1 LIBRA.RY ' 1 OF THE Thee > logical S eminary , ^ PRINCETON, N.J. j Case, .....QjVL .^ -BS.d.SO \ Shelf. Sdct on ..ni3.4- Book, i THE BIBLE A. M:IBACL,E; OR tilje SStorir d (BijH its Dtoit Imtiicss: THE SUPERNATURAL INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES SHOWN FROM THEIR LITERARY, THEOLOGICAL, MORAL, AND POLITICAL EXCELLENCE. BY EEV. DAVID MACDILL. PHILADELPHIA: WM. S. EENTOUL. 1872. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1871, by DAVID MACDILL and WM. S. RENTOUL, In tlie Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. U PREFACE. The object of the following work is two-fold; first, to present more fully than has yet been done the argument for the supernatural inspiration of the Scriptures drawn from their incomparable excellence; and, second, to meet the infidel assumption that ^ mir- acles are incredible, if not impossible,' by showing that THE BIBLE ITSELF IS A MIRACLE. We take for granted that the New Testament was written by Jewish authors about eighteen hundred years ago; and that the books of the Old Testament were of an earlier, some of them of a much earlier origin. Lardner's Oredlbilify of the Gospel History demonstrates that the books of the New Testament were in existence soon after the commencement of the Christian era. Their peculiarities of language and thought prove that their authors were Hellen- istic Jews. The testimony of Josephus shows that the books of the Old Testament were in use among the Jews moi^e than eighteen hundred years ago. We understand that these facts are admitted by in- telligent and reasonable men; and assuming them as granted, we build our argument upon them. iii IV PREFACE. To prove some of the points discussed, we rely, as the reader will see, more upon facts, well-established opinions, and the admissions of opponents, than our own argumentation. We have freely used the thoughts of others. Whenever we have done so, we have endeavored to make the proper acknowledgment. AYe may have failed to do so in some cases, through oversight. AVe have, doubtless, sometimes used the thoughts of others unconsciously. AYe are conscious of indebt- edness to various authors of which we can only make a general acknowledgment, as now we do. Our aim has been to make our book instructive to readers in general. Hence we have, as far as possiblej employed language and illustrations that may be understood by the unlearned as well as the learned. For the same reason our quotations from foreign authors are given in English. We have not thought it necessary to burden our pages with the original of the passages quoted. We do not claim that we have exhausted the va- rious subjects discussed. Much that we would like to have presented has been omitted, in order to avoid swelling our volume beyond a proper size. Cherry Fork, Onio; Odobcr, 1S71. CONTENTS PART I. THE LITERARY EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. CHAPTER I. PAGE Preliminary considerations 1 CHAPTER II. Freedom of the Bible from absurdity, , . . 11 CHAPTER III. Consistency of the Bible with science, • , , 84 CHAPTER IV. Literary excellence of the seemingly least valuable portions of the Bible, 65 CHAPTER V. Richness of the Bible in grand and beautiful sub- jects, 70 CHAPTER VI. Indebtedness of literature and literary men to the Bible, 77 V VI CONTENTS. PAGE CHAPTER VI r. Testimony of eminent men to the literary excellence of the Bible — Sir W. Jones, Archbishop Fenelon, Cowper, Herder, Gilfillan, Edward Irving, Addi- son, Isaac Taylor, Judge Grimke, and Chancel- lor Kent, 102 CHAPTEPw Vlir. Testimony of eminent men to the literary excellence of the Bible, continued — Webster, Hazlitt, Schle- gel, and Lamartine, 114 CHAPTER IX. Testimony of eminent men to the literary excellence of the Bible, continued — Humboldt, Gothe, Rous- seau, Renan, Byron, Carlyle, and the Westmin- ster Review, 119 CHAPTER X. Excellence of the lyric poetry of the Bible, • , 131 CHAPTER XI. Influence of the Bible on the Fine Arts, . • 137 CHAPTER Xir. Facts illustrating the literary excellence of the Bible, 147 CHAPTER XIII. Summary, 1G6 CONTENTS. Vll PART II. THE THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. PAGE CHAPTER I. Preliminary considerations, 177 CHAPTER II. Egyptian theology, 180 CHAPTER III. Hindu theology, 191 CHAPTER IV. Buddhist theology, ...••• 201 CHAPTER V. Persian theology, 208 CHAPTER VI. / Chinese theology, ' . 223 CHAPTER VII. Grecian theology, 228 CHAPTER VIII. Roman theology, ...•.., 239 CHAPTER IX. Arabic theology, 246 Viii CONTENTS. PAGE CHAPTER X. Ancient theology in general— its deterioration, . 248 CHAPTER XI. Hebrew theology, ... . • • • .251 CHAPTER XII. Concluding remarks, . . . . . • 270 PART III. THE MORAL EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. CHAPTER I. Distinguishing peculiarities of the Bible morality, . 275 CHAPTER II. Objections answered, . ... • • • 282 CHAPTER III. Moral perfection of Jesus, 297 CHAPTER IV. Hebrew morality compared with other systems, . 306 CHAPTER V. Actual influence of the Bible in favor of morality, 348 CONTENTS. IX PAGE CHAPTER VI. Facts illustrating the moral excellence of the Bible, 368 CHAPTER Vir. Testimony of skeptics to the moral excellence of the Bible, 378 CHAPTER VIII. Eecapitulation and concluding remarks, • . 387 PAKT ly. THE POLITICAL EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. CHAPTER I. Its freedom from political errors, . . • . 393 CHAPTER II. The positive excellence of its political ethics, . 404 CHAPTER III. Inferiority of other codes, 415 CHAPTER IV. The actual influence of the Bible on politics, , 434 CHAPTER V. Recapitulation, 448 CONTENTS. PART Y. MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOR THE ORIGIN OF THE BIBLE. PAGE CHAPTER I. Infidel theories, 455 CHAPTER ir. Infidel theories, continued — facts and considerations further illustrating their insufficiency, . . . 478 CHAPTER III. The infidel assumption that Miracles are incredible, 485 CHAPTER IV. The two theories, Christian and infidel, , , 497 PART I. THE LITERARY EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. I>A_RT I. THE LITERARY EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. CHAPTER I. PRELIMIXAPvY CONSIDERATIONS. The Bible clahns to be divinely inspired. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God is the emphatic declaration of one of its principal writers.^ Besides this and other declarations of similar import, we find that the writers of the Bible quote each other's words as having divine authority. Nor is the divine in- spiration, which the writers of the Bible claim for themselves and ascribe to one another, left a vague uncertainty as to its extent and influence. *The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue — For the prophecy came not of old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.'^ The in- spiration thus claimed by the writers of the Bible is an influence from God prompting and enabling them to write as they did. They assert that they wrote, not according to their own judgment or will, but as they were directed and influenced by the Spirit of 1 2 Tim. 3 : IG. ^2 Sam. 23 : 2. 2 Pet. 1 : 21. 1 1 2 LITERA.IIY EXCELLENCE. God. They represent themselves as clerks or aman- uenses, who wrote what God dictated to them, and what they knew to be agreeable to his will. Such is the inspiration which the Bible claims for itself. Is this claim true or false? This question should not be decided hastily. For many false claims to divine inspiration have been set up. All the heathen nations of antiquity of whom we have any knowledge, believed in pretended reve- lations from heaven. The fact that the Bible claims, and is generally believed, to be divinely inspired, does not prove it to be such. There are, however, some things connected with this fact, which at least recommend the claim of the Bible to respectful consideration. It is the only book, whose claim to divine inspiration has gener- ally been admitted, and has stood the test of time. It has been reverenced as the inspired word of God by the great majority, not only of enlightened people, but also of those whose virtues, talents, and learning entitle their opinions to the highest regard. The majority of the greatest scholars, actors, and think- ers of modern times, — Bacon, Newton, and Locke; Shakespeare, Milton, Addison, Cowper, and iNIacau- lay; Luther, Calvin, and Knox; Sir W. Jones, Grotius, Pascal, Buckland and Miller; Hampden, Cromwell, the Princes of Orange, and Washington; Lord Hale, Sir W. Blackstone, Adams, Hamilton, Chief Justice Marshall, Judge Story, Chancellor Kent, Lord Brougham, and Daniel Webster, — the greatest and best of men, the master-spirits of the human race, during eighteen hundred years, have PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS. 3 believed in the supernatural origin of the Scrip- tures. It is true that many men of wit, learning, and genius, — Voltaire, Gibbon, Gothe, Rousseau, Byron, Humboldt, — have been sceptics. But such men constitute a small minority among those whom the enlightened world esteems not only gifted, but also great and good. These facts do not, indeed, decide the question in regard to the supernatural inspiration of the Scrip- tures. But they create a presumption in favor of such inspiration. At the least, whatever has stood the test of time, and has been received and reverenced by the great majority of enlightened people, and by the greatest, best, and most learned of mankind for many centuries, and has been believed in by every nation that has been made acquainted with it, ought not to be rejected in haste, or dismissed with a sneer. The presumption thus established in favor of the claim of the Bible to supernatural inspiration is strengthened by the failure of all the efforts made to falsify that claim. During eighteen centuries the opponents of the Bible have labored to show that it is not of God. They have endeavored to prove con- tradictions and inaccuracies in its statements. To furnish themselves with evidence and arguments, they have studied the contemporaneous writings of ancient nations; have appealed to history, chronol- ogy, astronomy, geology, and other sciences; have examined the hieroglyphics of the Egyptians and the astronomical tables of the Chinese and the Plin- dus; have scanned the stars and the milky- way, and ransacked the strata of the earth. But all has been 4 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. in vain. Notwithstanding the labors and efforts of shrewd and learned infidels, the majority of scholars and scientific men, — historians, chronologists, astron- omers, geologists, philologists, and naturalists, — to- gether with the majority of people who live in en- lightened countries, still persist in believing the Scriptures to have been given by the inspiration of the Almighty. Yet, if the Bible is not what it claims to be, its falsity is peculiarly liable to detection and exposure. It is not a single book written by one man. It con- tains sixty-six books, v/hich purport to have been written by nearly fifty authors. These authors did not live at one time or place. They were scattered over a period of fifteen hundred years; occupied diiferent stations in life; and differed widely in character, g'fts, learning, and other circumstances. They were kings, priests, statesmen, warriors, shep- herds, farmers, fishermen, poets, prophets, apostles, learned men and unlearned, Jews and Greeks. Their books purport to have been written under circum- stances the most strangely and strikingly diverse, — in the city and in the desert; in the palace and in the dungeon; in the tented camp and in the quiet dwell- ing; in the bosom of society and amid the rocks of the lonely island ; at Jerusalem, at Babylon, at Rome, at various j^laces in different countries. The books are as diverse as the characters and circumstances of their authors. They contain poetry, proverbs, proj)hecics, prayers, j^recepts, parables, orations, bi- ographies, epistles, sermons, commentaries, confes- Bions, ecclesiastical history, national chronicles, raili- PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIOXS. 5 tary annals, political statistics, travels, laws, songs, descriptions of natural scenery, accounts of the creation and predictions of the final destruction of the earth. The Bible, indeed, embraces almost every species of composition, and treats of almost all sorts of subjects. Yet, in all these books, varied and diverse as they are, and purporting to have been written at various times, and in different places and countries, and by more than forty authors, who occupied diverse stations in life, and whose united lives stretched over a period of fifteen hundred years, there is nothing which, in the estimation of the majority of intelligent people and learned men, in- validates their claim to inspiration and infallibility. In all these books, which contain compositions of almost every conceivable kind and form, and on almost every kind of subject, there is not one state- ment, reference, or allusion, which the enlightened world regards as inconsistent with their claim to be the word of God. There is nothing in the whole book, varied, diverse, and multiform as its contents are, which, in the judgment of mankind, invalidates its historical character, or convicts any of its numer- ous authors of dishonesty or mistake. Though much has been said about inaccuracies, discrepancies, con- tradictions, and other improprieties in the Bible, the world remains unconvinced of their reality.^ If the Bible were not what it purports to be, — if its books were not historical ; if they were not writ- ten at the times they purport to have been written, and by the persons whose names they bear; if it con- 1 See Part v, eh. 4. 1* 6 LITERARY EXCP:LLEXCE. tained blunders in language; if its authors contra- dicted one another; it they contradicted trustworthy contemporary authors, or the teachings of natural science; if, in short, there were anything in its lan- guage, style, idiom, allusions, statements, or teach- ings, inconsistent with its claim to be the inspired word of God, — most assuredly some critical sceptic would have been able to prove it to the conviction of an intelligent world. No si)urious ])roduction can stand the test of time. Literary frauds are never long successful. In such attempts at fraud, the peculiarities of language, idiom, and style; allusions to contemporary authors and events; the kind of ideas and sentiments expressed ; and many other circumstances; ensure detection, and render con- tinued success impossible. Pollio, whose taste had been formed on the banks of the Tiber, detected the inelegant idiom of the Po in the style of Livy. Frederick the Great, king of Prussia, after tryinor to unlearn his mother tongue, and after reading, speak- ing, and writing French for half a century, could not compose in that language without making ridicu- lous mistakes. Macaulay asserts that Dr. Hobert- son's Dissertations on India, and Sir Walter Scott's Waverley and Marmion, contain Scotticisms at which a London ai)prentice would laugh. Such facts as these demonstrate the impossibility of ultimate suc- cess in literary imposture. But the Bible has stood the test of time. It has resisted the assaults of its enemies for eighteen hundred years. Though his- tory, astronomy, geology, philology, and criticism have all been employed against it, yet the judgment PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS. 7 of an overwhelming majority of the intelligent and learned, and good and great, has ever been, that it is what it claims to be; and that its language, style, and thoughts prove it to be the work of Almighty God. Since success in literary imposture is impos- sible,— since one man cannot successfully counterfeit, imitate, or plagiarize the works of another, — how could any man or set of men successfully counterfeit or imitate the language, style, and thoughts of the Almighty? The reception which this book, or rather these books, have met with, and the esteem and reverence with which, notwithstanding the learned and labored efforts of opposing infidels, they have ever been re- garded, appear still more remarkable, when we con- sider the character of the people among whom they originated. We dq not admit that the Jews were as rude and debased as some authors, desirous of setting aside the divine inspiration and authority of the Scriptures, have represented them. Gibbon describes them as an obscure, unsocial, obstinate, ungrateful, and selfish race, who for many ages were the most despised portion of the slaves of the Assyrians and Persians.^ Voltaire declares that the Jews are both our teachers and our enemies, whom we believe and detest at the same time; that the Arabs, their kins- men, have been infinitely more favored by God, and have prodigiously surpassed them even as robbers.^ The design of these writers in such representations is very evident. But the Jews certainly were not a superior race. According to their own writers, 1 Ch. 1, sect. 15. 2 pijii^ Diet., Art. Abraham. 8 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. they were originally a nation of slaves, and of course endured all the inevitable consequences of slavery; among which are, ignorance and barbarism. For ages they were rude and uncultivated. They never did become a refined, literary people. They had no Academy or Lyceum. Their only institutions of learning were their schools of the prophets. Their only poets were their seers. Oratory, painting, and sculpture, were almost unknown among them. Their own literature consisted almost exclusively in their religious writings; and of foreign literature they were almost entirely ignorant. They occupied a small portion of territory, about 120 miles long and 60 broad ; less in extent than one-fourth of the state of Ohio; hemmed in between the desert and the east- ern end of the Mediterranean sea. They were a nation of farmers; had scarcely any foreign com- merce; and were almost entirely secluded from the rest of mankind. Yet among these peo})lc, — for- merly a nation of slaves, rude and uncultivated, without literary institutions, without the sciences and the fine arts, without philosophers and literary men, without foreign commerce, and cut off from the sur- rounding nations, — among these people originated a literature consisting of sixty-six books, treating of or alluding to almost every conceivable subject, and containing almost every species and form of writing, composed in two languages, and j)urporting to have been written at different times and at various i)laces, in different countries, and by a^out fifty authors, who occupied almost every station in life, from the PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS. 9 highest to the lowest, and the earliest and latest of whom lived at periods separated by an interval of more than fifteen centuries; yet these books, claim- ing to be a revelation from heaven, and an infallible guide in religion and morals, though attacked as no other books have ever been, though their language, style, statements, allusions, and doctrines have been examined and criticized in the light of history, philology, astronomy, geology, and other sciences, are yet regarded by a vast majority of the good and intelligent and learned as having been written by men who were guided by the inspiration of the Al- mighty. If this judgment of the overwhelming majority of the enlightened and learned who have lived during eighteen centuries be not correct, then have the He- brew writers perpetrated the most stupendous impos- ture the world has ever seen, and in literary skill and cunning have surpassed all the rest of mankind. Or, if their honesty is admitted, as it now generally is, the conclusion must be, that Avithout design or agreement, in their unconsciousness and simplicity, the authors of the Bible have done what all the genius, learning, skill, and cunning of the world could not do, — deceived the majority of the most intelligent and learned of mankind durins; centuries and as^es. In either case, this long-continued deception of man- kind is unparalleled and unaccountable; and the book itself is a miracle of imposture. Vie do not say, by any means, that these facts and considerations are conclusive evidence of the miracu- 10 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. lous inspiration of the authors of the Bible. But they constitute presumptive evidence; and may serve to rebuke, though scarcely to repress, the assuming, patronizing, dogmatic spirit and air so often mani- fested by the advocates of infidelity. CHAPTER II. FREEDOM OF THE BIBLE FROM ABSURDITY. The Bible is distinsruislied from all the other writings of antiquity by its freedom from absurdity. Though it abounds in the most sublime poetry and eloquence, it is uniformly sober, reasonable, and truth-like. It, indeed, deals largely in the super- natural and the marvelous. It claims to be itself a supernatural production. But the supernatural and marvelous, of which the Bible treats, contain nothing monstrous, ridiculous, or childish. In it are found none of the exaggerations nor puerilities which abound in all the ancient literatures. It tells us of no garden of the Hesperides, producing appj^s of gold, and guarded by a dragon with a hundred heads; no monster Centaurs, half-man and half-horse; no huge Cyclops, gigantic, one-eyed men, feeding on iiuman flesh ; no Goro-ons havino^ heads adorned with serpents instead of hair, mouths armed with teeth like boar's tusks, and eyes that turned all beholders into stones; no hydras, griffins, pigmies, or other monsters which figure so largely in the history and poetry of antiquity. 1. The Egyptians were the most cultivated people of early antiquity. Egypt was the cradle of civili- zation, the nursery of science and philosophy. To Egypt, as to a university, resorted the most distiur guished men of other countries, — historians, legisla- U 12 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. tors, philosophers, mathematicians, and physicians, — to learn the arts, the sciences, philosophy, and law. The wisdom of the Egyptians is often mentioned in the Old Testament Scriptures. But famous as the ancient Egyptians were for their learning and wisdom, their literature was disfigured and degraded by many ridiculous fancies. They held an absurd system of astrology. By this pre- tended science, their wise men claimed that they could foretell pestilences, earthquakes, inundations, the appearance of comets, and years of plenty and scarceness. Their belief was, that some of the move- ments of the planets are beneficial, others injurious; and they pretended to assign the influence which the day of an individual's birth would have upon his character and fortunes. The human body was divided by them into thirty-six parts corresponding t(f the divisions of the zodiac, and under their in- fluence a god or demon was supposed to preside over each part. The opinion that the heavenly bodies have an influence, according to their position in the heavens, on the different parts of the human body, interfered with the practice of medicine. Thus the medical art among the Egyptians became contami- nated w^ith their astrological absurdities. The belief was prevalent among them, that even the soul of a man enters into life through one of the twelve signs of the zodiac; the first six being favorable, the re- maining six unfavorable.^ Though they observed and noted all remarkable phenomena, they took account of them only as prodigies.^ The tendency ' Kemick, vol. 1, p. 287-292. ^He^od. 2: 82. FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 13 among them to mingle fancy with science, is ilhis- trated by the chronological fable of the bird phoenix, which was supposed to visit the temple of the sua at Heliopolis at the termination of certain regular periods of time, carrying the body of its deceased parent enclosed in myrrh.^ The doctrine of the transmigration of souls was a part of their system of belief; if system they had at all. They thought that when a man dies, his soul enters some other animal; and that, after having inhabited every spe- cies of beast and bird, it finally enters a human body a second time. They affirmed that it completes this succession of changes in the period of three thousand years.^ Such are some of the fanciful and absurd notions which prevailed among the learned men of the most cultivated nation of early antiquity. All the knowl- edge of Egyptian literature which we possess is de- rived from pyramids, tombs, mummies, hieroglyphic inscriptions, and the hints of foreign authors. These are to us the only monuments of Egyptian learning. Still, we know enough to be assured, that had not their book-literature perished, we would find it characterized throughout by puerility and folly. 