuel of the Theophilanthropifts, a fmall volume of fixty 
 pages, duodecimo, is publifhed Separately, as is alfo their catechifm, 
 which is of the fame fize. The principles of the Theophilanthropifts 
 are the fame as thofe publifhed in the firft part of the Age of Reafon 
 in 1793, and in the fecond part in 1795. The Theophilanthropifts 
 as a fociety are filent upon all the things they do not profefs to believe, 
 as the facrednefs of the books called the bible, &c. Sec. They pro- 
 fefs the immortality of the foul, but they are filent on the immortality 
 of the body, or that which the church calls the refurreclion. The 
 author of the Age of Reafon gives reafons for every thing he difbelieves 
 as well as for thofe he believes \ and where this cannot be done with 
 fafety, the government is adefpotifm, and the church an inquifition. 
 
 It is more than three years fince the firft part of the Age of Reafon 
 was publifhed, and more than a year and half fince the publication of 
 the fecond part. The bifhop of LandafF undertook to write an 
 anfwer to the fecond part ; and it was not until after it was known 
 that the author of the Age of Reafon. would reply to the bifhop, that 
 
 the 
 
 
( 25 ) 
 
 the profecution againft the book was fet on foot ; ?nd which is TaM to 
 be carried on by fome clergy of the E nglifh, church f the biihop 
 is one of them, and the object he to prevent an expofure of the 
 numerous and grofs errors he has committed in his work (and which 
 he wrote when report faid that Thomas P^ine was d- d , ; t is a confeflion 
 that he feels trie weakmfs of hit caufe, and find.-, hitnfelf unable to 
 maintain it. In this cafe, he has given me a triumph 1 did not fcek, 
 and Mo fcrskine, the herald of the profecution, has proclaimed it. 
 
 THOMAS PAINE, 
 
 D1SCQURSM 
 
f 26 ) 
 
 DISCOURSE OF THOMAS PAINE 
 
 AT THE 
 
 SOCIETY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 TttEOPHILANTHROPISTS. 
 
 RELIGION has two principal enemies, Fanaticifm and Infidelity, 
 crthat which is called Atheifm. The firft requires to be combated by 
 reafon and morality, the other by natural philofophy. 
 
 The exilfence r >f a God is the firft dogma of the Theophilantb.ro- 
 pifls. It is upon this fubjecr. that I folicit your attention : for though 
 it has been often treated of, and that moft fublimely, the fubjecf. is 
 inexhauftible ; and there will always remain fomething to be faid that 
 has not been before advanced. I go therefore to open the fubjecf, 
 and to crave your attention to the end. 
 
 The univerfe is the bibie of a true Theophilanthropift. It is there 
 that he reads of God. It is there that the proofs of his exiftence are 
 to be fcjght and to be found. As to written or printed books, by 
 whatever name they are called, they are the works of man's hands, 
 and curry no evidence in themfelves that God is the author of any of 
 them. It muft be in fomething that man could not make, that we 
 inuft feek evidence for our belief, and that fomething is the univerfe j 
 the true bible; the inimitable word of God. 
 
 Contemplating the univerfe, the whole fyftem of creation, in this 
 point of light, we fhall difcover, that all that which is called natural 
 philofophy is properly a divine ftudy — It is the ftudy of God through 
 his works — It is the bed ftudy, by which we can arrive at a knowledge 
 of his exiftence, and the only one by which we can gain a glimpfe o§ 
 his perfection. 
 
 Do we want to contemplate his power ? we fee it in the immenfity 
 jOf the Creation. Do we want to contemplate his wifdom ? We fee 
 it in the unchangeable order by which the incomprehenfible Whole 
 is governed. Do we want to contemplate his munificence ? We fee 
 it in the abundance with which he fills the earth. Do we want to 
 contemplate his mercy ? We .fee it in his not with-holding that 
 abundance even fr,om the unthankful. In fine, do we want to know 
 what God is ? Search not written or printed books, but thefcripture 
 called the Creation. 
 