2. The literature of the ancient Hindus also abounds with absurdities. Nothing can be more absurd than their cosmogony and geography. Ac- cording to their books, the world was hatched from an eggy from which after an incubation of millions and millions of years, Brahma, who includes in him- self all things, and is the universe, sprang forth, 1 Herod. 2: 73. Tac. An. 6: 28. * Herod. 2: 123. 2 14 LITERARY EXCELLEXCF:. having a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, and a thousand arms. According to the Hindu geograph- ers, the earth is a flat, circular plain, measuring hundreds of millions of miles in circumference; the habitable part consisting of seven islands, each sur- rounded by an ocean; the first ocean consisting of salt water, the second of the juice of the sugar cane, the third of spirituous liquor, the fourth of clarified butter, the fifth of sour milk, the sixth of sweet milk, and the seventh of sweet water ; the whole restinor upon an enormous snake with a hundred heads, and the snake upon a tortoise. The VedaSj the oldest portion of the Hindu litera- ture, contain many things both foolish and indecent. The literary character of these ancient hymns may be inferred from the subjects of which they treat. In some of them the hawk, the partridge, the mortar and the pestle, and even the wheelbarrow, are the subjects of laudation. Iii one a gambler complains of his ill luck; in another, we find a loose conversa- tion between a man and his wife; and in another, an address to food, seemingly composed by a hungry glutton.^ A distinguished Hindu scholar declares, that large numbers of the vedic hymns are childish in the extreme; and that though this part of Hindu literature contains but little that is bad, it contains a great deal that is foolish.^ Of the Brahmanas, the same distinguished scholar says, that for pedantry and downright absurdity they are scarcely paralleled. His own words are, ^The general character of these ^ Wilson's An. Ilindu Hymns, ^^ax Muller's Chips from a German Workshop ,vol. 1, pp. 26, 37. FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 15 works is marked by shallow and insipid grandilo- quence, priestly conceit, and antiquarian pedantry.'^ The writincrs of the Buddhists abound with errors equally wild and absurd. Their cosmography is as follows: There are innumerable worlds, each world having its own earth, sun, moon, and stars. Each world has an earth, with its oceans, continents, islands, and a mountain in the center. Each earth has four continents, the inhabitants of which have the same shape as the continent in which they are born. The first continent has a shape like a square seat, and its inhabitants have square faces. The second is like a half moon, and its inhabitants have faces like half moons. The third is like a round mirror; and the fourth is triangular. At the base of each world the air is 9600 miles in thickness; above this is the water 4,800,000 miles* in thick- ness; and above the water is the great earth 2,400,000 miles in thickness. In the center of the earth is a mountain 1,680,000 miles high, from the summit of which a stone would be four months in falling to the earth. The square-faced inhabitants of the first continent are never sick, and, though they live a thousand years, they never appear to be more than sixteen years old. They obtain their food and clothes from a tree which grows to the height of 1000 miles.2 ^ His. of An. Sanscrit Literature, p. 389, * Yojanas. The length of the yojana is estimated at from 4} to 16 miles. For convenience we assume 10 miles as its length. ' Hardy's Manual of Buddhism, pp. 1-15. 16 LITERARY FXCELLENCE. Such are some of the vagaries of Buddhism; which is an off-shoot of Hindu philosophy, and is of a piece with the more ancient and the orthodox Hinduism. Wild, extravagant, and ridiculous as are the theories and speculations of the Buddhists, they are not more so than those of the Hindu philosophers; who repre- sent the duration of human life in the first period of the world's existence as 100,000 years, and human stature as 37 feet; who describe heroes with 10 or 12 faces and 15 or 20 arms, and tell of tens of thousands of sons begotten of one man.^ Yet the ancient Hindus were a cultivated and literary people. They attained to a high degree of civilization. Their language was remarkable for the beauty and perfection of its structure, and is regard- ed as the most polished and copious language ever spoken by men. Their learned men assiduously cultivated poetry, astronomy, j)hilosophy, and the- ology. But notwithstanding their advancement in civilization and refinement, and their employment of a language unequaled for beauty and copiousness, their literature — the product of their most gifted and learned men — abounds in the wildest fancies, and the most ridiculous exao^srerations and blunders. 3. The literature of the ancient Persians, in the respect just mentioned, was little better than that of the Hindus. The fable of the original bull, who was killed by the devil-god Ahriman, and whose soul after death went to heaven, and out of whose body useful kinds of grain were formed, is an illus- * Allen's India, pp. 19-20. Ward, vol. 1, pp. 17-18. FREEDOM FEOM ABSURDITY. 17 tration.^ Equally absurd is the fabulous account of the sea of Vouru Kasha, with the three-legged ass standing in the middle.^ AYe have another specimen of absurdity in the account of a fabulous water-ani- mal, said to be produced from a thousand male and a thousand female dogs, and for the killing of which so great a punishment was denounced.^ Many of tlie prescriptions for purification, and of the enact- ments for the puaishment of moral and ceremonial transgressions, that are contained in the books as- cribed to Zoroaster, as we will hereafter show,^ are grotesque and ridiculous. !N^or do these old Persian books possess any literary excellence to atone for their childishness and folly. 4. Fables, fancies, and blunders characterize also the ancient Chinese literature. Confucius, who flour- ished in the sixth century before Christ, was the great literary man of the Chinese; and it has generally been supposed that he was a man of genius, and that his productions were characterized by originality and literary merit. But the recent publications of Dr. L'egge do not justify the exalted opinion of Confucius and his teachings, Avhich many have heretofore enter- tained. His literary remains are generally common- place, and often puerile. The so-called philosopher was frequently a driveler. He believed and endorsed the fable of the Fung bird, which was said to appear only when a sage ascended the throne, or when right principles were about to prevail through the empire. He also believed and endorsed the fable of ^Yacna, 1: 6 (Spigol's German translation). '^Vispered, 8: 18, 20. ^Yeiididad, 14: 1-4. * Part II. ch. 3. 2* 18 LITERARY EXCELLEXCE. a monster with the head of a dragon and the body of a horse, said to have arisen from the water, and by the marks on his back to have given to Fah-he, the lirst of the sages, the idea of diagrams and maps.^ His geographical ideas were absurd. He regarded China as indeed the ^Middle Kingdom,' and as * All under heaven;' and thought that beyond it were only rude and barbarous tribes.^ These and other absurd notions characterize the anci*jnt Chinese liter- ature throughout. Williams in his 3IldcUe Kingdom remarks, that the ancient Chinese were characterized by the appetite for wonders which marks the infancy of nations as well as of individuals; and that their early national vanity and love of the marvelous furnished materials for many tales in succeeding times.^ Confucius accepted his country's literature as he found it. He was not an original thinker, nor an innovator. He said of himself, ^I am one who is fond of antiquity — a transmitter, and not a maker; believing in and loving the ancients.' Dr. Legge says; ^emphatically he was a transmitter and not a maker; not a great man, nor before his age.'* Hence the narrowness of his views: his national pre- judices, and his absurd notions, are to be traced to his country's literature, which he studied and loved. A few years ago, a periodical which persistently opposes the supernatural inspiration of the Bible, represented Confucius, in accordance with the pre- vailing opinion concerning him, as being a very great and learned man; as teaching a philosophic creed; ^Legge's Conf., pp. 95-^, 104. ^p. i09. ^Vol. 2, p. 194. *pp. 95—6, 114. FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 19 announcing only common -pi ace truths to the multi- tude, but reserving his abstruse doctrines for sages and the learned. But after the publications of Dr. Legge had been given to the world, the same peri- odical represented Confucius and the Chinese litera- ture as objects of contempt. * The things recorded of him are very small, but we must remember the lit- tleness of the Chinese mind. * * * * The moral, social, and political precepts of Confucius are perfectly childish in comparison of Greek ethics or Hebrew proverbs.'^ 5. The literature of the Greeks and Romans was ])v no means free from absurd vagaries and blunders. Their poets employed the fables and talcs current among the multitude to adorn and popularize their productions; but many unreasonable and nonsensical things were asserted even by their historians and poets. Herodotus records many absurd fables and stories as veritable history. His observations con- cerning natural phenomena are often only wild con- jectures. For instance, in accounting for the over- flowing of the river Nile in summer, he asserts that in winter the sun, driven by storms from his usual course, ascends into the higher regions of the air above Libya, and dries up the waters of the upper Nile; so that their diminished volume, when it reaches lower Egypt, is retained within the banks.^ Thales, first named one of the seven wise men of Greece, declared that the cause of the overflowino; of ^ Westminster Review, April, 1857, p. 302. Oct. 1867, p. 254. 2 Her. 2: 24-6. 20 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. the Nile was, that Its waters were driven back by the Etesian winds.^ Cleanthes thoug^ht that the sun is nourished by the vapors of the ocean.^ Cicero represents one of his interlocutors as maintaining, that the stars are animated divine beings, and are fed by the vapors, which ascend from the earth and the sea, and which are purified by their long passage to the heavens.^ Anaxagoras declared the sun to be a mass of burning iron, larger than Peloponnesus. He accounted for aerolites by asserting that the whole heaven is composed of stones, which are held together by its rapid revolutions; and that when these revolutions become less rapid, the stones fall.^ In one of Cicero's works, it is asserted that the heart is employed as well as the lungs in respiration, and that by one of its ventricles the breath is communi- cated through the arteries.^ Tacitus, the Roman historian, records the arrival of the fabulous phoenix in Egypt in the consulship of Paulus Fabius and Lucius Vitellius. He declares the accounts of this bird not, indeed, to be entitled to unqualified credit; but he records its arrival as an actual event worthy of the attention of his readers.*" Socrates maintained the absurd doctrine of the transmigration of souls. His theory was, that after death they inhabit the bodies of beasts, birds, and insects; that such as have })ractised gluttony and wantonness enter into the bodies of asses and similar brutes; such as have practised oppression and injustice, into the bodies of wolves, hawks, and kites; and the just and temper- ^Diog. Laer. 9. ""Do Nat. Deor. 2: 15. ^2: 15, 46. *Diog. Laer. 4, 8. " De Nat. Deor. 2: 54-5. '^xVnual. 6: 28. FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 21 ate, into bees, wasps, or ants, or perhaps into human bodies again.^ This celebrated philosopher also thought, that what men call the earth is only a great hollow; that on the earth are many hollows about which men live, as frogs about a marsh; and, that the true earth is in the heavens among the stars, as men would see if they could only fly up to the sum- mit of the air.^ It is but just, however, to remember, that the opinions of Socrates are known to us mainly through the writings of Plato; who may not have reported them in all respects correctly. It is certain however, that Plato held the absurd notions and doc- trines which he ascribes to his master. For some of his opinions, this so-called prince of philosophers was, doubtless, indebted to the Egyptians, whose country he visited, and among whom he studied. He adopted their doctrine of metempsychosis. He tauirht that timid and unjust men are in their second generation changed into women; the light-minded and curious into featliered birds; men who make no use of philosophy, into quadruped and multiped wild beasts; and the most ignorant and unthinking, into fishes, water snakes, and oysters.^ He described the world as an eternal animal and a blessed god. He ascribed soul and intellect not only to the earth, but also to the sun, to every star, and to every large body. According to his account, the soul of the world is composed of three ingredients, soAne, differ- ent^ and essence, divided and subdivided into minute parts, and then classified and united in certain pro- portions. He declares that the world was made 1 Phsedo, 70-71. ' 133-5. » ximceus, 72-3. 22 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. without eyes or ears, because there was nothing ex- ternal for it to see or hear; and that it was madQ without legs and feet, because it could move six or seven ways without them.^ Aristotle taught that the stars have animal life and activity;^ that they are eternal substances animated by divinities, as the body by the soul -^ and that they generate heat and light by rubbing against the air.* One reason as- signed by him for believing that the stars are in shape spheroidal is, that spheres have no organs of motion.^ 6. The Arabic literature also contains many ridic- ulous blunders and exaggerations. The Koran, which is the highest literary as well as theological achieve- ment of the Arabic mind, speaks of a man following after the sun in his course until he found it to set in a spring of black mud.® Not among the least of the absurd things contained in the Koran is, the account of the young men and their dog sleeping in a cave three hundred and nine years.^ It contains many other absurdities, such as, that the Almighty placed mountains on the earth to hold it still ;^ that He transformed some of the disobedient Jews into apes and svvine;^ that Moses, in anger at Aaron for making the golden calf, seized him and dragged him along by the hair of his hcad;^*^ that Jesus Christ, while an infant, addressed men in articulate speech, and made a living bird out of clay;^^ and that Satan lEpinomis, 6. Tim. 11-14, 18. ^De Coelo, 2: 12. » Metaphys. 11:8. * De Coelo, 2:7. ^ 2 : 12. « Koran (Sale's trans.) ch. 18. 'ch. 18. » ch. 31. »ch, 2,5, 7. ^<^ch.7. ^^ ch. 7. FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 23 is to be driven away from men with stones.^ Gib- «bon, who seems to have admired the character and career of Mohammed, describes the Koran as an end- less, incoherent rhapsody of fable, precept, and dec- lamation, which sometimes crawls in the dust and is sometimes lost in the clouds.^ Carlyle expresses his opinion of it, in characteristic style, as follows; ^I must say, it is as toilsome reading as I ever under- took. A wearisome, confused jumble, crude, incon- dite; endless iterations, long-windedness, entangle- ment; most crude, incondite; — insupportable stupid- ity, in short.^^ Such is the literary character of the Koran. But if any one wishes to have a full view of the fables, fancies, and absurdities in which the Arabic mind expatiated and delighted, let him read the Arabian Nights^ Entertahwients. 7. The Avritings of the Hebrews, except those con- tained in the Bible, are characterized by absurdities and blunders similar to those which abound in the writings of other nations. Josephus, though a man of sense and learning, asserts many absurd and im- possible things ; such as, that the river which watered the garden of Eden flowed round the whole earth; that the lower animals originally possessed the faculty of articulate speech, and used the lan- guage of men; and that serpents were created with feet, on which they walked upright.* From the Talmud, however, it is most clearly seen in what puerilities and monstrosities the Jewish mind, out- ' Chs. 15, 16. 2 Decl. and Fall, ch. 50. ^ Hero-worship, p. 58. * Antiq. of the Jews, 1 : 1. 24 IJTERARY EXCELLEXCE. side of the canonical Scriptures, rioted and reveled. It tells of things most incredibly and ludicrously extravagant and enormous ; — of a cock, that with his feet on the ground, touched the heavens with his head ; of a kid as large as mount Tabor; of a man (Og, king of Bashan), whose hip-bone was more than tliree miles long; of a man who ate three hun- dred calves and drank three hundred measures of wine for a lunch only ; of a fish with embankments of sand and with growing rushes on its back, and on which a ship's crew landed and cooked provisions, not discovering their mistake until the heat of their fire caused the monster to dive; of a fish, wliich, when cast ashore, threw down sixty villages, which sixty other villages ate of, which sixty other villages salted of, the fat of one of whose eyes filled three hundred barrels, and the bones of which were after- ward employed as materials in rebuilding the villages which had been thrown down; and of many other things equally monstrous and absurd. 8. In nothinor were ancient writers more absurd o than in chronolo2:v. Desirous of availing^ themselves of the veneration for antiqaity prevalent among man- kind, they set up for their national origin, religion, and literature the most extravagant claims. The Egyptian chronology is confused and contra- dictory. According to Lepsius, it embraces 21,903 years, including the fabulous, un historic, and his- toric periods. According to Herodotus, who received his information from the most learned of the Egyp- FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 25 tians, their native monarchy continued 11,340 years.'^ But according to the Egyptian account, the dynasties of men were preceded by the reign of gods and demi- gods. Lepsius makes the period of the gods, 13,870 years; of demi-gods, 3,650; and of man, 4,383. Manetlio, as related by Africanus and Eusebius, makes the period of the gods and demi-gods togeth- er, 24,000 years. According to an Old Chronicle quoted by Syncellus, the reign of gods and demi- gods continued 36,525 years, which would make 25 periods of 1461 years each. The time allotted to the beast-god. Apis, was 25 years. The fable of the phoenix, which, as some affirmed, lived 1461 years, or as others affirmed 500 (this latter period was probably obtained by dividing 1461 or in round numbers 1500 into three equal periods), was doubt- less originally designed to symbolize these 25 periods of 1461 years, making together a period of 36,525 years, the supposed duration of gods and demi-gods. Thus Egyptian chronology is founded on fiction and fable. Ken rick remarks that to these dynasties of gods and demi-gods ^ were arbitrarily assigned long periods of domination.'^ The Hindus are still more extravagant in their claims to antiquity. Their chronology as contained in their sacred books consists of four periods, which together make four millions, three hundred and twenty thousand years. The Hindu Avriters refer to still longer periods, declaring a kalpa, or one day of ^ 2 : 142. 2 Lepsius' Letters from Egypt, p. 496. Herod. 2: 142. Kenrick's An. Egyp., vol. 2, p. 77-8. Tac. An. 6: 28. 26 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. Brahm, to consist of four billions, three hundred and twenty millions of years; a period equal to seven hupdred and twenty thousand times the supposed duration of man on the earth. They boast also that there never was a time when their Vedas did not ex- ist, and that they are as old as the universe it^lf.^ The Chinese also exceed the truth in boasting of their antiquity. Their early history is mythological, and is the production of subsequent times. To this mythological period a very remote antiquity was assigned, and is sometimes yet.^ The sceptical Bo- lingbroke asserts, that according to the chronology of the Chinese, the table of Fohi is nine or ten cen- turies older than Adam.^ The Grecians also set up extravagant claims to antiquity. The Athenians boasted that they sprang from the soil which they inhabited, and that they were as old as the sun. In token of their springing out of the soil as grasshoppers were supposed to do, they wore golden grasshoppers on their heads. The Arcadians boasted that they were before the moon. Indeed, in Greece as elsewhere, almost every tribo claimed to be a primeval race, and to have inhabited their own country from the beginning of the world. Thus we have shown that ancient literature abounds in ridiculous errors. The blunders, puer- ilities, exaggerations, childish fables, and monstrous lies, that might be collected from the writings of the ancient poets, historians, orators, and philosophers, would fill many volumes. Cicero declares that he ' Allen's India, An. and Mod* pp. 19--20. 2 Middle Kingdom, vol. 2, p. 184. ^phU. Works, vol. 3, i>. 7- FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 27 knew nothing so absurd as not to have found an advocate in some one of the philosophers.^ The writings of Cicero himself contain many errors*of this kind, some examples of which are presented above. But the Hebrew writings contained in the Bible constitute an exception. It alone of all ancient books, is uniformly reasonable and truth-like. It contains no ludicrous exaggerations, no w^ild conjec- tures, no monstrous stories, no absurd statements. The account which it gives of the creation — a sub- ject on which the absurdest theories and wildest conjectures have been proposed — is simple and rea- sonable, though at the same time sublime. The first statement is, that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. The second is, that at first all thinors were in confusion and darkness. The third thing asserted is, that God by his fiat caused light to appear. In the fourth place, the historian mentions the separation of light from darkness, and the succession of night and day. The fifth thing recorded is, the appearance of the dry land. Thus, step by step, the writer of Genesis proceeds in the account of the creation and arrangement of the world, without making one statement which reason or com- mon sense can pronounce fanciful or absurd. Moses is in perfect contrast with all other cosmogonists. No other writer has given an account of creation which any enlightened man does or can believe. There is also a striking contrast between the Bible ^ De Diviiiutioue, 2: 58. 28 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. and other ancient books in resrard to ehronoloo^v. It sets up, neither for itself nor for the people among whom it originated, any extravagant claims to an- tiquity. The Jews boasted not that they were the first race of men, nor that they had inhabited their own country from the beginning of the world. They were taught by their religious books that there were powerful kingdoms before they existed as a nation; and that originally they were slaves to an older and stronger race. Indeed, the only objection urged against the chronology of the Bible is the smallness of its numbers. This freedom of the Bible from all boastful pretensions to antiquity, and its representing the people among whom it originated to be a modern race compared with some of the surrounding nations, distinguishes it from every SHicient literature. Again, in regard to historical events and natural phenomena, the Scriptures are eminently truth-like and reasonable. The testimony of Humboldt on this point is very decided : ^ As descriptions of nature, the writings of the Old Testament are a faithful reflec- tion of the character of the country in which they were com{)osed ; of the alternations of barrenness and fruitfulness, and of the alpine forests by which the land of Palestine was characterized. They describe in their regular succession the relations of the climate, the manners of this people of herdsmen, and their hereditary aversion to agricultural pursuits. The epic or historical narratives are marked by a graceful simplicity, almost more adorned than those of Herod- otus, and most true to nature; a point on which the unanimous testimony of modern travelers may be FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 29 received as conclusive, owing to the inconsiderable changes effected in the course of ages in the manners and habits of a nomadic people/^ Similar testimony is given by the great German poet, Gothe, who speaks of the strong naturalness of the Old Testament? This faithfulness of the Bible to natural phenom- ena, prevailing manners and customs, and other his- torical matters, is evinced by the fact, that sceptics, in their efforts to falsify the claims of the Bible, appeal not to common sense^ but to science. They do not at- tempt to convict it of puerility, absurdity, or palpable falsehood; but would be well pleased, could they but succeed in convincing a majority of enlightened people that some of its statements are inconsistent with scientific facts established by the profound in- vestigations of modern times. This is now their aim and hope. The most strenuous efforts are put forth ; much learning and research are employed; books, reviews, and essays are written in quick succession, to fasten upon the Bible the charge — not of absurd- ity, not of misrepresenting natural phenomena, not of falsifying national manners and customs, not of contradicting the dictates of common sense and sober reason, but — of scientific inaccuracy. This fact virtually concedes its accuracy in matters of common observation; that very accuracy which is wanting in all other ancient books, and the absence of which is alone sufficient to demonstrate their human origin, and the fallibility of their authors. Even the accounts of miracles contained in the ^ Cosmos, vol. 2, pp. 412-13. ^ Truth and Poetry, B. 12. 3* 30 LITEPwARY EXCELLENCE. Scriptures are cliaracterized by sobriety, simplicity, and dignity. The marked difference between the Bible and other ancient books in this respect, will readily recur to every classic reader. It tells of no willows weeping blood, no monstrous births, no shocking and direful prodigies. The Westminster Review,^ though the thorough-going advocate of infidelity, makes the t'ol lowing declaration : 'The mi- raculous stories of the New Testament, with hardly an exception, and the majority of the miraculous stories of the Old Testament, whatever else they are, are certainly not childish. What, for instance, can be more sublime and well-sustained, than that most incredible of Hebrew legends — the account of the ascent of Elijah? What imagination could be more powerful and profound than that which produced the story of the transfiguration? The tales of the apocryphal gospels are for the most part childish: and this has been fairly urged on the orthodox side as an argument for plenary inspiration.' Thus even determined opponents of the supernatural origin of the Scriptures admit, that what they call stories and legends are characterized by dignity and sublimity. If these opponents would abandon the assumption that the supernatural is impossible, or at least in- credible, they might see that the Biblical accounts of miracles, not Svith hardly an exception,' but alto- gether without exception, are anything else than childish. Thus the Bible throughout is free from absurdity. » July, 18GG, pp. 29-30. FREEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 31 There is nothing puerile, extravagant, or unreason- able in its cosmogony, chronology, history, descrip- tions of natural phenomena, or accounts of miracles. Different, as we have shown, is the literature of every ancient nation. With the single exception of the canonical books of the Bible, all the literary produc- tions of antiquity — whether originating among the Egyptians, Hebrews, Hindus, Persians, Chinese, Grecians, Romans, or Arabians — are characterized by blunders and absurdities. The Egyptians, with their early civilization, their hieroglyphics, books, astronomy, geometry, art of embalming, and all their celebrated stores of wisdom ; the Hindus, with their ingenuity, philosophy, most comprehensive and ac- curate of languages, and all their cultivation; the Persians, with the learning and literature of the As- syrians and Babylonians added to their own; the Chinese, with their knowledge of magnetism, deci- mal fractions, gunpowder, the art of glass-making, and the mariner's compass; the Arabians, with their discoveries in medicine, botany, chemistry, algebra, geometry, astronomy, and other sciences; the Greeks, with their eloquence, poetry, philosophy, refinement, and attainments in the fine arts; and the Romans, appropriating to themselves the philosophy, science, poetry, and arts of the world ; — all these nations created literatures containing blunders, nonsense, fanciful conjectures, and monstrous fables. But the Hebrews, — almost entirely ignorant of art and sci- ence, confined to a mere patch of territory, having little or no intercourse with foreign nations, a people not only uncultivated and unrefined, but, according 32 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. to their own writers, strange, obdurate, and stub- born,— have given to the world a literature in sixty- six book^ containing poetry, history, biography, sermons, epistles, precepts, proverbs, and almost every species of composition, that is uniformly char- acterized by sober reason, common sense, and truth- like simplicity and dignity. Nor is this freedom from absurdity secured by the silence of the Biblical writers on difficult and dan- gerous subjects. They treat of, or allude to, almost every thing knowable by man. They speak of the earth, sun, moon, and stars; of the rivers, seas, des- erts, islands, and countries; of the creation of all things, the division of the human race into nations, and their settlement in different regions of the earth ; of the rise and fall of kingdoms, the destruction of cities, and the successes and defeats of armies; of the winds, clouds, seasons, minerals, vegetables, and ani- mals, and of all kinds of natural phenomena, hu- man actions, and providential and miraculous events. Yet, in all their statements, descriptions, allusions, and references, they avoid the blunders, exaggera- tions, puerilities, and fabulous stories that abound in the Hindu, Persian, Chinese, Grecian, Roman, and Arabic authors; in the remains of Egyptian literature; and in the uncanonical books of the He- brews themselves. Such a book, coming: from the a2:cs of ie^norance and superstition, is indeed wonderful. That it origi- nated among oriental people, who delighted in mar- velous and fanciful stories and fictions, and among uncultivated minds, in whom fancy and imagination FFwEEDOM FROM ABSURDITY. 33 predominate over judgment and reason, makes it still more wonderful. And the wonder is increased by the fact, that it was the product of the Jewish mind, which — as is shown by the Talmud and the Apocryphal writings — delighted in childish stories, ridiculous exaggerations, monstrous fables, and enor- mous lies. CHAPTER III. COXSISTEXCY OF THE BIBLE WITH SCIENCE. In the preceding chapter, we have shown that all the ancient literatures, — Egyptian, Hebrew (except- ing the books of the Bible), Hindu, Persian, Chinese, Grecian, Roman, and Arabic, — contain statements and speculations that are contrary to the dictates of reason and common sense. Our references and quo- tations serve equally well to illustrate the inconsist- ency of these ancient literatures with the teachings of science. Without asrain advertinir to the absurd- ities which abound in ancient literature in general, we will direct attention to the scientific errors of the Grecian authors. Though the Greeks were the most philosophical and scientific nation of antiquity, the writings of their most learned and gifted authors contain many opinions and theories that are demon- strated to be lalse and fanciful by the scientific dis- coveries of modern times. Herodotus asserts that Europe in length much ex- ceeds Al'rica;^ and that the Danube is the largest of all rivers.'^ He represents the sun as being driven out of his course by winter storms.^ He pronounces the account of the circumnavigation of Africa by the expedition of Necho, king of Egypt, incredible, for the reason that the men en<2:a<>ed in it asserted that ^4: 42,45. "4: 50. ^2: 24,26. 34 CONSISTENCY WITfl SCIENCE. 35 they had the sun on their rigid hand;^ whicli must liave been the case as long as they were south of the equator, sailing as they did from left to right. Anaxagoras, in addition to the absurdities men- tioned in tlie preceding chapter, held, that heavy bodies, such as the earth, occupy the lower situa- tions; and the light ones, such as he supposed the sun, moon, and stars to be, the higher; and that the middle spaces are assigned to water and air. He maintained that the stars originally moved about in confusion; and that the milky-way is the reflection of the liij-ht of the sun.^ ^ Anaxi mines conjectured that the stars are riveted like nails in the heavens, which he regarded as a solid crystal s}>here. Philolaus represented the sun as a glass-like body throwing upon us the rays whicl^ it has received from the central fire. Thales held the primary element and the source of the universe to be water; Anaximines and Diogenes, air; Anaxi- mander, a vast chaos; and Heraclitus, /re. Empe- docles held air, earth, and water to be the origin of all things; and all things as uncreated and inde- structible. Parmenides regarded creation as impos- sible. The Pythagoreans held that numbers and music are the first principles of the entire universe; and that the world is regulated by numerical har- mony."^ Plato was deeply imbued with the opinions of the Pythagorean school. In his theorizing about creation ^4: 42. 2 Dioor. Laer. 4. ^ ^ristot. Metapli3's. lib. 1, cap. 3-6. Cic. De Nat. Deor. 1 : 10-16. Diog. Laer. 36 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. and nature, he made much use of proportion and numbers. He held, like many other Grecian phil- osophers, that the world is composed of four elements, earth, air, fire, and water, united together in certain proportions. The world being thus, as he says, con- stituted an eternal animal^ was provided with a soul fixed in the middle of it. This soul was composed of an indivisible essence and another essence divisible and corporeal, which the Creator combined into one idea. He then took one part of the whole compound, then a second part double the first, next a third one- and-a-half times the second, and so on, until he had a seventh part twenty-seven times the first. Then again dividing and uniting the parts, he placed in- tervals between them, in the ratio of the numbers 256 and 243. After splitting the composition into two parts, uniting and bending them, and perform- ing various other processes, the Creator had the soul of the universe complete, and proceeded to fix it in its proper place.^ In addition to this account of the formation of the universe and of a universal soul, which is at war with common sense as well as with science, this prince of philosophers maintained, that though the universe is a sphere, the earth is in shape a square block.^ He asserted that water condensed takes the form of stones and earth; when melted, that of vapor and air; the air, when burnt up, becomes fire; fire, when condensed and extinct, becomes air; air, collected and condensed, becomes mists and clouds, »Tim. 11,12,14. 'Tim. 30. CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 37 mists and clouds, when compressed, become rain, and from water are again formed stones and earth.^ He also maintained the unscientific and absurd notion that the stars are living beings, divine and eternal animals, to each of which an intelligent soul is as- signed.^ His notions concerning the various organs of the human body and their functions were equally erroneous. He thought the lungs were designed merely as a sort of cushion around the heart, to cool it when angry. He regarded the liver as the seat of the intellect and the affections, and as especially de- signed for divination. He declared that the marrow is composed of earth, air, fire, and water, mingled in certain proportions ' with straight and smooth tri- angles of the first order/ and that God formed the bones of pure and smooth earth, mingled and moist- ened with marrow, first placed in fire, then plunged in water, once more placed in fire and then again plunged in water. He declared also that the blood consists of fire combined with moistened mud, and is- therefore red. His opinions concerning many other parts of the human body were equally errone- ous and absurd.^ As we have already shown,"* Aristotle taught that the stars are living and active beings, and that they produce heat by rubbing against the air.^ He re- jected the Pythagorean doctrines concerning the uni- verse, and in opposition thereto maintained that the earth is the centre of the world; and that the sun, 1 Tim. 22. 2 xim. 15-17. Epin. 7:6. ^ xim. 45-61. * Preceding Chap. ^De Coelo, 2, 17,12. 4 38 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. moon, and stars revolve around it.^ Among the errors which he held are also the following: that the planets have many motions;^ that the fixed stars do not revolve;^ that the stars are small bodies; that the earth is 400,000 stadia (about 50,000 miles) in circumference;* that the milky- way is a large comet ;^ that comets are meteors which belong to our atmosphere;^ that aerolites are large stones raised by hurricanes; that the number of celestial spheres is either forty-seven or fifty-five, but cannot be greater;^ and that India is near the Straits of Gib- ralter.^ Such are the scientific errors which abound in the ablest writers of ancient times, — errors in geography, geology, astronomy, physiology, chemistry, and al- most every branch of natural science. If such were the errors of Plato, Aristotle, and of all the distin- guished Grecian philosophers and naturalists, what a mass of scientific error and absurdity must be con- tained in the writings of the many less gifted authors who flourished in ancient times! Nor is modern literature free from scientific errors. They abound in the writings of modern authors of every class. Voltaire maintained that the marine nholls found in the mountainous regions of Europe h:i(l been dropped from the hats of pilgrims return- ing from the Holy Land. The distinguished theo- logian Turrettin, argued against the Copernican system, and maintained that the heavenly bodies re- volve round the earth. Leibnitz imao:ined that the ^DeCcelo, 2: 12-13. 22:12. ^2:14. *2:12. ^2:14. « Meteor. 1 : 8, 11-14. ^ Metaph. 11:8. « De Ccclo, 2: U. CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 39 earth was originally a burning mass, which has been undergoing a process of cooling ever since its crea- tion; that, when the outer crust had cooled suffi- ciently to allow the vapors to condense, they fell and formed a universal ocean, covering the loftiest moun- tains; and thot, afterward the crust broke and al- lowed the waters to rush into the subterranean hol- lows, so that the level of the ocean was lowered and the dry land appeared. Burnet, whose Theory of the Earth Addison and Steele commended, explained why, as he supposed, the earth enjoyed perpetual spring previous to the flood, and how the crust of the globe, being fissured by the sun's rays, let out the waters of the supposed central abyss. Whiston — whose theory was panegyrized by Locke — supposed that the earth was originally a comet; and that the deluge was caused by the near approach of another comet. Buffon thought the earth was originally a globe of liquid fire, smitten from the sun by the per- cussion of a comet; but he adopted in the main the tiyeory of Leibnitz. Bacon favored the theory that the earth is the centre of the world, and that the sun and other heavenly bodies revolve around it. Pie believed in alchemy, or at least in the possibility of transmuting the baser metals into gold. Milton wrote about the crystalline sphere, and male and fe- male light; and embodied in his immortal poem many of the scientific errors of his times. Sir Charles Lyell formerly opposed the Lamarckian theory of the gradual development of new from old species. But since the re-statement of that theory by Darwin, 40 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. Sir Charles has given in his adhesion to it;^ and the idea that men, beasts, and birds are descended from the same original ancestors, which he formerly op- posed, he now advocates. But we have not space to illustrate at length the scientific inaccuracy of modern literature. It abounds in errors like those mentioned above. Modern as well as ancient writers present theories, conjectures, opin- ions, statements, and allusions that are clearly incon- sistent with the teachings of science, and even of en- lightened reason. But there is in this respect a striking contrast between the Bible and every other collection of writings. There is no real discrepancy, but a re- markable harmony, between its declarations and the truths of science. 1. In the first place, the Bible does not contradict science. Science has corrected some mistaken inter- pretations of the Bible, but has not demonstrated any of its declarations to be false. Many attempts have been made to array science against it, but al- ways without success. It has been urged that the earth is much older than the Bible represents it. But the Bible really makes no declaration in regard to the age of the earth. Its simple but sublime declaration is, that In the be- ginning God created the heaven and the earth. It as- serts the fact, but does not fix the time of the creation. There was a time of darkness and chaos after the creation of all things out of nothing. The earth may ^ New edition of the Principles of Geology. CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 41 have existed a thousand, a million, or ten thousand millions of years before the creation of man, and be- fore the commencement of the six days' work. The admissibility of this interpretation was recognized before the science of geology was known. The command of Joshua to the sun and moon to stand still,^ has been represented as inconsistent with the established theory of the revolution of the earth on its own axis. But this command, and the account of the stopping of the sun and moon in their course, are expressed in accordance with the modes of speech universally prevalent among men, and do not contra- dict any of the facts taught by astronomical science. The very men who declare Joshua's command to be inconsistent with the known motion of the earth, themselves use langjuao^e in accordance with the apparent motion of the heavenly bodies. Their own mode of speech refutes their objection, and vindicates the Bible account of the stopping of the sun and moon in their course, from the alleged inconsistency with the fact of the earth's diurnal revolution. It is not necessary that a book, designed to instruct the whole human race in regard to moral and religious subjects, should be more scientific in its language than the ordinary speech of Newton, Humboldt, and scientific men in general. Were a writer or speaker, in treating of a moral or religious subject, to use other phraseology than that employed in the Bible in regard to the apparent motion of the heavenly bodies, he would subject himself to the charge of pedantry and affectation. » Josh. 10: 12. 4* 42 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. It has also been asserted that the author of Genesis contradicts the teachings of astronomy, in represent- ing the creation of the sun and other heavenly bodies as taking place on the fourth day, and subsequently to the creation of the earth.^ But it is only a maldngj not a creation^ that is declared to have been the work of the fourth day. The sacred historian asserts that the heavens and the earth (the heav^ens are first men- tioned) were created in the beginning. The word Jieuvens certainly includes the heavenly bodies. Ac- cording to the Mosaic account, therefore, the sun and moon were created in the bes^innino;, but on the fourth day were made luminaries to the earth. It has been further urged, that the Scriptures favor a scientific error in calling the atmospheric heavens a firmament^ The word firmament does in- deed suggest the idea of something solid; which the heavens are not. But the Hebrew word translated firmament has no such meaning. It is correctly translated expanse in the margin. Another supposed error has been pointed out in the account of the Xoachian deluge. It has been as- serted that there is not w^ater enough on the globe to overflow all the land and to cover the highest moun- tains to the depth of fifteen cubits and upwards; and that, therefore, the declarations in Gen. 7: 18, 19 are incorrect. But it is not certain that the author of Genesis represents the deluge as universal. The declaration that 'all the high hills that were under the whole heaven were covered,' does not necessarily imply its universality. In Deut. 2 : 25, it is declared ^Gcn. 1: 14-19. ^Gqh. 1: 8. co:nsistency with science. 43 that the fear of the Israelites ^should be upon the Dations that are under the whole heaven'. Also in Col. 1 : 23, it is declared that ^the o^ospel was preach- ed to every creature under heaven/ It is very evi- dent that in these declarations, the words whole hea- ven or under heaven are used in a limited sense. They are often so used. We may say during a thunder- storm, that a black cloud covered the whole heaven, or that durini!* a conflaij^ration, the flames illumin- ated the ichole heaven. By such phraseology every intelligent person would understand, not the heavens as extending round the earth, but the heavens as ex- tending over a certain country or region. The other phrases employed in Genesis in regard to the extent of the deluge may be understood in the same way. Pool and other commentators, and Miller and other Christian geologists, have maintained that the deluge extended only over the regions of the earth that were inhabited by men. Before the objection mentioned can be urged with any force against the Mosaic ac- count of the deluge, it must be shown that that ac- count asserts its universality. It has been asserted that the Bible is at variance with geology, in teaching that all death is the conse- quence of man's sin. Geology teaches, or is thought to teach, that death was introduced before sin: that beasts, birds, fishes, and all kinds of animals died before man appeared on the earth. The Bible, how- ever, does not, as many suppose, teach a contrary doctrine. It asserts only, that the death of men is the consequence of their sins; and that thus they are degraded to a level with ^the beasts that perish.' It 44 LITERAKY EXCELLENCE. does not assert that beasts were immortal before the fall of man; or that they became subject to death through man's sin. Such, in the main, are the objections that are urged against the scientific accuracy of the Scrip- tures. We do not by any means assert that these are all the objections that are urged. AYe present them merely as specimens. In regard to these ob- jections in general, we remark: — (1) that they are founded in most cases on mis-translations or mis-in- terpretations. (2) These mis-translations and mis- interpretations have been pointed out, and the objec- tions founded on them refuted, again and again. (3) These objections, though often urged with dog- matic assurance by the opponents of the inspiration and infallibility of the Scriptures, have been declared invalid by Newton, Cuvier, Buckland, Miller, Mitchell, Silliman, Hitchcock, and other distin- guished men of science. * (4) Infidels themselves have abandoned the most of these objections. Every little while an objection is started, that takes with sceptical minds for a time, but is soon laid aside. Thus it has been with the objections drawn from Egyptian hieroglyphics and chronology; Hindu and Chinese tables; astronomy, and geology. Infidels abandon them all in turn, and fall back upon the assumption that 'miracles are incredible, if not im- possible.' There are some objections, however, which are of very recent origin, and to which some of the above remarks do not apply. These objections are, there- CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 45 fore, entitled to a more careful consideration. One of them is, the objection urged of late against the teachings, or supposed teachings, of the Bible, in re- gard to the age of man upon the earth. The Bible is generally believed to teach that Adam was created about six thousand years ago; and until within a recent period all geologists assented to this chron- ology. But it is now maintained by not a few geolo- gists, that man has existed upon the earth during a much longer period. The most distinguished advo- cate of this theory is Sir Charles Lyell. Between the theory advocated in his Antiquity of Man and the chronology of the Bible as generally understood, there is an irreconcilable contradiction. Either the chronology of the Bible, as generally understood, is incorrect; or Sir Charles has mis-interpreted the facts of geology. 