 It has been the error of the fchools to teach aftronomy, and all the 
 ether fciences, and fubjects of natural phi/ofophy, as accomplishments 
 
 onlyj. 
 
f V ) 
 
 •nly ; whereas they fhould be taught theologically, or with reference 
 to the Being who is the author of them ; for all the principles of 
 fcience are of Divine origin. Man cannot make,, or invent, or con- 
 trive principles. He can only difcover them ; and he ought to look 
 through the difcovery to the author. 
 
 When we examine an extraordinary piece of machinery, an afton- 
 ifhing pile of architecture, a well executed ftatue, or an highly 
 finithed painting, where life and action are imitated, and habit only pre- 
 vents our miftaking a furface of light and fhade for cubical folidiry, 
 our ideas are naturally led to think of the extenfive genius and talents : 
 of the artift. When we ftudy elements of geometry, we think of 
 Euclid. When we fpeak of gravitation, we think of Newton. How thenv 
 is it, that when we ftudy the works of God in the Creation, we flop 1 
 fhort and do not think of God ? It is from the error of the fchools in> 
 having taught thofe fubjecls as accomplifhments only, and thereby 
 feparated the ftudy of them from the Being who is the author of 
 them. 
 
 The fchools have made the ftudy of theology to confift in the ftudy 
 of opinions in written or printed books ; whereas theology fhould btf 
 ftudied in the works or book of the creation. The ftudy of theology 
 in books of opinions has often produced fanaticitm, rancour, and 
 cruelty of temper ; and from hence have proceeded the numerous 
 perfections, the fanatical quarrels, the religious burnings and mafTa- 
 cres, that have defolated Europe. But the ftudy of theology in the works 
 of the creation produces adireif. contrary tft'eit The mind becomes 
 at once enlightened and ferene ; a copy of the fcene it beholds ; in- 
 formation and adoration go hand in hand j and all the focial faculties 
 become enlarged. 
 
 The evil that has refulted from the error of the fchools, in teach- 
 ing natural philofophy as an accomplifhrnent only, has been that of 
 generating in the pupils a fpecies of Atheifm. inftcadof looking 
 through the works of Creation to the Creator himfelf, they ftop (hort, 
 and employ the knowledge they acquire to create doubts of his ex- 
 iftence. Iliey labour, with ftudied ingi nuity, to afcribe every thing 
 they behold to inmate properties of matter j and jump over all the 
 reft by faying, that matter is eternal. 
 
 Let us examine this fubjecT: j it is worth examining; for if we ex- 
 amine it through all its cafes, the refuk will be, that the exiftence of 
 a fuperior caufe, or that which man calls God, will be discoverable 
 by philofophical principles. 
 
 In the firft place, admitting matter to have properties, as we fee 
 it has, the queftion ftill remains, how came matter by thofe proper- 
 ties ? To this they will anfwer, that matter pofTefred thofe proper- 
 ties eternally. This is not folution, but aflertion ; and to deny it is 
 equally as impoffible of proof as toafTert it. It is then necefTary to go 
 further, and therefore I fay, — if there exift a circumftance that is not 
 a. property of matter, and without which the univerfe, or to fpeak in 
 a limited degree, the folar fyftem, compofed of planets and a fun, 
 
 t> 2 could 
 
( 28 ) 
 
 cou 1 d not exiflr a moment ; all the arguments of Atheifm, drawn 
 fiom properties of matter, and applied to account for the univerfe, 
 will bs overthrown, and the exiftence of a fuperior caufe, or that 
 which n^an calls God, becomes discoverable, as is before faid, by 
 tiatuial philofophy. 
 
 1 go now to fhew that fuch a circumftance exifts, and what it is : 
 1 he univerfe is compoled of matter, and, as a fyftem, is fuftained 
 by motion. Motion is not a property of matter, and without this 
 motion the foLr iyftem could not exift. Were motion a property of 
 matter, that undifcovered and undifcoverable thing called perpetual 
 motion would dtablim itfelf. it is becaufe motion is not a property 
 of matter, that perpetual motion is an impoffibility in the hand of 
 every being bui that of the Creator of motion. When the pretenders to 
 Atheifm can produce perpetual motion, and not till then, they may ex- 
 pect to be credited. 
 