1. It is to be observed, in the first place, that it is possible that the early chronology of the Bible is mz's- undcrstood. This admission need give the Christian no alarm; nor is it a just ground for exultation on the part of the sceptic. If the Bible be what we re- gard it — a divine revelation — science will not con- tradict any of its statements; though it may correct some of our interpretations of them. It is the glory of the Scriptures, that all branches of science con- tribute to their elucidation. We are not, indeed, convinced that the chrono- logical computation, founded upon the Biblical his- tory, and making the human race less than six thousand years old, is incorrect. AVe assert only the possibility of its incorrectness. This possibility 46 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. is demonstrated by the fact, that that computation does not by any means command universal consent. What is called the Christian Era, according to which the creation of man took place 4004 years before the birth of Christ, was introduced by Dionysius Exi- guous, a monk of Rome, in the sixth century. This is the chronology of the Vulgate, and is received by the Roman Catholic church. The Samaritan Penta- teuch^ however, makes 4,700 years instead of 4,004 between the creation of man and the birth of Christ; the Septuagint, 5,872; the Greek church, 5,508; Hales, 5,411. Dr. Pritchard, whose orthodoxy as w^ell as learning is unquestioned, declares that, while the time of the arrival of Abraham in the land of Canaan may be ascertained with close approxima- tion to accuracy, ^beyond that event we can never know how many centuries, nor even how many chiliads of years, may have elapsed since the first man of clay received the image of God and the breath of life.'^ In view of these facts, it is wise to admit that the chronology of the Bible may not be rightly under- stood; and that the facts of geology may contradict some of our interpretations, without invalidating any of its chronological statements. 2. It is possible, however, that the facts of geology that are supposed to teach the remote antiquity of man, are misunderstood. Geologists are no more infallible than Biblical commentators. It is even yet to be seen, whether the theory advocated by Sir ^ Physical History of Mankind, vol. 5, p. 570. CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 47 Charles Lyell has the approbation of even a majority of geologists. He himself admits that nearly all the facts which he cites to prove the great antiquity of man, are inconclusive. He mentions ancient bricks found buried sixty or seventy feet beneath the surface of the Nile valley in Egypt, and declares that, ac- cording to the supposed rate of increase of the Nile mud, some of these bricks must be 12,000 and others 30,000 years old. Yet he admits tliat there have been no satisfactory measurements of Nile mud in reference to the rate of increase, and that the bricks in question may be comparatively modern.^ Besides, bricks might sink sixty or seventy feet in the soft loam of the Nile valley in two or three thousand years. In the delta of the Mississippi, supposed to be many tens of thousands of years in forming, — prob- ably more than 100,000, — a human skeleton has been found sixteen feet beneath the surface. Dr. Dowler is quoted as assigning to this skeleton an antiquity of 50,000 years. Sir Charles, however, says, ' I can- not form an opinion as to the value of the chrono- logical calculations which have led Dr. Dowler to ascribe to this skeleton an antiquity of 50,000 years. '^ In 1857, in a cave near Dusseldorf in the valley of Dussel, a human skull was found, one hundred feet below the surface of the earth. To this skull a great antiquity has been ascribed. But our author states, that there is a fissure extending from the cave to the upper surface of the country, and suggests ^ Antiq. of Man, p. 38. ^ p. 44. 48 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. that through this passage the body, to which the skull belonged, and the loam in which it was found buried, may have been washed into the cave below.^ Hence these bones may not be even a century old. A fossil human bone has been found at Natchez on the Mississippi, accompanied by bones of the mas- todon and megalonyx, which is supposed to have been washed out of a more ancient alluvial deposit. But the geologist suggests that this bone may have been derived from the vegetable soil at the top of a cliif, near which it was found; and remarks, that since we have but one isolated case, it is allowable to suspend our judgment as to the great antiquity of the fossil.^ Thus, in regard to all the human bones found beneath the surface of the earth, and referred to as proof of man's high antiquity, our author makes some statement which shows that after all, they may have been deposited at a very recent date in the caves or alluvium in which they were found. To the ob- jection that the bones of men are found as fossils only in caves and other dark recesses where the fauna of different periods may have been washed by the floods and have found a common sepulture, he replies only by referring to the fact, that flint knives and hatchets have been found imbedded in regular and undisturbed strata far beneath the surface of the carth.^ We have thus a virtual admission that none of the fossil human bones that have yet been found, can be relied on to prove the antiquity of ' p. 7G-77. "^ pp. 200-3. ' pp. 93-4. CO^^SrSTEXCY WITH SCIENCE. 49 mankind. It is strange that they should be referred to in a scientific work for such a purpose. In regard to the artificial knives and hatchets found imbedded in undisturbed strata, and supposed to be very ancient, it is a remarkable fact, that no human bones have been found along with them. Bones of mammalia, of both living and extinct species, have been found in abundance along with these ancient flint implements. But the author of the Antiquity of Man admits, that though* in the course of the last quarter of a century thousands of such bones have been subjected to the examination of skillful osteologists, they have not been able to detect among them one fragment of a human skeleton; not even a tooth. He remarks, that this fact is naturally a matter of no small surprise; and says, that he ^con- fidently expects that some human remains will be found in the older alluvium of the European valleys. ^^ Would it not be well to suspend judgment in regard to the antiquity of man, until this confident expecta- tion shall have been realized? Heretofore, the ab- sence of the remains of a race of animals from any particular stratum has been considered incontestable proof, that at the time of the formation of that stratum such race of animals had no existence. Lyell requires us either to abandon this principle, or to accept his own confident expectation referred to above as equivalent to an established scientific fact. But flint implements have been found in gravel beds twenty or thirty feet beneath the earth's surface, mingled with the bones of extinct animals; and, not- 1 pp. 144-5. 5 60 LITERAEY EXCELLENCE. withstanding the absence of all human remains, the conclusion has been drawn, that human beings were contemporary with those extinct animals; and that the human race is much more than six thousand years old. There are, however, several things which must be proved, in order that the argument may have any validity. (1) It must be proved that the knife- shaped and hatchet-shaped flints are really artificial, not natural formations. (2) It must be shown that they were not fabricafed by fraudulent workmen, tempted by the high price which such articles com- mand. (3) It must be proved that they could not have been formed by animals having a little higher order of instinct than the ape and the beaver, but destitute of reason. (4) It must be proved that these flint implements and the bones of extinct animals were deposited together, at the time the gravel beds in which they are found were formed, and did not get mingled long after the disappearance of the ex- tinct animals from the earth. (5) It must be shown that these knives and hatchets were not formed by intellectual beings who had become extinct before man appeared on the earth. It may, indeed, be, that the first four points have been demonstrated to the satisfaction of all candid investigators. But until human bones shall have been found mingled with these implements, the sup- position may be entertained that they were manu- factured by intellectual beings other and earlier than the human race; and that they prove nothing in re- gard to the antiquity of man. Some of tlie facts which Lyell presents seem, indeed, to suggest the CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 51 existence of an intellectual race antecedent to man. The skull found in the cave near Dusseldorf, as men- tioned above, is described as scarcely human. We are informed that doubts were expressed by several naturalists, whether it was truly human. Prof. Hux- ley remarked at once, that it was the most ape-like skull he had ever beheld; and after closer examina- tion declared, that Hhis skull is the most brutal of all known human skulls.^ Sir Charles himself de- clares, that ^undoubtedly there is a nearer resem- blance in the outline of this skull to that of a chim- panzee than had ever been observed before in any human cranium/^ Now, if this skull is more than six thousand years old, it may have belonged to a being inferior, but antecedent to man. The flint implements, to which so much importance is attached by some geologists, may have been formed by that antecedent race; and their intermingling with the bones of extinct animals in ancient gravel beds may thus be accounted for, without assuming a higher antiquity for man than that ascribed to him by the prevailing chronology. Perhaps, too, the mortal remains of beings su- perior to man lie imbedded beneath the surface of the earth. Sir C. Lyell, as stated above, confidently expects that human remains will he detected in the older alluvium of the European valleys. But in- stead of human remains, there may be found, not in the alluvium only, but in the lowest formation — even deeper down than the geologist has yet penetrated — the mortal coils of beings as much superior to men ip. 78-92. 52 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. intellectually and morally, as the mastodon and megatherium exceed in size the largest races of living animals. The geologist may be called away from huntino^ after rude hatchets and knives of stone in ancient gravel beds, by the startling discovery of the relics of art more perfect and beautiful than man has yet attained. It is thus seen, that the discovery of flint imple- ments beneath the surface of the earth, which may be shown by their position and accompaniments to have been manufactured by intellectual beings hun- dreds of thousands of years ago, does not demonstrate the incorrectness of the chronology which assigns to man an antiquity of only about six thousand years. And even if geology should prove him to have ap- peared on earth at a much earlier period; the result, so far as the Bible is concerned, might only be, to rectify the inferences that have been drawn from its chronological statements. AYe do not, indeed, regard the evidence of the great antiquity of man, presented by Lyell, as con- clusive. We are not even convinced, by all that geologists have said, of the great antiquity of the earth. Our doubts on this latter point arise from the fact, that it has not been proved that the various strata of the earth were formed at different times. They are nowhere all found in super-position. They are, indeed, found in a certain order, where they exist at all. But in no one place are they all found together. In the region where we write, the Silurian system is at the surface. Straia, miles in depth, and which are supposed to have been deposited at inter- CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 53 vals of millions of years, never had an existence here; or if they had, have all disappeared. If the latter, where have they gone? and why are not their fossils scattered among the strata of other regions? But if all the fossiliferous rocks from the Silurian up, not only are, but always have been wanting in various regions, it is evident that some of the strata must have been formed at the same time — while the Silurian or the Chalk formation was being formed in one locality, the Old Red Sandstone or the Car- boniferous System was being formed in another. If such be the case, no theory in regard to the age of the earth can be founded on its strata and fossils. Until geologists demonstrate that the various strata were formed at different periods, they can really establish nothing either in regard to the age of the earth, or the age of man upon it. In regard to the philological argument; which is, that according to the chronology of Scripture, there was not sufficient time for the formation of the di- verse languages that are known to have existed in very early times; it may be observed, that it is founded on the assumption that linguistic changes took place as slowly in very ancient times as at present. This assumption, however, seems incorrect, when we consider the isolation of ancient tribes and nations, their frequent migrations, the occasional subjugation and absorption of one by another, their ignorance of the art of printing, by which modern languages have become fixed, and other circum- stances which must have accelerated linjruistic diver- gences and fluctuations in ancient times. A similar 5* 54 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. error has been committed by some geologists, in as- suming that clianges on the eartli's surface at no period in the past progressed faster than at tlie present time; and in building upon this assumption their theories in regard to the vast antiquity of the earth. But if the Bible is what it claims to be, the diversities of human language were produced sud- denly by the interposition of the Almighty;^ and hence, notwithstanding the existence of these di- versities in very ancient times, the received chron- ology may be correct. In regard to the argument drawn from the ad- vanced state of the arts soon after the Noachian deluge, we simply remark, that it is far from prov^- ing a long lapse of time; since a knowledge of the arts, which had more than fifteen hundred years for their development previous to the deluge, would be preserved by Noah and his sons in the ark. But whatever geologists and chronologists have proved, or shall prove, in regard to the antiquity of the human race, the only effect, so far as the Bible is concerned, will be, as we have said, to correct mistakes in regard to its chronology. The effort to falsify its chronology, like afl the other efforts to prove a contradiction between it and science, has failed. Though both ancient and modern literature abound in obvious and absurd contradictions of sci- ence, mistakes in chronology, astronomy, geology, geography, physiology, and history, the Bible stands all the tests of advancinii; science and of time. Nor is this fact to be accounted for by the silence ^Gcn. 11: 1-9. COJSISISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 55 of the Bible in regard to the matters of which the natural sciences treat. There is no book whose con- tents are so comprehensive and various as those of the Bible. It describes the creation, and predicts the destruction of the world. It speaks of the heav- ens with their sun, moon, stars, and milky-way; of the earth, with its mountains, rivers, plains, seas, islands, and countries; of the clouds, winds, rains, dews, snows, hail, vapor, and of all the elements and phenomena of nature. It treats of almost all beings — God, angels, men, birds, fishes, reptiles, insects; of almost all events, from the thunder-storm and the earthquake, to the voice of the turtle and the chirp- ing of the grasshopper ; of the trees, shrubs, grass, flowers; the cedars of Lebanon, and the hyssop that springeth out of the wall. Though the chief design of the book is to teach theology and morality, many of its declarations touch on botany, zoology, astron- omy, geology, physiology, history, philology, and almost every branch of science. It is the only book of the universe that we possess. Of all books it is the most worthy of being called the Cosmos. The celebrated author who chose that word to designate his great work, in speaking of the descriptions of nature contained in the Scriptures, makes the fol- lowing; declaration: ^It mis^ht almost be said that one single Psalm (104th) represents the image of the whole Cosmos. * * * We are astonished to find in a lyrical poem of such a limited compass, the whole universe — the heavens and earth — sketched with a few bold touches.'^ The Bible, in thus dc- ^ Humboldt's Cosmos, vol. 2, p. 413. 56 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. scribing the whole universe, and in alhiding to matters which pertain to all the natural sciences, speaks freely and unhesitatingly. Its writers tread the ground fearlessly. They are very out-spoken. Yet in all their narratives, descriptions, statements, and allusions, they avoid saying any thing which the discoveries of modern science demonstrate to be incorrect. But they not only avoid scientific errors; they also present much scientific truth. They not only avoid contradicting science, but also allude to facts which have been made known only by the ])rofound inves- tigations of modern times. Their scientific accuracy may be illustrated by many examples. Instead of representing the earth as resting on an elephant, and the elephant on a tortoise, as did the ancient Hindu writers, the Bible declares that God hangeth the earth upon nothing} Instead of, like Plato, describing the earth as a square block, it rep- resents God as sitting on the circle of the earth ;^ as setting a compass (circle) on the face of the depth f and as walking in the circuit (circle) of heaven.^ In- stead of, like Empedocles and many other ancient philosophers, representing the heavens as a solid mass, it describes them as an expanse* — something spread out like a curtain.^ Instead of, like Plato and Aristotle, representing the stars as having life and activity, it declares that the heavens and all in- animate things were created before the living ani- mals,'^ and thus designates all the celestial bodies as 1 Job, 2G: 7. ^ Is. 40: 22. Trov. 8: 27. "Job, 22: 14. 5 Gen. 1: G--8, marg. n^^. 40: 22. ^ Geu. 1: 1, 14, 24. CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 57 lifeless, inactive substances. It contains no absurd system of astrology, such as was in vogue among the Egyptians, Chaldeans, and other ancient nations; it ascribes no magical influence to the luminaries of the night, and mentions astrologers, star-gazers and monthly prognosticators only to deride them.^ It speaks not, like Herodotus, of the sun being driven out of his course by winter storms, but represents him as running his accustomed course (circuit or circle) like a strong man.^ It tells not, like the Hindu writers, of an ancient king reigning one bil- lion and two hundred millions of years (about two hundred thousand times longer than the supposed duration of the human race), nor of sixty thousand sons begotten of one man, born in a pumpkin, and nourished in pans of milk ; but it gives us a very reasonable and credible chronology, and makes no monstrous representations in regard to the longevity of primitive men, and the rapidity of their increase. It never represents fire, earth, water, or air, nor all of them combined, as the beginning and source of all things; but it makes the simple and sublime declara- tion, that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth^ and asserts that things that are seen were not made of things which do appear} It does not, like the Koran, represent the sun as setting in black mud, but declares that he goes on continuously in his course; after his setting, hasting to his place of ^ Is. 47 : 13. 2 pg^ 19 . 5^ g^ 3 q^^^ ^ . ^^ *Heb.ll: 3. ^Eccl. 1: 5. 58 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. There are several important facts mentioned in the Scriptures, which could be known to their authors only by profound scientific investigation, or by the peculiar favor of Iieaven. One of these facts is the unity of the human race. The Scriptures teach that all mankind are descended from one pair;^ and that God hath made all nations of one blood.^ This truth was unknown to the ancients or was disbelieved by them, and has been called in question even in modern times. But by the aid of physiology, philology, ethnology, history, chemistry, and other sciences, the unity of the hu- man race has been established as a scientific truth; disputed or doubted only by Agassiz, and perhaps a few other scientific men. Another truth, which, until within a recent period, rested on the testimony of the Bible alone, is the orig- inal sameness of human language. It asserts that originally the whole earth was of one language and one speech.^ The number of languages spoken among men, and their apparent diversity, seem inconsistent with their common origin. But modern philologists have demonstrated the similarity and common origin of all languages. As Dr. Max MiiUer says, in this way is established the claim of a common descent, and a legitimate relationship between Hindu, Greek, and Teuton. Another fact brought to view in the Scriptures, and demonstrated by modern science, is the countless multitude of the stars. The Scriptures again and 1 Gen. 1 : 28. 3 : 20. ^ Acts, 17 : 26. ^ Gen. 11 : 1. CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 59 again refer to them as innumerable.^ To the ordi- nary observer, however, only about a thousand stars are visible, and the whole number visible in both hemispheres is not five thousand. But, as is well known, the telescope reveals the existence of millions and millions of stars scattered through the depths of space, and demonstrates the correctness of the Bible ill representing them as innumerable. The scientific accuracy of the Bible is farther seen, in its ascribing weight to the wind (atmosphere) f in its representing the moon as standing still at the same time with the sun at the command of Joshua,^ a matter likely to be overlooked by a historian ig- norant of the diurnal revolution of the earth; in its representing light as having an existence independent of the sun,^ a fact known only to modern naturalists; in its declariuii: that there was vesretation before the appearance of the sun in the heavens,^ a fact demon- strated by modern geology; in its representing the earth as containing under its outer crust as it were fire,'' another fact taught by modern geology; in its representing the mountains as being raised and the valleys as being depressed,^ which accords with the teachinsrs of ereoloofical science. The scientific accuracy of the Scriptures has been recognized by many distinguished men. Lord Ba- con speaks of the Book of Job, the Prophets, and the Mosaic writings, as ^pregnant and swelling with 1 Gen. 15: 5. ^j^^i^ 28: 25. ^j^^i^ k). jo-lS. ^Gen. 1: 3. ^ Gen. 1: 11. « Job. 28: 5. 'Ps. 104: 8, marg. 60 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. natural philosophy/ and as having 'great aspersion of natural philosophy.'^ Baron Humboldt, in ex- pressing his astonishment at the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the Scriptures, makes the following remarkable declaration : 'The meteorological process- es which take place in the atmosphere, the formation and solution of vapor according to the changing di- rection of the wind, the play of its colors, the gener- ation of hail and of the rolling thunder, are described with individualizing accuracy; and many questions are propounded which we, in the present state of our physical knowledge, may, indeed, be able to express under more scientific definitions, but scarcely to answer satisfactorily.'^ We thus find, that the sci- entific accuracy w^ith which the phenomena of the material universe are delineated in the poetry of the Bible, excited the astonishment of one who was ac- quainted with the entire range of modern science. This testimony will doubtless appear to some to be stronger, from the fact that Humboldt rejected the divine inspiration of the Scriptures. The declara- tions of this celebrated man, and the illustrations above presented, demonstrate a wide difference be- tween the Bible and every other collection of writ- ings, both ancient and modern. Its language and statements harmonize with scientific truths and facts, which were unknown to, or were disbelieved by all the ancient poets, historians, philosophers, and learn- ed men. We may challenge the opi)onents of super- uatural inspiration to name fifty authors of any age ^ De Aug. B. 1. Filum Lab. 7. ' Cos. vol. 2, p. 414. CONSISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 61 or nation, or of all ages and nations, who allude to natural phenomena as frequently as do the Biblical writers, that do not abound with contradictious of science. The sceptic is not likely, indeed, to admit the con- sistency of the Bible with science, but there are some facts connected with this subject which every intelli- gent and candid man will admit. 1. It is an undeniable fact, as we have shown, that ancient and modern literature abounds in scien- tific errors. The remains of Egyptian literature, the voluminous writings of the Hindus, the Persian Avesta, the books of the Chinese and the teachings of Confucius, the Koran, the Jewish Talmud, and the Apocryphal Gospels, the best productions of the Grecian and Roman authors, and much of the liter- ature of modern times, are characterized by such errors. These errors are great and numerous, l^o intelligent man can doubt their reality. By them the divine inspiration claimed for the Shasters, the Talmud, the Avesta, and the Koran, is disproved beyond the possibility of doubt. Nor is there any collection of writings, ancient or modern, except the Scriptures, whose human origin is not demonstrated by undeniable inconsistencies with science. 2. It is also an undeniable fact, that the opponents of the supernatural inspiration of the Bible have la- bored long and hard to convince mankind that it contains scientific errors. Their efforts have been, of later years, directed especially to establish this point. They have employed history, chronology, as- 6 62 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. tronomy, geology, and almost every other science, to- gether with Egyptian hieroglyphics, Chinese tables, and other antiquarian monuments; have written books, reviews, and essays; and have labored learn- edly and indefatigably to convict the Bible of scien- tific error. The very necessity of making so great efforts to establish this point, demonstrates that the Bible is, in point of scientific accuracy, superior to all the literary collections of ancient and modern times. It would be possible, with half the effort, or with no effort at all, to prove the scientific inaccuracy of every other collection of writings. 3. It is another undeniable fact that infidels, with all their learned and protracted efforts to convince the world that the Bible contradicts science, if they have not signally failed, have had, to say the least, but very partial success. Undoubtedly some per- sons have been led, on this ground, to disbelieve its plenary inspiration. But scarcely, at any time, in any country, have the majority of the people been infidels. It is not certain that a majority of the French even at the close of the last century, or of the Germans at the beginning of the present, were in- fidels. It is undeniable, however, that with scarcely an exception, the enlightened nations have regarded the Bible as a super-human book. During eighteen centuries, infidels have been largely in the minoritv. During eif!:hteen centuries the great majority of intel- ligent people and learned men have believed in the supernatural inspiration of the Scriptures. Such, too, is the belief of the majority of intelligent ])eoj)le and learned men now living. If the Bible contains COi^SISTENCY WITH SCIENCE. 63 scientific errors, not only have they escaped the no- tice of the majority of the most gifted and learned of mankind; but many of the most distinguished men of science have failed to see them, after what are claimed as such have been pointed out. Such men as Xewton, Locke, Grotius, Sir W. Jones, Cuvier, Miller, Buckland, Hitchcock, Silliman, Brewster, Schlegel, Chalmers, Tholuck, and a host of others deeply versed in modern literature and science, after reading the Bible carefully, and hearing all that in- fidels have to say, declare, that between its state- ments and the teachings of science they see no con- tradiction. These are facts which every intelligent person must admit. But if the Bible be merely a human book, the infidel ought to be able to point out un- mistakable scientific errors in it, as in all other ancient books. It is certainly a strange and won- derful thing, that those fifty old Hebrew authors, in their simplicity or cunning, m their ignorance or knowledge, should write on almost all kinds of sub- jects in such a way, as to be regarded by many of the most distinguished men of science as completely accurate and infallible, and so as to baffle all the efforts of sceptical learning and genius to convict them before the world of one scientific mistake. When we consider how the writings of all other ancient authors, even the most learned and gifted, and also much of the literature of modern times, abound in scientific errors and even absurdities — errors and absurdities that are admitted at once and on all hands to be such; and when we further con- 64 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. sider that, after all that has been said and written by the opponents of plenary inspiration, the verdict of the enlightened world is, that the Bible is entirely consistent with science ; its merely human and Jewish origin appears altogether unaccountable. CHAPTER lY. THE LITERARY EXCELLENCE OF THE SEEMINGLY LEAST VALUABLE PORTIONS OF THE BIBLE. Considerable portions of the Bible are not only destitute of beauty and eloquence, but these also deal in minute details, that doubtless appear to many as uninteresting and worthless. This is especially true of the book of Leviticus and such other portions as treat of the laws, regulations, ceremonies, and other internal affairs of the Jewish natioii. Yet these por- tions of the Scriptures are really rich in historic in- formation. They make us acquainted with the civil and criminal laws, the military, municipal, and san- itary regulations, the religious ideas and rites, the social and domestic customs and manners, of a very ancient and remarkable people. Legislative enact- ments, the regulations of cities and military camps in regard to health and cleanliness, statutes in regard to garbage and slaughter-pens, the accounts of the construction and management of sinks and sewers, and other such matters, certainly do not constitute tasteful and attractive reading. But it is thus that we are enabled to know the condition and progress of a nation, and what kind of life they lived. The duty of the historian is not merely to tell us of mighty kings and warriors, and of battles and 6* Go 66 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. sieges, but to make us acquainted with the charac- ter, the thoughts, the actions, the every-day life, of the people. The ideas that once prevailed in regard to the digrdty of histonj have happily passed away, and historians have learned to treat of ordinary mat- ters, as do the Biblical writers. Often do literary men visit the sites of ancient cities in order to secure just such items of knowledge as the less interesting and seemingly less valuable portions of the Bible contain. They chase the owls, bats, and hyenas from their dwelling-places; dig among the ruins of walls, palaces, temples, and altars; and when, after great labor, they find some half-rotten column, or a fragment of some old rust-eaten pot or cup, bearing the inscription of a few letters or hieroglyphics, they rejoice as one that finds a long-lost treasure, hoping to decipher the half-effaced characters, and make out the decree of some Egyptian or Babylonian despot concerning his fish-ponds, or the livery of his ser- vants. Every thing that illustrates the religious and moral ideas, or the manners and customs, of the Egyptians, Hindus, Persians, and other ancient na- tions, is considered valuable. For books that would make us minutely acquainted with their laws, reli- gions, and customs; their style of dress, their mode of preparing food, treating the sick, and burying the dead; the form and size of their drinking- vessels and soup-dishes; their forms of betrothal, mar- riage, and divorce; and everything pertaining to their every-day life, — literary men would make al- most any sacrifice. To obtain them, they would en- danfjer health and life, traverse continents, sail round VALUE OF THE LESS IMPORTANT PARTS. 67 the globe, and dig into the very bowels of the earth. Now, the Bible gives us in regard to the Jews, precisely the information which is so highly valued, and so eagerly sought after, in regard to other ancient nations. The minuteness w^th which it recounts the civil, military, and criminal laws, the sanitary regu- lations and ceremonial observances, of that peculiar j)eople, is in reality one of its excellences. Some of their regulations and ceremonies may seem strange and outlandish — as those in reg^ard to the distinction of meats, the leprosy, and the purification of women, must do, if their sanitary character and moral sig- niiicancy be overlooked; but this does not detract from the literary value of the books which faith- fully record them. Since the historical details which make us acquainted with the theological and moral ideas, political laws, religious rites, and the manners and customs and modes of living, of ancient and ])owerfuI nations, are regarded as important and valuable; much more important and valuable are such details in regard to the nation from whom the whole enlightened portion of mankind have received their theology and morality. But the portions of Scripture, which seem to many persons so uninteresting and valueless are not des- titute even of poetic beauty. In this respect, the law-books of the Jews are unlike those of any other nation. What, in a literary point of view, is a legislative journal, or a modern statute-book? They arc composed of minute details concerning taxes, jails, school-houses, wharf-boats, stray mules, and shccp-killing dogs; and are as destitute of 68 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. poetic beauty and sublimity as is the desert of Sa- hara of grass and flowers. None but lawyers and politicians, whose business compels thera, reads such books. But it is not so with the law-books of the Bible. They contain many gems of poetic beauty, and strains of soul-stirring eloquence. The closing chapters of Deuteronomy, especially, are character- ized by beauty and grandeur. In the song of Moses, there recorded, his Svords drop as the rain, and his speech distills as the dew.'^ The law-books of the Jews have another excel- lence which distinguishes them from those of other nations; — they mingle useful and grand moral truths with the minute details of criminal, military, and sanitary regulations. The fact that they contain the Ten Commandments — a code, in which the wisdom and learning and philosophy of the world have not been able to discover any error or suggest any im- provement— renders this portion of the Bible more important and valuable than all the other judicial books of the world, or than the entire literature of the ancient Egyptians, Hindus, Grecians, Komans, and all the ancient nations, combined. "When we come to speak of the political excellence of the Scriptures, we will show that these old law- books have exerted a beneficial and powerful influ- ence on the politics and legislation of the world. Nor should it be forgotten, that the Mosaic regula- tions concerning the distinction of meats, corporeal uncleanness, and the rites of purification, not only had a sanitary character, but were also designed to ^Deut. 32: 2. VALUE OF THE LESS IMPORTANT PARTS. 69 teach a debased people the nature and necessity of moral purity; and hence the literary excellence of the books containing them consists, in the faithful- ness and accuracy with which they are recorded. The portions of Scripture, then, seemingly of the least value, are rich in historic information concern- ing an ancient and remarkable people who are the theological and moral teachers of mankind; abound in snatches of sublime poetry; and contain many grand moral utterances: and hence they constitute a very important and valuable part of the world^s literature. CHAPTER Y. EICHNESS OF THE BIBLE IN GRAND AND BEAUTIFUL SUBJECTS. It will enable us better to appreciate the literary superiority of the Bible over other books, if we com- pare the subjects treated of in it with those treated of by the Hindu, Grecian, and Roman authors. We speak of Hindu, Grecian, and Roman authors; be- cause it is but fair to compare the writers of the Bible with the writers who lived nearest their own times, and because modern literature has been largely enriched from its abundant stores. In one of the preceding chapters, we alluded to the frivolous subjects of many of the Vedic hymns — celebrating the praises of the hawk, partridge, mortar and pestle, and even the wheel-barrow! Other por- tions of Hindu literature treat of absurd and indecent cosmogonies and mythologies, and licentious and de- basing loves and passions. The Grecian and Roman j^oets sing of love, war, and glory; of the jealousies, and resentments, and licentious amours of Jupiter and Apollo, Juno and Venus, and other imaginary gods, male and female; and of the fierce passions, daring encounters, shocking crimes, and the successes and misfortunes, of men remarkable, not for intel- lectual vigor or moral worth, but only for their 70 EICHNESS IN GRAND AND BEAUTIFUL SUBJECTS. 71 physical strength and courage. They describe the garden of the Hesperides, with its golden apples, and guarded by a dragon with a hundred heads; the Elysium, with its meadows and streams and singing birds, where the dead Achilles waged war with wild beasts, where the slaughtered Trojan chiefs amused themselves with horses and arms, and where the voluptuary and debauchee pursued the same gratifi- cations as he had done while on earth ; Gorgons and Plydras dealing death and destruction; and battles in which gigantic Titans, one-eyed Cyclops, or Cen- taurs— half-man and half-horse — were antasfonists. The Bible treats of subjects infinitely more noble and exalted — the unity, the infinite power and good- ness, the dreadful holiness and sovereignty, and the awful majesty of the Godhead; the creation of the heavens and the earth; the innocence and liappiness of the first pair as they dwelt amid the flowers and fruits of Eden ; the fall of the angels ; the fall, guilt, and ruin of man; the brevity and wretchedness of human life; the dreadfulness of future punishment in the lake burning with fire and brimstone; the worth of the human soul; the futility of human merit; the love and condescension of Jesus; his per- fect and glorious character; his mysterious agony in the garden of Gcthsemane, and his death on the cross; his glorious resurrection and ascension; the organization of the New Testament church and the progress of Christianity in apostolic times; the thou- sand years of universal righteousness and peace; the coming of the Son of God to judge the world at tHe last day; the raising of the dead; the assembling of 72 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. all nations before the great white throne; the de- parture of the wicked into everlasting fire; the eter- nal happiness of the righteous; their crowns of glory- that shall never fade away; and the beauty and gran- deur of the heavenly city with its pearly gates, its golden streets, and its pure river of the water of life clear as crystal, all flashing in the light and glory- that shine from the face of God. The richness of the Bible in grand and beautiful subjects, is further demonstrated by the fact, that modern authors have borrowed so much from it. Milton and Bunyan were indebted to it for the lead- ing ideas in their immortal works. We neither deny their originality, nor accuse them of plagiar- ism. Macaulay says, that though there were many clever men in England during the latter half of the seventeenth century, there were but two creative minds; and that one of these produced the Paradise Lost, and the other the Pilgrim^s Progress} But these great writers did not produce the grand themes on which they wrote. These were already produced to their hand in the Scriptures. Milton in his great poem wrote * Of man's first disobedience, and the fruit Of that forbidden tree, whose mortal taste Brought death into the world and all our woe, ^Vith loss of Eden, till one greater man Restore us and regain the blissful seat.' But it is only in the Bible that 'the height of this great argument' is made known to men; and but * Essay on Pilgrim's Progress. RICHNESS IX GRAND AND BEAUTIFUL SUBJECTS. 73 for the Bible, the Paradise Lost could never have been written. It is a suggestive f^ict, that more than a thousand years before Milton's time, his chief work was anticipated by a writer much inferior to him in poetic genius. Saint Avitus, bishop of Vienne in France, born about the middle of the fifth century, wrote six poems, three of which were on the Crea- tioUj Original Sin, and the Expulsion from Paradise. This triad of poems, Guizot declares,^ should in jus- tice be called Paradise Lost; their resemblance to that work, in subject, general conception, and even some of the more important details, being so strik- ing. This resemblance certainly did not result from the imitation of the poems of the French bishop by the English poet. As Guizot suggests, Milton was probably not aware of the existence of such poems. The resemblance is fully accounted for by the fact, that both these authors drew their subjects, and many of their conceptions, from the same source — the Bible. Bunyan also drew his subjects, and a large part of the details of his great work, from the Bible. All the prominent ideas contained in the Pllgriin's Progress have a Scripture origin. The Christian as a pilgrim, the Christian life as a journey, the sin- ner clothed with rags, and sin as a burden on his back, the City of Destruction, and the Celestial City, the Wicket Gate, the Cross and the Sepulchre, the valley of the Shadow of Death, the Delectable Moun- tains, the land of Beulah, the Elver without a bridge and very deep, and the celestial Gate beyond it; — 1 Hist, of Civ. Lect. 18. 7 74 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. all these ideas are taken directly from the Scriptures. Another great writer, who borrowed much from the Bible, is Dante. The visions and conceptions of the prophets and bards of Israel, are found run- ning all through the Divine Comedy. Schlegel names him first among the Christian poets who took their subjects, or their models, from the Scriptures.^ The main excellence of these great works — the Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost, and Pilgrim^ s Pro- gress — consists in the grandeur of their subjects, and in their rich profusion of beautiful and sublime con- ceptions and ideas. The poetry of Homer — the greatest poet of antiquity — is attractive mainly by its language and imagery. Its chief design is, to celebrate the courage and bloody deeds of half-savage warriors. Its subjects, conceptions, and mere story, when compared with those of the above-mentioned works, are insignificant and mean. This fact de- monstrates the surpassing excellence of the literary topics treated of in the Bible, since to it the authors of these works were indebted for their subjects and general conceptions — subjects and conceptions which, by comparison, make those of the greatest poets of ancient times appear trifling and contemptible. But not only did Dante, Milton, and Bunyan, draw subjects and conceptions from the Bible; so also have nearly all modern poets. The Olney Hymns of Cowper have not only Bible subjects, but also contain many ideas, truths, figures, and expres- sions, taken from the same source. The same re- mark may be made in regard to PoUok's Course oj ^ Hist, of Literature, Lect. 9. ETCHXESS IN GRAND AND BEAUTIFUL SUBJECTS. 75 Time; the subject and conceptions of which poem are j^rand, though it is especially deficient in the simplicity which characterizes the poetry of the Bible. Henry Kirke AVhite wrote many pieces on Scriptural subjects. One of his best pieces is his Star of Bethlehem. Many of AVillis' pieces also are on Bible subjects; such as, his Sacrifice of Abraham, Christ's Entrance into Jerusalem, Hagar in the Wilder- ness, The Death of Absalom, and others. The titles of some of Landon's poems are as follows; St. John in the Wilderness, The Nativity of Christ, Christ Bless- ing the Bread, Christ Blessing Little Children, and Christ croioned with Thorns. Mrs. Hemans has poems on Christ^ s Agony in the Garden, The Hebrew Ilother, The Wings of a Dove (Ps. 55: 6), The Angels' Call, and The Voice of God. We have Po})e's Messiah, Young^s Last Day and Paraphrase of the Booh of Job, James Montgomery's Psalms and Elijah in the Wilderness, and Mil man's Belshazzar and Fall of Jerusalem. Dry den's Absalom and Ahithophel is founded on Bible history. In Ivanhoe, one of the best of Scott's novels, the heroine, Rebecca, is a He- brew character; and her hymn is a Hebrew hymn. We have Moore's Sacred Songs and Byron's Hebrew Melodies, — unchristian poets though they were. We have Voltaire's Saul and Samson, as well as Milton's Samson Agonistes. As we will hereafter show, Vol- taire was indebted to the Bible for the subjects and conceptions of his most successful tragedies, his Zaire and Alzire. We will also show that Gothe appreci- ated the rich store of literary subjects contained in the Bible, and borrowed from it. The first part of 76 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. his Faust is from tlie opening chapters of the Book of Job. The g^eat work of Kiopstock — the founder of modern German literature — is tlie Messiah; the subject and general conceptions of which, like those of Paradise Lost, are taken from the Bible. Cald- eron, the great Spanish poet, has many pieces on Scripture subjects, such as his Lochs of Absalom, Bel- shazzar^s Feast, Gideon^s Fleece, The Sheaves of Ruth, The Wheat and the Tares, and a large number of others. We may adduce also the poems of Edward Henry Bickersteth, (published within the present year,) who is greatly admired by many, and who certainly as a poetic waiter is not without merit. We refer especially to his Samson, Nineveh, FzeJciel, and John Baptist; not to mention his larger poem, Yesterday, To-day, and. For-ever. These statements might be much extended; but those instances already given may serve to inform or remind tlie reader, of the large indebtedness of eminent modern authors to the Bible for their sub- jects. The poets of Great Britain, America, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and almost every land, have gone to the Bible to find subjects for tragedies, epics, lyrics, oratorios, and almost every species of compo- sition. For more than a thousand years, the master minds in literature have taken from it their noblest subjects; and its abundant stores are not yet ex- hausted. This fact demonstrates how rich this won- derful book is in literary subjects — subjects beautiful, dignified, and grand; worthy of all the honors and ornaments which the hand of ible consist entirely in the moral and religious truth which it embodies. A fine lyrical poem, like a fine oration or a fine historical work, must excel as a literary composition. Indeed, in a lyrical poem, splendor of literary execution is an essential. Ac- ^ Dr. Plumcr. ^ Albert Barnes. ^ Com. on the Psalms, intro. sect. 1. * Ilomiletics, p. 305. THE BIBLE LYRICS. 