 The natural flate of matter, as to place, is a ftate of reft. Motion, 
 or change of place, is the effect of an external caufe acting upon 
 matter. As to that faculty of matter that is called gravitation, it is 
 the influence which two or more bodies have reciprocally on each 
 other to unke and be at reft. Every thing which has hitherto been 
 difcovered with refpe£t to the motion of the planets in the fyftem, re- 
 lates only to the laws by which motion acts, and not to the caufe of 
 motion. Gravitation, fo far from being the caufe of motion to the 
 planets that compofe the folar iyftem, would be the deftruction of the 
 folar fyftem, w.re revolutionary motion to ceafe ; for as the action cf 
 fpinning upholds a top, the revolutionary motion upholds the planets 
 in their orbits, and prevents them from gravitating and forming one 
 mafs with the fun. In one fenfe of the word, philofophy knows, and 
 atheifm, fays, that matter is in perpetual motion. But the motion 
 here meant refers to the flate of matter, and that only on the furface 
 of the earth. It is either decompofuion, which is continually deftroy- 
 ing the form of bodies of matter, or recompofition, which renews 
 that matter in the fame or another form, as the decompofition of 
 animal or vegetable fubftances enter into the compofition of other 
 bodies. But the motion chat upholds the folar fyftem is of an entire 
 different kind, and is not a prope ty of matter. It operates alfoto an 
 entire different effect. It operates to perpetual prejervation, and to 
 prevent any change in the ftate of the fvftem, 
 
 Giving then -to matter all ;he properties which philofophy knows 
 it has, or all that atheifm afcribes to it, and can prove, and even 
 fuppofing matter to be eternal, it will not account for the fyftem of 
 the univerfe or of the folar fyftem, becaufe it will not account for 
 notion, and it is motion that prefer ves it. When, therefore, we 
 difrover a circumftance of futh imtrienfe importance, that without 
 it the univerfe could not exift, and tor which neichei matter, nor any, 
 nor all, the properties of matter can account ; we are by neceffity 
 forced into the rational and comfortable belief of the exiitence of a 
 caufe fuperior to nutier, and that caufe man calls God. 
 
 As 
 
( 2 9 ) 
 
 As to that which is called nature, it is no other than the Jaws by 
 which motion and action of every kind, with refpect to unintelligible 
 maicci, is regulated. And when we-fpeak of looking througn nature 
 up to nature's God, we fpeak philofophically the fame rational lan- 
 guage «us when we fp~ak of looking through human law up to the 
 power that ordained ... mi. 
 
 God is th. j power or firft caufe, nature is the law, and matter is 
 the fuuject acted upon. 
 
 But infidelity by aflribing every phaenomenon to properties of mat- 
 ter, conceives a fyftem for A'hich it cannot account, and yet it pretends 
 to demonftrati.m. It reafons from what it fees on the iurface of the 
 earth, but it does not carry itfelf on the folar fyftem exifting by 
 motion. It fees upon the fu/face a perpetual decompofition and re-, 
 compofition of matter. It fees that an oak pioduces an acorn, an 
 acorn an oak, a bird an egg, an egg a bird, and fo on. In things of 
 this kind it fees fomething which it calls a natural caufe, but none of 
 the caufes it fees is the caufe of that motion which p: Terves tne folar 
 fyftem. 
 
 L t us contemplate this wonderful and ftupendous fyftem confiding 
 of matter and exifting by motion. It is not matter in a ftate of reft, 
 nor iii a ftate of decompofition or recompofi:ion. '.t is nutter 
 fyftemat'zed in perpetual orbicular or circular motion. As a fyftem 
 th • notion is the life of it: as animation is life to an animal body, 
 deprive the fyftem of motion, and, as a fyftem, it muft expire. Who 
 then breathed into the fyftem the life of motion ? What power im- 
 pelled the planets to move fince motion is not a property of tne mat- 
 ter of which they arc compofeu ? if we contemplate the immenfe 
 velocity of this motion, our wonder becomes increafed, and our 
 adoiation enlarges itfelf in the fame proportion. To rnftance only 
 one cf the planets, that of the earth we inhabit, its enhance from the 
 fun, the ce itre of the orbits of all the planets,, is, according toobfer- 
 vations of the ttanfit of the planet Venus, about one hundred million 
 miles ; confequently the diameter of the orbit or circle in which the 
 earth moves round the fun is double that diftance ; and the meafure 
 of the circumference of the orbit, taken as three times its diameter, 
 is fix hundred million miles. The earth performs this voyage in 365 
 days and fome hours, and confequently moves at the rate of more 
 than one million fix hundred thsufand miles every twenty-four hours. 
 