135 cordingly, the uniform testimony of those best qual- ified to judge is, that the Psalms are characterized by literary excellence of the most exalted kind. IVIe- lancthon declared that they ^are the most elegant work extant in the world/ The declaration of Mil- ton concerning them is as follows; ^JSTot in their divine argument alone, but in the very critical art of composition, they may be easily made appear over all the kinds of lyric poesy to be incomparable/ Lowth, in his work on Hebrew poetry, says; ^The sweetness of the Psalms in composition, sentiment, diction, and arrangement, has never been equaled by the finest productions of all the heathen Muses and Graces united;' and *you will seek in vain for mod- els more- perfect/ The Psalms, then, as religious lyrics, are more valued by Christians in general than any other com- positions. They are of the highest order of literary excellence; and are the model and standard of Chris- tian hymn- writers. Though the modern writers of religious lyrics enjoy the advantage of greater learn- ing and culture, a more expanded Christianity, and richer stores of religious knowledge; and though they compose in the loved vernacular of those for whom they write; — they have yet produced nothing equal to the Psalms, that originated in a remote and barbarous age, among a rude and secluded people, and in a language that ceased long ago to be spoken. The authors of these ancient lyrics anticipated the religious knowledge and experience of the most ad- vanced periods of Christian culture. They describe the glories of the Godhead, the scenes of nature, and 136 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. the passions and workings of the human heart, with so masterly a hand, as to astonish and delight the world. They have poured out strains of such beauty and sweetness, and executed songs with such neatness and splendor, as to become the models of all succeed- ing ages, and to make competition with them in their own department impossible even by the genius, piety, and culture of the most refined and Christian portion of mankind. CHAPTER XI. THE INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE ON THE FINE APwTS. The influence of the Bible on music, painting, sculpture, and architecture, though not so direct as in regard to poetry and eloquence, has been very- great; as might be shown by many facts and illus- trations. We have not space, however, for a full discussion; and shall attempt but little more than to show, that the best subjects and highest achieve- ments in the line arts have been suggested by the Bible. Art, as defined by Ruskin, is a noble and express- ive language; and is designed to represent ideas. The greatest picture is that which conveys to the -mind of the. spectator the greatest number of the greatest ideas; and he is the greatest artist who has embodied in his work the greatest number of the greatest ideas. The importance of execution in art is not denied. Execution is to the artist what versifi- cation is to the poet.^ We would say — not to im- prove Ruskin's definition, but to guard against niis- apprehension — that the greatest artist is he who represents in his works the greatest ideas in the greatest number and in the best manner. Success' ^Modern Painters, P. 1, sec. 1, ch. 2. 12* 137 138 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. ill art depends upon the excellence of the ideas represented, as well as upon the skill and taste with which they are represented. Now, the Bible and Christianity have contributed greatly to the improvement of the fine arts by en- larging and purifying the ideas to be represented in artistic works. This point can be best illustrated by referring to the Grecian artists. As is well known, the fine arts reached a higher state of per- fection in Greece than in any other ancient country. The Grecian artists have never been excelled, and perhaps never will be excelled, as copyists of the beautiful forms of nature. They were the daintiest workmen in marble and paint that the world has ever seen. Zeuxis painted grapes so well, that the birds came to eat them. Apelles drew the picture of a horse so life-like, that a real horse passing by neighed at it. Parrhasius painted a curtain so well, that Zeuxis mistook it for a real curtain; and when undeceived, said, 'Zeuxis has deceived birds, but Parrhasius has deceived Zeuxis himseU? But skill- ful as the Grecian artists were in the imitation of natural forms and colors,"they were deficient in idecis. Their greatest achievements in painting and sculp- ture were, to represent the faultless form of a sleep- ing Venus; or the muscles and joints of Hercules. They represented mere outward beauty in their pictures and statues; but neglected intellectual and moral beauty almost altogether. Grecian architect- ure was defective in like manner. Its columns were graceful and perfect; but no lofty ideas were sym- bolized by them. A Grecian temple was, doubtless. INFLUENCE ON THE FINE ARTS. 139 very beautiful, in its perfect symmetry and pro- portions; but it lacked the dignity and grandeur which spring from moral and spiritual truth. It rose but a little way from earth, until its upward flight was cut short by entablature and cornice. It had no lofty shafts and perpendicular lines, car- rying the eye and the mind of the beholder up to heaven and to God, and suggesting hope and im- mortality. Of many of the great and noble ideas which the Bible and Christianity have made familiar to men in modern times, the Grecians and all the ancient Gentile nations were entirely ignorant, or knew but little. Of faith, hope, and immortality they had only vague and indefinite notions. Of holiness, meekness, humility, and self-sacrificing benevolence, they had scarcely a conception. Thus, knowing but little or being entirely ignorant of these lovely and lofty virtues and hopes, they of course did not rep- resent them in their works. Their aim was, to represent natural beauty, and to symbolize the god- like under the perfection of the human form. Haz- litt says, ^the Greek statues are little else than spe- cious forms. They are marble to the touch and to the heart. They have not an informing principle within them.'^ The Bible and Christianity also did much for the advancement of art by purifying the ideas of men. Ancient art was degraded by association with false and impure religion. Being employed to imbody ^ Eng. Poets, Lect. 1. 140 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. the ideas which such religion suggests, it became the handmaid of licentiousness and obscenity. Instead of teaching men to love and admire beauty and purity, it became the promoter of indecency and un- cleanness. The degradation of ancient art is demon- strated by this one fact, that many of the statues and pictures found in Herculaneum and Pompeii were so vile, that they had to be removed from public sight. But art was delivered from this de- basins^ bondao;e throus^h the influence of Christian- ity. It supplanted the old mythologies, with all their obscenities and indecencies. It purified the artist. It purified the people, and educated them to appreciate the good, true, and beautiful. It inspired artists and men in general with the love of moral and spiritual truth, and thus led to the presentation of it in artistic works. The great service which the Bible has performed in behalf of art, in thus enlarg- ing, purifying, and elevating the ideas of men, is shown by the fact, that the greatest artists have taken the subjects of their master-pieces from it. That they have done so, and that the Bible has suggested the best subjects and highest achievements in art, we now proceed to show. 1. Painting. — The Bible has furnished the finest themes for the painter. The Cartoons of Raphael, the world's best painter, are declared by Hazlitt to be 'the finest comments that ever were made on the Scriptures.'^ Besides the Cartoons, we may mention TJie Transfiguration, Preaching of Paul, Vlsio)i of ^ Eng. Poets, Icct. 1. INFLUENCE ON THE FINE ARTS. 141 Ezehiel, and Last Judgment, by the same great mas- ter. Ill addition to these master-pieces, there are The Last Judgment by Michael Angelo; Jacobus Ladder, Hand Writing on the Wall, Christ in Geth- scmanej and Christ at Emmaus, by E-embrandt; The Annunciation, Fall of the Damned, and Resurrection of the Just, by Rubens; Hoses Striking the Hock, The Deluge, Adam and Eve in Paradise, Moses Receiving the Law, Abraham and Isaac, Raid's Shipwreck, Christ Rejected, and Death on the Rale Horse, by West. The list might be much extended by referr- ing to the Works of Salvator E-osa, Titian, Tinto- retto, Northcote, Van Dyke, and other celebrated painters; but it includes enough to remind the read- er that the subjects of the best pieces of painting are taken from the Scriptures. Sir Joshua Reynolds, the celebrated English painter, recommends as themes for the pencil what he calls Uhe capital sub- jects of Scripture history.^^ Many of the most cele- brated painters have been admiring and diligent students of the Bible. Such was the artist just re- ferred to, Sir J. Reynolds. Michael Angelo had the greater portion of the Scriptures committed to memory. They were the constant study of Raphael. Flaxman's cliief delight was, to make designs from the poets, the Rilgrim's Progress, and the Bible. Fuseli read the Bible in the original Hebrew. Al- bert Durer was w^ell versed in the Scriptures. 2. Music. — We have already shown that the Psalms are the best religious lyrics in existence; * Discourses, p. 49. 142 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. and that the next best are those that have been modeled after them. The largest number of our anthems, chants, oratorios, and musical pieces of every kind, have subjects taken from the Scriptures. The Te Dcum Laudamus, Gloria Fatri, Gloria in Excelsis, Jubilate Deo, Vesper Hymn, Handel's Mes- siah, Esther, Samson, Jephtha, and Israel in Egypt, Mendelssohn's Pait^ and Elijah, Haydn's Creation, and Mozart's Requiem, and other pieces which, \vith those named, constitute the grandest music in the world, — have subjects taken from, or suggested by Bible history, doctrines, or poetry. Even sceptics and other secular writers, have taken musical sub- jects largely from the same source. The subject and materials of Voltaire's Samson are taken from the Bible. The same is true of Goldsmith's oratorio of the Captivity. There is an incdmplete oratorio of Campbell's from the book of Job. The subjects of Moore's Sacred Songs and Byron's Hebrew Melodies are also taken from the Bible. The introduction of Christianity did more than to furnish musical composers with their best subjects. The most noble pieces of music, that had been com- posed in preceding times, were invested with a more etherial and solemn harmony, by their adaptation to Christian Avorship and employment in it; musical masters were stimulated to compose pieces adapted to the highest end of music — the praise of Almighty God; and music itself was elevated and ennobled, by its employment to represent the grandest thoughts attained by the human mind. 3. Architecture. — The influence of the Bible on INFLUENCE ON THE FINE ARTS. 143 this branch of art has also been great and beneficial. Michael Angelo and Sir Christopher Wren, the most celebrated architects of modern times, derived from it the conceptions which they embodied in their works. The Gothic style, and nearly all the improvements that have been made in architectnral art in modern times, were suggested by it. Gothic architecture, with its perpendicular lines, tall and graceful shafts, flying buttresses, windows of^stained glass giving out celestial colors, pointed arches, and spires reaching toward heaven, — is designed to sym- bolize the lifting up of the soul to God, spiritual hope, blessed immortality, and other doctrines and ideas derived from the Scriptures. The Grecians, so far as the beauty of proportion and symmetry, and finish of execution are concerned, were, doubt- less, the world's ^^finest architects. But the Jews, who did not cultivate the fine arts, had, five hun- dred years before the erection of the Parthenon, the grandest building in the world. Doubtless a Gre- cian temple, with its columns and capitals, entabla- ture and cornice, all of snowy whiteness and perfect finish, as it flashed in the sunlight was a thinf>- of beauty. But its beauty was for the eye alone. It lacked the beauty and grandeur that spring from the suggestions of moral and spiritual truth. Had the cultivated Greeks possessed a knowledge of the grand and glorious doctrines revealed in the Bible concerning God, heaven, and immortality, how much more noble would have been their achievements in architecture, as well as in other arts! • 4. Sculpture. — This branch of art deals almost 144 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. exclusively with mere form; and hence is not so well adapted to represent intellectual and moral beauty. Yet the Bible has furnished some of the linest themes for the sculptor; as well as for the painter, musician, and architect. We may mention the 3foseSy ChrUt bearing his Cross, the Dead Christy Samson, David, and Matthew, by Michael Angelo ; the Twelve Apostles, by Thorwaldseii ; CAmf, JlotJier of Pity, and Eight Apostles, by Bonchardon; Adam and Eve, by Baccio; and Eve, by Powers. The subjects of the master-pieces of the most celebrated sculptors of modern times have been taken from the Bible. Thus we have reminded the reader that the Bible has suggested the best subjects, and the most glori- ous achievements, in all the fine arts. The ideas represented in the master-pieces of art are taken from it. If any further proof of this fact than what is above given, is needed, it may be found in the declaration of Schlegel, that the old masters of a loftier time preferred Christian subjects, and de- voted their grandest and most important works to the honor of religion. To such an extent did those old masters thus jiractise, that many young artists, who confined themselves to the study of them, have been led into the error of selecting Christian subjects almost exclusively.^ It may be objected, that Christianity has often discouraged the cultivation of the fine arts. Doubt- less there is some seeming foundation for this objec- * JEsthetics, Mod. Ger. Paintings. INFLUENCE ON THE FINE ARTS. 145 tion. The relifrious teachers of the Jews did not encourage painting and sculpture, lest these arts should become subservient to idolatry. Pictures and statues were almost sure to be thus employed, and hence were contraband among the ancient worship- ])ers of the true God. Perhaps the Christians gen- erally in the first centuries were prejudiced against painting and sculpture, because of their prostitution to idolatry and uncleanness. In like manner, the Puritans of England in the seventeenth century were prejudiced against not only some of the fine arts, but also some harmless amusements and com- mendable refinements. Such prejudices are natural and unavoidable. Men are so constituted, that they dislike whatever is closely associated with things they hate. Christians are no exception in this re- spect. The aversion of the early Christians for painting and sculpture is evidence of the purity of their religion; but not of its hostility to the fine arts. Besides tiiis, it should be remembered, that the early Christians, the Reformers, and the Purit- ans, were too earnest and busy to devote much time and attention to pictures, statues, fine music, and fine buildings. They had something else to do, and they did it. The fine arts have been most largely cultivated by those who had abundance of leisure. Often have tyrants and despots unintentionally fa- vored the development of artistic talents, by pre- venting the development of any other kind. Paint- ing, sculpture, and the other branches of art, flourish most where there are many people who have nothing else to do than admire pictures, stat- 13 146 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. ues, fine buildings, and fine music. The contempt and aversion which Christians have often manifested for the beautiful creations of art, were not inspired by Christianity or the Bible; but by these have been furnished the best subjects and ideas to the artists of modern times. CHAPTER XII. FACTS WHICH ILLUSTRATE THE LITERARY EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. 1. Its success as a literary production. It is more read than any other book. In the case of other books, success is regarded as incontestable evidence of excellence. Milton determined ^to write some- thing which the world would not willingly let die;' and the fact that Paradise Lost is widely read is universally admitted as proof of its superior merit. A worthless book may, indeed, be temporarily popu- lar. As in morals, so in literature the voice of the people is not always the voice of truth; but the voice of the ages is. Tried by this criterion, the Bible, in point of literary excellence, is far above eyery other book. It may be objected, that the Bible is read by many because they believe it to be a divine revelation. But this fact, since Bible read- ers are among the most enlightened portion of man- kind, only sets its literary excellence in a stronger light. The perfection of art is to conceal art. The birds coming to eat the grapes painted by Zeuxis, and the horse neighing at his own likeness in the picture of Parrhasius, proved the surpassing skill of the artists. If the claims of the Bible to divine inspiration are false — if its narratives are fictitious 147 148 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. or legendary — what prodigies of genius and skill must its writers have been, who described imaginary scenes, characters, and events, and recorded fictions or legends, with such consummate art as to deceive, not birds and horses, but the majority of scholars and intelligent people during eighteen hundred years ! Suppose that Homer had described the sayings and doings of the imaginary gods, and of his human heroes, with so much of the life-like appearance of reality, that his readers had been made believe his fictions to be true history, — as many of the ancient Greeks doubtless did; — would that have detracted from the excellence of his great poem? Milton has incorporated into his immortal work much of the history, imagery, and doctrine of the Bible; and its beauty and interest are enhanced to most readers by the fact, that, believing in the Bible as they do, they also believe the main part oi Paradise Lost to be real and true. Because Milton employed the doctrines and narratives of the Bible to impart beauty and sublimity to his poem, the sceptic does not admire him or his poem any the less. He thinks that Mil- ton displayed judgment, taste, and genius by pre- senting Hebrew fictions and legends as dignified, grand, and life-like realities. How much greater must have been the skill and genius of the ancient authors, who invented or gathered up these fictions and leg-ends, and presented them to the world in a book so truth-like, beautiful, eloquent, and god-like, that the nations and ages have read, studied, rever- PACTS. 149 enced, and loved it as the production of the Al- mighty ! The claim, then, of the Bible to divine inspiration does not nullify the evidence of its literary excel- lence drawn from its success. And judged by this criterion, it is incomparably superior to every other book. It is read everywhere, by people of every class, and on all occasions. It is read by the learn- ed and unlearned, by old and young, by the refined and rude; by the English, Americans, Germans, French, by all enlightened nations; in the frozen regions of the north and under the burning rays of the vertical sun ; in the crowded cities of Europe, in the forests and plains of the New World, on the shores of Africa, and in the jungles of India; in the mansion and the cottage; in the family, the school, and the college; in the closet and in the public as- sembly. It is read at the bed-side of the sick and dying, and at the mournful funeral. Its sanctions are quoted in the celebration of marriage rites, and at the baptism of infants. It is used on occasions Off national thanksgiving, and of national fasting and sorrow. By all kinds of enlightened people, in all enlightened countries, at all times, on all occa- sions, in hundreds of languages, the Bible is read. Coleridge once said, pointing to a well worn copji of Cowper, ' that is fame !' Macaulay speaks of ' thai wonderful book,' the Pilgrim^ Progress, as obtaining admiration from the most fastidious critics, and loved by those who are too simple to admire it; as extract- ing praise from Johnson, the most pedantic of critics and most bigoted of Tories; and as being the delight 13* 150 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. of the peasantry in the wildest parts of Scotland, and a favorite in every nursery. But all this and far more, may be said of the Bible. There are thou- sands and thousands of well-worn copies of the Bible where the name of Cowper is unknown. Where *that highest miracle of genius/ the work of Bun- yan, counts its readers by hundreds among the com- mon people, the Bible counts its readers by thou- sands. All who love the Pllgrim^s Progress love the Bible, but thousands and thousands love the latter that never heard of the former. The Bible, too, extracts praise from the great and learned. Bacon says in one of his recorded prayers, 'Thy creatures have been my books, but thy Scriptures much more.' Sir AValter Scott on his death-bed called for the reading of the Bible, saying, 'There is but one book.' Newton read, studied, wrote on, and de- lighted in it. These and other Christian philoso- phers and poets revered it too highly, and loved it too dearly, to allow them to admire it. It is the sceptics — Gothe, Humboldt, Rousseau, Renan, and others — who ignore or reject the supernatural claims and divine authority of the Bible, and read it only to be filled with its beauty and grandeur, that ad- mire it most highly as a literary composition. But by one class and another, it is more admired and loved than any other book. It is oftener read, quo- ted, referred to, borrowed from, and commented on, than any other book. It is studied, prayed over, wept over, and rejoiced in, by many more people than any other book. It is translated into more FACTS. 151 languages, has a deeper hold upon the hearts and minds of men, enters more into national thou2:ht and individual experience, and exerts a wider and more powerful influence on the opinions and actions of men, than any other book. It is a book which the world has not let die, and will not let die. The popularity and success of the world's greatest au- thors— Shakspeare, Milton, Bunyan, Racine, Gothe, Humboldt, and Macaulay — are not to be compared with the success and popularity of Moses, David, Solomon, Ezekiel, John, and Paul. The Bible, judged of by its success, is by far the most valuable literary work in the w^orld. 2. Another fact, one that should be remembered in connection with the unparalleled success of the Bible, is that the great majority read it only in trans- lations. Doubtless- many of these translations are excellent. Gothe highly commended Luther's Ger- man translation.^ It is regarded as the standard of classical expression in the High Dutch language. Klopstock and many other writers of the first rank, made it the model of their style.^ The excellence of the English version is universally admitted. A Ro- man Catholic writer of England thus speaks of it; ' Who will not say that the uncommon beauty and marvelous English of the Protestant Bible is one of the strong-holds of heresy in this country? It lives on the ear like music that cannot be forgotten; like the sound of church bells; which the convert hardly 1 Truth and Poetry, B. 11. 2 Schle.o-el's His. of Lit. Lect. 15. 152 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. knows how he can forego. Its felicities often seem to be almost things rather than mere words/^ Undoubtedly the above mentioned versions and many others are excellent. But to attribute the beauty and power of the Bible to the excellence of the translations in which it is read, is absurd. No faithful translation of a meritorious book can be equal to the original. The translator of an inferior book, by alterations and emendations, interpolating in one place and suppressing in another, embellish- ing here and simplifying there, may indeed get up something superior to the original. It is also possi- ble that a book containing good thoughts, but infe- rior diction, may appear to better advantage in a translation. But every scholar knows, that every well-written work must lose something of its beauty and power by translation. Excellent as the English, German, French, Latin, and other translations of the Bible are, they are inferior to the Hebrew and Greek originals in beauty and power. Speaking on this subject, Daniel Webster said; ^Much of the force and beauty of the language we lose, of course, in the translation — much from our ignorance of He- brew versification, — of which, indeed, we retain only the division of the verses; but changed, emasculated as it is, where sliall we look for its like?'