 Where will infidelity, where will atheifm, find caufe for this 
 aftonifhing velocity of motion, nevsr ceafing, never varying, and 
 which is the preftrvation of the earth in its orbit ? It is not by rea- 
 foning from an acorn to an oak, from an egg to a bird, or from any 
 change in the ftate of matter on the furface of the earth, that this can 
 be accounted for. Its caufe is not to be found in matter nor in any 
 thing we call nature. 'The atheift who affects to reafon, and the 
 fanatic who rejects reafon, plunge themfelves alike into inextricable 
 difficulties. The one perverts the fublime and enlightening ftudy of 
 natural philofophy into a deformity of abfurdities by not reafoning to 
 
 the 
 
( 3° ) 
 
 the end. The other lofes himfelf in the obfcurity of metaphyseal 
 theories, and difhonours the Cieator, by treating theftudyof his work% 
 "with contempt. The one is a half-rational of whom there is fomc 
 hope, the other avifionary to whom we mujfl be charitable. 
 
 When at firft thought we think of a Creator, our ideas appear to 
 ns undefined and confufed ; but if we reafon philofophically, thofe 
 ideas can be eafily arranged a.id fi'nplified It is a Being whofe power 
 is equal to his will. Ohierve the nature of the will of man. It is of 
 axi infinite quality. We cannot conceive the poffibility of limits to 
 the will. Obferve, on the other hand, how exceedingly limited is 
 his power of acting compared with the nature of his will. Suppofe 
 the power equal to the will and man would be a God. He would 
 ■will himfelf eternal, and be fo. He could will a creation and could 
 make it. in this progreffive reafoning, we fee, in the nature of the 
 will of man, half of that which we conceive in thinking of God, 
 add the other half and w_- have the whole idea of a being who could 
 make the univerfe, and fuftam it by perpetual motion ; becaufe he 
 could create that motion. 
 
 We know nothing of the capacity of the will of animals; but we 
 lenow a great deal of the d.fferenee of their powers. For example, 
 bow numerous are the degrees, and how immtnfe is the difference of 
 power, from a mite to a man. Since then every thing we fee below 
 us (hews a pio^reflion of power, where is the difficulty in fuppofing 
 that there is at the Jummit of ail things a Being in whom an infinity of 
 power unites with the infinity of tire will. When this fun pie idea 
 prefents itfelf to our mind we have the idea of a perfect being that 
 man calls God. 
 
 It is comfortable to live under the belief of the exigence of an infi- 
 nitely protecting power; and it is an addition to that comfort to 
 know, that fuch a belief is not a mere conceit oi the imagination, as 
 many of the theories rhat are called religious are ; nor a belief founded 
 only on tradition or received opinion, but is a belief deducible by the 
 action of reafon upon the things that compofe the fyftem of the 
 univerfe ; a belief arifmg out of vifible facts, and fo demonftrable 
 is the truth of this belief, that ir no fuch belief had exiited the per- 
 fons who now controvert it, would have been the perfons who would 
 have produced and propagated it ; becaufe, by beginning to reafon, 
 they would have been led on to reafon progreflively to the end, and 
 thereby have difcovered that matter and all the properties it has, will 
 not account for the fyftem of the univerfe, and that there muft necef- 
 Carily be a fuperior caufe. 
 