^ Why cannot we have translations of Homer and other ancient poets which will be generally read and admired, which will 'live on the ear like music and the sound of church bells,' and which will become a ^ Dr. Newman. ^ Harper's ]Mag. vol. 12, p. 498. FACTS. 153 standard and model of style and expression? It is because the power and charm of Homer and other ancient poets lie not so much in their subjects, con- ceptions, ideas, and imagery, as in mere style and diction; and hence in translations their beauty is destroyed, or greatly impaired. Indeed, no great poet, except the Hebrew bards, is much read or ad- mired out of his own native land. Scholars, indeed, do read foreign poems in the original or in transla- tions. But from the common people, the poet — un- like the prophet — has no honor except in his own country. When a poem, however grand and beau- tiful, comes to us diluted in a translation, it loses so much of its strength and flavor, that it becomes an insipid thing. Not one in ten — no, not one in a hundred of English readers — knows or cares any- thing about Dante, Racine, Calderon, or Gothe. But the Bible is translated into and read in almost every language. Though it was written long ago — the greater part of it thousands of years ago; in for- eign tongues now dead; in lands where the natural scenery is different from ours, and among a people whose manners and customs, laws and opinions, and modes of thought and speech, were also widely dif- ferent from ours; and though it comes to us some- what impaired in beauty and power by translation; yet it is more at home with us, and is more read and studied and admired and loved, than any of our own native books. It talks like one who lisped and learned our own sweet vernacular in childhood. And it is at home not only in our own country and language, but in every country and language. 154 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. Those ancient Hebrews, secluded and unlearned as they were, or are supposed to have been, have given a universal book to men; the only book that all na- tions and classes can understand, appreciate, and ad- mire; the only book the translations of which into the vernacular tongues is more read and loved by the peoples of earth, and exerts a greater influence upon them, than the productions of their own great- est poets. 3. Another thing which shows the literary excel- lence of the Bible, is the influence which it has ex- erted in the promotion of education and learning. On this subject a volume might be written. AVe have space, however, only to present a number of facts and authorities. (1) The Bible exerted a powerful influence in the promotion of knowledge, education, and every branch of civilization during the first centuries of the Chris- tian era. This fact is fully recognized by Guizot; who speaks of Christianity, which is the religion of the Bible, as one of the great events which carried civilization forward, and declares that it did so be- cause it changed the internal condition of man, his opinions and sentiments, arid regenerated his intel- lectual as well as moral character.^ It is true that Christianity did not at first directly attack the great evils which prevailed in the social system, and which withstood intellectual as well as moral improvement. But this was because she had not a sufficient number of adherents to enable her to attack them success- ^ His. of Civilization, Lect. 1. FACTS. 155 fully. Afterward, when she had gained numbers and influence, she did attack them, and abolished them. At first, however, she necessarily labored to reform, purify, and elevate individuals; and in doing so she became the great promoter of civiliza- tion. (2) Christianity also did much to promote civili- zation from the commencement of the fifth century onward, during the time that the lloman empire was being over-run by the barbarians. The author quot- ed above says, that during this period, there were among the Christian ministers men of profound and varied learning, who possessed a praise- worthy zeal to promote knowledge and education; that the church attacked barbarism at every point, in order to civilize and rule over it; and that, but for the church, the whole world must have fallen a prey to mere brute force.^ It is true, that there is a differ- ence between Christianity and the Christian church. But it is through the church, and through Christian men, that Christianity and the Bible put forth their power. (3) During the middle age, whatever of learning and civilization survived the influx of barbarism, were preserved by Christianity and the church. The church, in her monasteries and other institu- tions of learning — far as they were from what they ought to have been — preserved the books and manuscripts which contained the literary and sa- cred productions of former generations, and which ^ His. of Civilization, Lects. 2 and 3. 156 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. otherwise would have perished through the preju- dice and barbarism of the times. The service which Christianity and the church thus performed, has been very happily illustrated by Macaulay: — *The church/ says he, Mias been many times com- pared by divines to that ark, of which we read in the book of Genesis; but never was the resemblance more perfect than during that evil time, when she alone rode, amidst darkness and tempest, on the deluge beneath which all the great works of ancient power and wisdom lay entombed; bearing within her that feeble germ from which a second and more glorious civilization was to spring.'^ For thus pre- serving the productions of ancient genius and piety, and keeping alive the germs of civilization during thai dreary night of barbarism — the middle age — Christianity and the Christian church deserve the gratitude of all succeeding generations. (4) The influence of the Bible in behalf of learn- ing and education, was very great at the time of the Reformation. All the historians, philosophers, and essayists, who have written concerning that great event, except the Romanists and those of Romanist proclivities, (as for instance F. Schlegel,) recognize its happy effects both upon the moral and intellect- ual condition of mankind. But the chief cause and instrument of the Reformation was the Bible, and to it therefore must be attributed in a great measure the freedom of thought, the advancement of learn- ing, and the literary activity which resulted from 1 His. of England, ch. 1. FACTS. 157 the Reformation. The reformers, Luther, Calvin, and Knox, appealed to the Bible as the infallible word of God, and as the repository of all the moral and theological truth attainable by man. Infidels speak of it as a reproach to the reformers, that though they delivered the human mind from papal tyranny and oppression, they subjected it to the au- thority of the Bible. We might at great length il- lustrate the influence of the Bible in producing the Keformation, and the influence of the Reformation on modern history and the advancement of civiliza- tion. But as we must consult brevity, we will pre- sent the opinions of an able thinker and writer, who is not likely to be suspected of prejudice. In speak- ing of the influence of the Bible on Luther's mind, and the use he made of it in urging on the Reforma- tion, and the happy results of that great event, Car- lyle says: — ^It must have been a most blessed dis- covery, that of an old Latin Bible, which he found in Erfurt library about this time. He had never seen the book before. It taught him another lesson than that of fasts and vigils. A brother monk, too, of pious experience, was helpful. Luther learned now, that a man was saved, not by singing masses, but by the infinite grace of God; a more credible hypothesis. He gradually got himself founded as on a rock. No wonder he should venerate the Bible, which brought this blessed help to him. He prized it as the word of the Highest must be prized by such a man. He determined to hold by that; as through life, and to death, he firmly did. * * * *The Diet of Worms, Luther's appearance there 14 158 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. on the 17th of April, 1521, may be considered the greatest scene in Modern European History; the point indeed, from which the whole subsequent his- tory of civilization takes its rise. * * * j^ jg^ we say, the greatest moment in the Modern History of Men. English Puritanism, England and its Par- liaments, America and vast work these two centu- ries, French devolution, Europe and its work every where at present, the germ of it all lay there ; had Luther in that moment done other, it had all been otherwise. * * * *The most interesting phasis, which the Reforma- tion anywhere assumes, especially for us English, is that of Puritanism. In Luther's own country, Protestantism soon dwindled into a rather barren affair; not a religion or faith, but rather now a the- ological jangling of argument, the proper seat of it not the heart; the essence of it sceptical contention; which indeed has jangled more and more, down to Voltairism itself, through Gustavus Adolphus con- tentions onward to French-Revolution ones! But in our Island there arose a Puritanism, which even got itself established as a Presbyterianism and Na- tional Church among the Scotch; which came forth as a real business of the heart, and has produced in the world very notable fruit. * * * *In the history of Scotland, too, I can find proper- ly but one epoch; we may say, it contains nothing of world interest at all but this Reformation by Knox. * * * 'This that Knox did for his nation, I say, we may reallv call a resurrection as from death. * * * FACTS. 1 59 The people began to live; they needed first all to do that, at what cost or costs soever. Scotch Literature and Thought, Walter Scott, Robert Burns; I find Knox and the Reformation acting in the heart's core of every one of these persons and phenomena; I find that without the Reformation they would not have been. Or what of Scotland? The Puritanism of Scotland became that of England ; of New England. A Tumult in the High Church of Edinburgh spread into a universal Battle and struo^s^le over all these realms; there came out after fifty years' struggling what we call the ^Glorious Revolution,' a Habeas Corpus Act, Free Parliaments, and much else. ^Knox resembles, more than any of the moderns, an old Hebrew prophet. The same inflexibility, in- tolerance, rigid, narrow-looking adherence to God's truth, stern rebuke in the name of God to all that fi3rsake truth ; an old Hebrew Prophet in the guise of an Edinburgh minister.'^ Such is the opinion of a profound, though a scep- tical thinker, in regard to the influence of the Bible ^nd the Reformation, on the progress of civilization and the history of the world. There are those who will be more influenced by the utterances of such a man, than by argumentation and the citation of his- torical facts. (5) It was by the influence of Christianity that civilization was introduced into Great Britain. Ma- caulay says that the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity in the seventh century was the first ^ Hero-worsliip, pp. 116-133. 160 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. ill a long series of salutary revolutions; and that the Church — though at that period corrupted by super- stition and philosophy, against which she had long contended, and by Roman policy and Gothic igno- rance, Grecian ingenuity and Syrian asceticism — even yet retained enough of the sublime theology and benevolent morality of her earlier days, to ele- vate many intellects and to purify many hearts.^ Even Plume speaks of the introduction of Christi- anity into England as a most fortunate and memo- rable event.^ Burke declares, in his Abridgment of English History, that there is no revolution in En- lish history so remarkable as the introduction of Christianity; that light scarce began to dawn until that event took place; and that it brought with it letters and the arts of civil life.^ To the same effect is the further testimony of Macaulay, who declares that learning followed in the train of Christianity.^ (6) The Bible and Christianity have done much to promote learning and literature by the establish- ment of schools and colleges. The free-school sys- tem originated among the Protestants at Geneva. Calvin himself was the founder of it, and of popular education.^ From Geneva the common-school sys- tem passed into Scotland among the Presbyterians, and into En(i:land among; the Puritans. Free schools were first established in the United States by the Puritans of New England; and their example has been followed throughout the country, except where it was rendered impracticable by slavery, a cause 1 History of Eug. ch. 1. ^ m^ ^f E^g^ ch. 1. ' Works, vol. 2, p. 512. * His. of Eng. cb. 1. ^ Bancroft's Misc. p. 405. FACTS. 161 now happily no longer existing. The main design of the New England Puritans in establishing schools was, to promote the knowledge of the Scriptures: — *It being one chief project of that old deluder Sath- an, to keep men from the knowledge of the Scrip- tures,' therefore it was required that every township should maintain a school for reading and writing, and every town of a hundred householders a gram- mar school, with a teacher qualified to 'fit youths for the University/^ The establishment of the most celebrated colleges in our country also resulted from the influence of the Bible and Christianity. Harvard University was at first a grammar school for the education of gospel ministers. It was endowed by Rev. John Harvard, in 1639, nineteen years after the first set- tlement of Massachusetts, with his library and the half of his estate, and was erected into a college. It was placed under the superintendence of a board of overseers, composed of the magistrates and the min- isters of the six neighboring churches.^ The embryo oi" Yale College was a school for the education of gospel ministers. The college of William and Mary, founded in 1691, was designed to educate ministers for the Church of England. Dartmouth colleoje was at first an Indian missionary school. Princeton col- lege was established by Presbyterians in 1746; Hampden and Sidney College was established also by Presbyterians in 1774. Brown University was established mainly by the Baptists in 1764. E,ut- 1 Bancroft's His. ch. 10. ^ Hildreth, vol. 1, pp. 370-1. 14* 162 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. ger's College was established in the interests of the Dutch Reformed Church in 1770. At the time of the llevolution, there were in the colonies three colleges controlled by Congregationalists, three by Episcopa- lians, two by Presbyterians (including Hampden and Sidney College, established in 1774), one by the Baptists, and one by the Dutch Reformed.^ Nearly all the colleges that have been since established owe their existence to the influence of the Bible and the efforts of Christian men. In Europe, the most celebrated colleges had a simi- lar origin. The University of Cambridge, in Eng- land, is said to have been founded by Sigebert, who restored Christianity, and introduced learning among the Angles. The University of Oxford was found- ed or repaired by king Alfred. Both of these insti- tutions were T)riginally designed to educate men for the Church. Of the twenty-six German universities, thirteen belong exclusively to the Protestant church, eight to the Roman Catholic, and five to the two church- es qpnjointly. They were founded -r by emperors, princes, or ecclesiastical dignitaries; in a few cases by the magistrates of cities. One who knows where- of he affirms says, that the motives of the founders were, without exception, pure and elevated, and gen- erally pious and Christian? There ma}^ be opponents of the religion of the Bible occupying the position of teachers in German universities, but every one of these institutions was established for the promotion ^Hildreth, vol. 1, p. 2G3; vol. 2. pp. 254, 578. 2 Schaff's Germany, p. 32. FACTS. 163 of it. Strauss was dismissed from the University of Tubingen an account of his Leben Jesu. The Sorbonne, the university of Paris, was a theo- logical as well as literary institution. It was, indeed, the great theological school in the thirteenth centu- ry; and the fact that it was the first institution named University indicates that in that age Chris- tian theology was regarded as the chief science, and as the connecting bond among all the rest. In Spain, during the reign of Isabella, both re- ligion and learning were greatly encouraged. Col- leges were established in most of the large cities. The most famous institution of learning in Spain was the University of Alcala, founded by cardinal Ximenes. It contained forty-two professorships; of which six were appropriated to theology, and the rest to canon law, ancient languages, fuedicine, and other branches of learning and art. Ximenes valu- ed especially those branches of learning which aid in the interpretation of the Scriptures. Under his pat- ronage, the University of Alcala executed the Poly- glot version of the Scriptures, ^ the most stupendous literary enterprise of that age.'^ When the Scrip- tures ceased to be valued in Spain, learning lan- guished, and the colleges declined. These facts may serve to remind the reader of what the Bible has done to promote education and learning. Even where it has encountered opposi- tion, it has kept alive the spirit of inquiry, and stimulated scientific investigation and literary effort. ^ Prescott's Ferd. and Isa. vol. 2, p. 204; vol. 3, pp. 318-9. 164 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. Where it is a sealed book, or is altogether unknown ; there education and learning languish, «and intellect- ual stagnation prevails. (7) Many of the greatest writers and thinkers have borne testimony to the actual influence of the Bible in the promotion of learning. Burke, who was one of the greatest thinkers of his age, says ; ^ The pro- gress of Christianity has always been marked by that of letters.'^ Cousin, another great thinker, says; ^Christianity is the foundation of modern civ- ilization.'^ Renan, the French rationalist, declares that ^Christianity completely transformed the world in three-hundred years;' and that it Maid the foun- dation of true liberalism and true civilization.'^ Many similar testimonies might be presented. 4. We will mention one other fact in illustration of the literary excellence of the Bible — the marked inferiority of the apocryphal writings. Some of these writings were doubtless in existence before the canon of Scripture was closed, and many of them not long afterward. But they are all un- mistakably inferior as compositions. In what are called the apocryphal gospels there are many cliild- ish things — such as, the statement that the water in which Jesus had been washed, sprinkled on a child, would enable it to remain in a burning oven, unhurt; that Mary, his mother, often distributed his washing- water as miraculous tincture, and pieces of his clothes as amulets against all kinds of harm; that Judas Is- cariot when a boy, being a demoniac, snapped at and 1 Works, vol. 2, p. 51G. ^ His. of Mod. Pliilos. vol. 1, p. 280. ^ Origin of Chris. FACTS. JG5 struck at Jesus; that Satan came out of Judas in the shape of a mad-dog; and that Jesus once on a time changed a number of little boys into goats, and after- ward restored them to their proper shape. The inferiority of the apocryphal writings in both matter and style to the books of the Bible, is too evident to admit of doubt or dispute. Sceptics have noticed it, and admitted the force of the argument which it furnishes in favor of plenary inspiration. Even Josephus, the contemporary of the apostles, who was a man of superior ability, possessing much learning — more probably than all the apostles to- gether— is far beneath the writers of the New Testa- ment and also of the Old, in richness and elevation of thought, and simplicity and dignity of style. There is somethino- which lifts the writers of the Scriptures above all their contemporaries, as well as above all preceding and all subsequent writers. CHAPTER XIII. SUMMARY. The sum of what has been said in the preceding chapters in regard to the literary superiority of the Bible is as follows: 1. The Bible has stood the test of time. It origin- ated among a secluded and despised people, who were not remarkable for learning and refinement, nor for their attainments in the arts and sciences. It con- tains almost every species of composition, and treats of almost every kind of subject. It has been read, studied, examined, and criticized for eighteen hun- dred years. It has been assaulted as no other book has ever been. Science, logic, criticism, ridicule, have been employed against it. Learning, wit, and genius at times have been arrayed against it. Yet its historical character, supernatural origin, and di- vine authority are admitted by a majority of learned and scientific men, and by the great mass of enlight- ened people. 2. The Bible is free from absurdity. It contains none of the puerilities and vagaries which abound in all the ancient literatures. It avoids all Conjec- tures. It relates no wild stories. It sets up no ex- travagant claims to antiquity. It gives the only account of the creation, and of the origin of man- 166 EECAPITUL ATION. 167 kind, which an intelligent man can believe. Even its accounts of miracles are sober and dignified. Though it originated among a people who delighted in strange stories, wild conjectures, and extravagant fictions; and whose other literature abounds in puer- ilities, fables, and monstrous lies; it is throughout moderate, reasonable, and truth-like. In these re- spects the Bible is in striking contrast with much of modern literature, as well as with ancient literature in general. 3. The Bible is consistent with science. Scientific investigation has, like a consuming flame, burnt up many philosophies, theories, cosmogonies, systems, and literatures. But the Bible has passed the fiery ordeal, and not a page of it has been singed. All ancient literature, and much of modern, abound with contradictions of science. Even the writings of the most celebrated and ablest ancient authors — Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero — contain many scientific errors. The Bible is the only collection of books free from such errors. In it — multiform, diverse, and comprehensive as its contents are — no error has yet been pointed out to destroy the belief of the great majority of learned men and intelligent people in its scientific accuracy and its infallibility. 4. The portions of the Bible seemingly least import- ant are of great literary value. They are rich in his- toric information, giving us an account of the civil laws, sanitary regulations, religious rites and cere- monies, of a very ancient and remarkable people. They contain moral utterances of the deepest signifi- cance and transcendent beauty, and snatches of the 168 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. most sublime poetry. For historic information, moral beauty, and poetic sublimity, the old law- books of the Hebrews are an exception among all the law books of the world. 5. The Bible is rich in beautiful and grand literary subjects. It treats not of absurd cosmologies, inde- cent theogonies, and debasing loves and passions, as do the ancient poets in general. All its subjects are noble, elevated, grand. The matters treated of in the Vedas, the Iliad, the Eneid, and all the poems of the ancient heathen, in comparison with the themes treated of in Genesis, Job, the Psalms, Prophecies, Gospels, and other parts of the Scrip- tures, are trifling and mean. Dante, Milton, Bun- yan, and many other masters in modern literature, borrowed from it the subjects and general concep- tions of their immortal works. The poets of many lands have gone to it for subjects of epics, tragedies, lyrics, oratorios, ballads, and almost every species of composition. 6. l^ie Bible has done much to enrich and ennoble modern literature. Not its subjects only, but its con- ceptions, doctrines, sentiments, imagery, and forms of expression, have been incorporated in the litera- ture of every one of the great nations of the earth. Poets, critics, essayists, orators, and literary men in general, have quoted from it, referred to it, imitated it, and borrowed from it, almost without limit, and generally without acknowledgment. The greatest authors and orators have received their literary cul- ture from it, been nourished by its strength, elevated by its lofty spirit, and have modeled after it their RECAPITULATION. 