 It was the excefs to which imaginary fyftems of religion had been 
 carried, and the intolerance, perfecutions, burnings, and maflacres, 
 they occafioned, that firft induced certain perfons to propagate infi- 
 delity ; thinking, that upon the whole, it was better not to believe at 
 .all, than to believe a multitude of things and complicated creeds, that 
 occafioned fo much mifchief in the world. But thofe days arepaft; 
 perfection has ceafed, and the antidote then fet up agaiaft it has no . 
 
 longer 
 
< 3' ) 
 
 longer even thefliadow of apologv. We profefs, and we proclaim Jtt 
 peace, the pure, unmixed, comfortable, and rational belief of a God, 
 .as manifefted to us in the univerfe. We do this without anyappre- 
 Jienfion of that belief being made a caufe of periecution as other belief* 
 iiave been, or of fuffexing perfecution ourfelves. To God, and 
 .ttot to man, are all men to account for their belief. 
 
 It has been well obferved at trie firft inftitution of this fociety, that 
 the dogmas it profefles to believe, are from the commencement of the 
 World ; that they are not novelties, but are confeffedly the bafis of all 
 fyftems of religion, however numerous and contraduiory they may be% 
 All men in the outfet of the religion they profefs are Theophilanthro- 
 pifts. It is impoflible to form any fyftem of religion without build- 
 ing upon thofe principles, and therefore they are not fe&arian prin- 
 ciples, unlefs we fuppofe a feci compofed of all the world. 
 
 I have faid in the courfe of this difcourfe, that the ftudy of natural 
 philofophy h a di»ine ftudy, becaufe it is the ftudy of the works of 
 God in the Creation. If we coniider theology upor. this ground, 
 what an extenfive held of improvement in things both divine and 
 human opens itfelf before us. All the principles of fcience are of 
 divine origin. It was not man that invented the principles on which 
 aftronomy, and every branch of mathematics are founded andftudied. 
 It was not man that gave properties to the circle and the triangle. 
 Thofe principles are eternal and immutable. We fee in them the 
 unchangeable nature of the Divinity. We fee in them immortality, 
 an immortality exifiing after the material figures that exprefs thofe 
 properties are diflblved in duft. 
 
 The fociety is at prefent in its infancy, and its means are fmall 5, 
 but I wifh to hold in view the fubje& I allude to, andinftead of teach- 
 ing the philofophical branches of learning as ornamental accomplilh- 
 ments only, as they have hitherto been taught, to teach them in a 
 manner that (hall combine theological knowledge with fcientific in- 
 ftrudtion ; to do this to the beft advantage, lome inftruments will be 
 neceflary for the purpofe of explanation, of which the fociety is noC 
 yet pofleJTed. But as the views of the fociety extend to public good, 
 as well as to that of the individual, and as its principles can have no 
 enemies, means may be devifed to procure them. 
 
 If we unite to the prefent inftruction, a feries of lectures on the 
 ground I have mentioned, we fhall, in the firft place, render theology 
 the moft delightful and entertaining of all ftudies. In the next place, 
 We fhall give fcientific inftru&ion to thofe who could not otherwife 
 obtain it. The mechanic of every profeflion will there be taught the 
 mathematical principles neceflary to render him a proficient in bis 
 art. The cultivator will there fee developed the principles of vege- 
 tation ; while, at the fame time, they will be led to fee the hand of 
 God in all thefe things. 
 
 ■F 1 N I S. 
 

 :MfaAZtmk& 
 
 mMkt 
 
 1 1 iN 
 
 • * A A A J 
 
 
 
 .0 a' : r m** . AAA a aAV 
 
 aa a a**" ;:>c : 
 
 
 1 A /», *, *i A 
 
 ^A^AM^'V^ 
 
 
 
 VsV^-" 1 
 
 ftA*K'KAfvft>£ 
 
 
 
 *.l*^:- 
 ?*.* 
 
 - - . . . • ■ ■ " ' h i* * r 
 
 K^r^^r^ 
 
 
 -/ ;S«^.V„ ' a.a,a^- 
 
 
 ^**Ma 
 
 i$$*M^.; 
 
 :*$&tfj 
 
 - - . -\ /. . a 
 
 ~*'^,^::;* 
 
\f\+AAA.\ 
 
 
 
 '^WW 
 
 
 2 ""'H* 
 
 to/A /• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 WMWi 
 
 >* * > \ik t S*<i 
 
 ^:^a^. 
 
 
 
 ****** 
 
 SM&~