169 style and diction. It has been to literary men a starry firmament, at which they have looked and gazed until their souls were lighted up with beauty and glory — a field of fruits and flowers among which they have plucked and reveled. It has been an un- failing source of useful thoughts, beautiful ideas, grand conceptions, striking figures, and simple, graceful forms of expression. 7. The unparalleled excellence of the Bible as a lit- erary composition is almost universally admitted. It has been admired and panegyrized as beautiful, elo- quent, grand, and sublime, and as more so than any other book, by the most eminent literary men — poets, philosophers, historians, critics, statesmen, jurists, theologians, scholars, and men of science — Romanists as well as Protestants, sceptics as well as Christians — Englishmen, Americans, Germans, and Frenchmen. No book has been so generally ad- mired and panegyrized by the gifted, the learned, and great of all professions, all classes, and all be- liefs. 8. The Bible lyrics are the finest the world has ever seen. Christians can find nothing better to express their devotional feelings. None other have been adopted into general and permanent use. They are translated, versified, imitated, read, studied, chanted, and sung, wherever Christianity is known. The very best that Christian hymn-writers can do, is, to reproduce them in the modern forms of metrical composition. *The seven-fold chorus of hallelujahs and harping symphonies^ are found only in the songs of the Hebrew bards. The highest literary 15 170 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. authority has declared these ancient productions un- equaled for their elegance, sweetness, beauty, and sublimity. 9. The Bible has purified and enriched the fine arts. It ^reed them from their degrading subjection to false religion and vile morality. It has suggested the finest subjects and highest achievements in art. 10. Many facts illustrate the literary excellence of the Bible, It is more successful than any other book; is more read, studied, admired, loved, quoted, re- ferred to, and imitated; and exerts a more power- ful and wider influence than any other. Though it is generally read in translations, it is to every nation like a book written in their own mother tongue; to all its readers it is an exotic, yet is at home in every country and clime; though it was written long-ago, in languages now dead, among a strange and seclu- ded people, it is more read, studied, revered, loved, admired, wept over, and rejoiced in by the peoples of earth, than any of the productions of native genius. It was one of the greatest promoters of knowledge and intellectual progress during the first centuries; it strus^s^led ao-ainst the io^norance and barbarism of the middle age; it introduced letters and learning into Great Britain; it was the cause and instrument of the Reformation, and the revival of -learning in the sixteenth century; it originated the system of free-schools; it established nearly all our colleges and universities; it is the great civilizer. 11. Yet the Jews, whose literature consisted mainly of the Scriptures, were not a cultivated peo- ple. Science, in the modern sense of the word, was RECAPITULATION. 171 unknown among them. They had no philosophers, and of the fine arts they were almost entirely ignor- ant. Their only poets were their religious teachers. Their colleges were schools of the prophets. Of foreign literature they knew almost nothing. They inhabited a small piece of territory beyond which their thoughts seldom extended. They had in real- ity no class of literary men. Their writers could not have been much superior to the mass of the people in learning: for almost their whole literature consisted of their sacred books, which all the people were required to read or to hear read. A few of their writers — for instance, Moses and Daniel — were J indeed, acquainted with foreign courts and literature; but even they wrote as if they had no knowledge of books, and no learning but such as came from the depths of their own souls. The Bib- lical literature — like the Hebrew nation — is origi- nal, diverse, unique, ignoring and contemning the literature and science of the world. 12. How, then, were these plain, unlearned, and unpolished men — shepherds, farmers, tax-gatherers, and fishermen — enabled to write such a book as the Bible — beautiful, eloquent, sublime, full of matter, graceful in language, abounding in splendid im- agery and grand conceptions? How came it to pass that the secluded and uncultivated Jewish nation produced so many writers rivaling, and even excel- ling, the gifts and genius of Shakspeare, the tower- ing thoughts of Dante and Milton, the pathos, gracefulness, and beauty of Bunyan, Cowper, Gothe, Rousseau, Racine, and all the poets of ancient and 172 LITERARY EXCELLENCE. modern times? Whence was it that this rude na- tion, through their unlearned writers, have given to the work! a book which has enriched and ennobled modern literature; purified and elevated the fine arts; advanced education and science; and which has been imitated, quoted, referred to, and appropriated almost without limit; and has been recognized as the standard and model of literary excellence by many of the greatest writers and speakers of modern times? Whence was it that those old Hebrew bards, prophets, and apostles — without science, without the fine arts, without philosophy, without literary models except such as they themselves created; en- gaged in a continued struggle with their own obsti- nate people, who were ever falling into polytheism and immorality; and with nothing but the sun and the stars and the natural scenery of their own little country to teach them beauty and eloquence; — whence was it that such men, under such circum- stances, produced a book the fullest of matter, the most diverse and multiform in its contents, the rich- est in historic information, the most simple and graceful in its language and style, the most charm- ing in its imagery; the most eloquent in its utter- ances, the most grand and sublime in its thoughts and conceptions of all the books that have been produced in ancient or modern times; the only book which is for all generations and for all time, and which is at home in every language, in every country, and in every clime? How could such men, under such circumstances, produce the most simple, the most beautiful, the most eloquent, the most sug- RECAPITULATION. 173 gestive, the most powerful, the most wonderful, the most sublime book in the world; and thus surpass in literary excellence and success all the genius, learning, philosophy, and art of ancient and modern times? We answer, that the Bible is a supernatural production. Infidelity may stammer out such an- swers as it can; or, like Rousseau when overcome by the purity, sweetness, and eloquence of the Scrip- tures, decline to answer at all, and 'observe a re- spectful silence/ 15* PART II. THE THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE, I>^IIT II. THE THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. CHAPTER I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS. In the preceding part of this work, we have en- deavored to prove and illustrate the literary superi- ority of the Scriptures. We have taken up more time and space with that part of the subject, for the reason that their literary superiority is not univer- sally recognized. The unequalled excellence of the Biblical theology, we believe, is universally recog- nized, and hence we shall be more brief on this part of our subject. The superior excellence of the Biblical theology being, as we have said, universally admitted, it is not necessary that we should prove it. We need only state and illustrate it, so that due importance may be attached to it in estimating the general ex- cellence of the Scriptures. The fact, however, that their theological excellence is universaUy admitted is perhaps one reason why this excellence has not had its proper influence in the controversy concerning inspiration. We do not properly appreciate the un- interrupted blessings of heaven, just because we have 177 178 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. always been accustomed to them. We are inclined to regard the regular rising and setting of the sun, the return of the seasons, and the refreshing showers, as matters of course, for which we need not be thank- ful. The Israelites born in the desert doubtless re- garded the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night, and the perennial stream which gushed from the rock when smitten by Moses, as common things, like the rain and the dew of heaven. So too the widow, whose barrel of meal did not waste and cruse of oil did not fail through the blessing of the prophet, may have ceased to admire and be thankful, just because the meal did not waste and the oil did not fail. Though it is true only in a limited sense that familiarity breeds contempt, yet there are many facts which we disregard just be- cause we have been accustomed to them from child- hood. There are truths which have little or no influence over us, for the reason that they are so true that no one calls them in question. So it is with the theological excellence of the Scriptures. No one disputes it. Even infidels admit it. Hence it is regarded as a matter of course, and as of little importance in estimating the general excellence of the Bible, and determining the question in regard to its origin. Our object, then, in this second part of our work, is not so much to prove^ as to illustrate by actual comj)arison the superiority of the theology of the Scriptures over all other theological systems that are known to have prevailed among men. In making this comparison, it is not necessary that we PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS. 179 should examine every theology that has appeared among men. It is necessary to examine only those that have prevailed among the most civilized and re- fined nations. For if the Bible theology is superior to the Egyptian, Hindu, Buddhist, Persian, Chi- nese, Grecian, Roman, and Arabic theologies, we may safely infer that it is superior to all the theolo- gies that may have prevailed among obscure nations and savage tribes. CHAPTER II. EGYPTIAN THEOLOGY. The Egyptians, the most ancient nation of whom we have any definite knowledge, were very super- stitious. Their superstition was notorious even in the time of Herodotus, who says that ^of all men they were the most excessive in their veneration for the gods/^ As far back as we have any account of them, they had lost all knowledge of the doctrine of the unity of God. The ancient historian just re- ferred to says, that originally there were eight Egyptian gods, and that twelve additional gods were produced from them, seventeen thousand years before the reign of Amasis.^ Besides these two class- es of deities, there was a third, inferior in grade, and of an indefinite number. An enumeration of all the gods whom the ancient Egyptians worshipped would fill many pages. They worshipped not only a mul- titude of imaginary beings, of several grades and of different sexes, but also the heavenly bodies, the natural elements, beasts, birds, reptiles, vegetables, and stones. They represented their chief deities under various forms and symbols. They repre- sented Amuu, supposed to be their chief deity — corresponding to the Jupiter of the Greeks and ^B. 2: 37. 'B. 2: 32. 180 EGYPTIAN THEOLOGY. 181 Romans— with a body of a deep blue color, a ram's head, and a red cap from which proceeded two tall straight feathers. Khem, another of their deities, appears as a hawk with human legs, a flail, and feathers like Amun. Sevek had the head of a croc- odile; Thoth, the head of an ibis; and Amun-Kor, the head of a hawk. One of their deities was rep- resented with the countenance of a she-goat and the legs of the male; another with the ears of an ass or giraffe. Typhon was represented as an ass, bear, hippopotamus, and crocodile. Athor, a female deity, was represented sometimes as a spotted cow, and sometimes with a human face and a cow's ears. Several deities appear combined in one person, and others are represented as being both male and fe- male. Thus the goddess Neith is represented as uniting both sexes in herself, and, though maintain- ing perpetual virginity, as having given birth to the sun. One of her titles is, the great cow, engenderer of the sun. Natural objects were deified by the ancient Egypt- ians. The sun was worshipped as Ra; the moon sometimes as a male deity connected with Thoth, and sometimes as a female with Isis. The starry heaven was worshipped under a female figure. Di- vine honors were paid to the river Nile. Osiris, who perhaps originally was understood to represent the prolific power of nature, was identified some- times with the sun, sometimes with the earth, and sometimes with the river Nile. To Isis, his con- sort, also were assigned various characters and func- tions. 16 182 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. Animal-worship also prevailed among the Egyp- tians. They paid divine honors to cows, crocodiles, cats, dogs, goats, hawks, vultures, larks, beetles; to nearly all kinds of beasts, birds, reptiles and insects. Crocodiles, cats, goats, serpents, and various other animals were maintained in the Egyptian temples in magnificent style and at great expense. They were bathed, anointed, and perfumed; and at night lay on soft cushions. They were fed on the choicest ^ food. Cakes of fine flour sweetened with honey, and flesh of beasts, birds, and fishes, roasted, boiled, or uncooked, to suit the palates of all, were prepared for them. They were adorned with ornaments of gold and costly gems. They had attendants and nurses whose office was hereditary, and who in public wore insignia that they might be recognized, and were regarded with great reverence. Incense was burnt before these beast-gods. Vows were per- formed in their presence. Parents consecrated their children to them. They cut ofp their children's hair, weighed it, and gave the weight of it in sih^er to procure delicacies for their bleating and cackling gods. When any of the sacred animals died, they were embalmed and deposited in a consecrated place. Every family had a holy beast, and when it died, the household mourned as for a beloved child. When a cat died, every member of the family cut off the hair of his eye-brows in sign of mourning. When a dog died, they shaved their heads and their whole bodies. To kill any of the sacred animals was a capital offense. To do so involuntarily sub- jected the transgressor to a fine determined by the EGYPTIAN THEOLOGY. 183 priests. To kill an ibis or a hawk, even involun- tarily, was punished with inevitable death. The destruction of any of the sacred animals by native Egyptians was almost an incredible crime. When they accidentally found one of these animals lying dead, they stood aloof and with lamentations and protestations declared that they had not killed it. Even in times of famine, the Egyptians, though driven to eat human flesh, refused to use any of the sacred animals for food. The degradation of the theological ideas of the Egyptians is most clearly seen in their veneration and worship of their holy bull, the beast-god Apis. This animal is described by Herodotus^ as the c If of a cow that could have no other offspring, and conceived Apis from being struck by lightning. His color was black, but he had a white spot in the form of a triangle on his forehead, the figure of an eagle on his back, and of a beetle under his tongue. The hair on his tail was double. But on some of these points the accounts of ancient authors are con- tradictory. Of course, some of the marks just men- tioned were merely feigned, or were produced by artifice. Apis was allowed to live just twenty-five years; and whether he died a natural death, or was killed by the priests at the expiration of his allotted term, a public lamentation was performed, which lasted until another Apis was found, and was then succeeded by great and enthusiastic rejoicings. As soon as a suitable calf was found, he was placed in ^B. 3: 28. 184 " THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. a house facing the east, where he was nourished on milk four months. At the expiration of this time, he was conveyed at the new moon, in a gilded pal- ace placed on a boat, to Memphis, and was lodged in splendid apartments, with pleasure grounds and ample space for exercise. He drank clear water from a well or fountain, but was not allowed to drink of the Nile water lest it should make him too fat. The most beautiful female companions of his own species were provided for him. The man in whose herd this divine calf was found was regarded with universal admiration. The Egyptians really worshipped this Apis bull as a god, as is asserted by Cicero^ and other ancient writers. They celebrated in his honor a festival which lasted seven days. On this occasion great multitudes assembled at Memphis. The animal was led in solemn procession by the priests, a cho- rus of children going before him and singing hymns in his praise, and the people coming forward and welcoming him as he passed. He was consulted as an oracle, and various modes of divination through him were employed. Boys who played around his stable or palace were supposed to be inspired with a divine impulse, which enabled them to utter predic- tions in perfect rhythm. Children who walked be- fore him in the public processions were supposed to acquire the gift of prophecy from his breath. His receiving food readily, was considered a good omen; his refusal to cat was considered a bad omen. Some- 1 De Xat. Dcor. 1 : 29. EGYPTIAN THEOLOGY. 185 times those who wished to consult him, after bupning incense, put their mouths to his ear and asked him whatever question they wished, and then stopping their ears, withdrew from the sacred enclosure. Whatever expression they heard, after withdrawing from the presence of the animal and unstopping their ears, was taken as an answer to the question which had been whispered in his ear. When this horned and hairy god died, he was honored with a masrnificent funeral. It is recorded o that a sum equal to a million of dollars was some- times spent in celebrating the obsequies of one of these dead bullocks. Since Apis was regarded with so much veneration, his every motion would be regarded as of momentous importance, and watched with the utmost care. The lying down and rising up of the senseless brute, his sleeping and waking, his eating and refusing to eat, the tossing of his head and the shaking of his tail, his grunting and bellowing, and all his movements and motions, would be observed and noted with greater vigilance and awe, and his appetites and desires more promptly and completely gratified, than those of the most powerful monarch. The production of offspring, and the production even of half-human offspring, if such a thing were possible, from this and other sacred animals, would of course be sought after as a momentous matter and a religious duty. Just here is suggested the essential bestiality of the Egyptian theology. Decency, however, forbids a full declaration. But we may refer to the state- ments of Herodotus, who, speaking of the offering 16* 186 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. of swine by the Egyptians in sacrifice at particular seasons, says, that they gave a reason for it which it would be indecent to mention;^ and who, in speak- ing of the representation of Pan as having the face of a she-goat and the legs of the male, says, that the Egyptians have a reason for it which it would not be proper to state, but a little further on does make a statement which indicates the abominable charac- ter of the Egyptian theology and worship.^ There is enough known concerning the debasing effects of animal worship among the Egyptians to account for the stringent laws enacted by Moses against bestial impurity among the Israelites after their long resi- dence in the land of Apis.^ It is not our business to show how the polytheism, pantheism, and animal worship among the ancient Egyptians originated. If the Bible be true, and the suggestions of secular history are to be accepted, all mankind originally worshii^ped the one true God. Doubtless the Egyptians beyond the historic period were monotheists. Probably their first error was the worship of the earth, sun, moon, and the natu- ral powers and elements, as the symbols of the attri- butes of the Godhead. Next they may have glided into the belief that these symbols themselves pos- sessed divinity, and may have come to regard them as divine beings and as gods. Then symbols would be selected also for them. The ox, with his patient labor, would represent the fruit-bearing earth ; the hawk, with its bright eyes, the sun; the crocodile, 12: 46. 2 2: 47. ^ Lev. xviii. 23. xx. 15. 16. EGYPTIAN THEOLOGY. 187 the river Nile; and combinations of the forms of difi'erent parts of animals, as the head of an ibis or a ram on the human body, or the human trunk with the face and legs of a goat, or the human form and face with the ears of an ass or cow, would be chosen to represent the properties and functions of the gods — which the earth, heavenly bodies, seas, rivers, winds, and all the powers of nature, were now sup- posed to be. These symbols would in turn be dei- fied, and thus the process would go on and on, until the knowledge of the true God was lost, and until all the natural powers, elements, and objects, beasts, birds, reptiles, and insects were*worshipped as gods, or as the vehicles of gods. Sir G. Wilkinson ex- presses the opinion that the Egyptian religion was pantheistic rather than polytheistic, and seems to think that its errors and abuses resulted mainly from the pantheistic principle and tendency.^ Ken- rick says that the Egyptian system of theology did not originate in any one principle, and that it con- tains traces of at least three; the worship of the heavenly bodies, the personification of the powers supposed to be engaged in creation and nature, and the assignment of personal symbols to abstract qual- ities.^ But whatever may have been the source of the theological errors of the Egyptians, it is certain that they were both polytheists and pantheists; the worshippers of imaginary beings, the heavenly bod- ies, natural elements and objects, and also of animals. Since such was the theology or rather the super- * An. Egyptians, vol. 1, p. 328. ^ An. Egypt, vol. 1, p. 309. 188 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. stition of the Egyptians, their worship was of course formal, impure, and beastly. Prayers, processions, the singing of hymns, the offering of incense and bloody sacrifices, fightings, scourgings, exposures of the naked body, revelings, and obscenities, constitu- ted the main part of the ceremonies and services which they performed in honor of their imaginary, material, and animal gods. It also appears, that in very early times they offered human sacrifices. This is denied by Herodotus.^ His testimony, however, is of the negative kind. He is followed by Wilkin- son.^ Kenrick, however, shows that human sacri- fices were offered by the Egyptians until the time of Amasis; who abolished the custom, and substituted an image of wax instead of the human victim.^ It is to the credit of their humanity, that notwithstanding the debasing influence of an abominable theology, they yielded to the decree of their king abolishing the monstrous custom. We conclude our necessarily brief and imperfect review of Egyptian theology with a general sum- mary. 1. Though the Egyptians appear to have lost all knowledge of the Divine unity, there yet remained in their theological system — contradictory and mon- strous as it became — traces of a belief at a very early period in that fundamental doctrine. The blending of the attributes and functions of their gods, and the frequent identification of one god with another, in- dicate that originally they were but names or sym- 1 2 : 45. 2 vol. 1. p. 411. ^ ^ol. 1. pp. 368-370. EGYPTIAN THEOLOGY. 189 bols of the one God. The fact that among the vast number of local gods, there was one, the mysterious Ra or Phra (Pharaoh), the sun, who was attended by no goddess, had no mother, and yet was born of the virgin Neith, and who was universally recog- nized as king and father, also points to an early be- lief in the doctrine of one Supreme Being. 2. Among the numerous superstitions which ob- scured and destroyed this belief, was that of panthe- ism. The Egyptians conceived divinity in almost every thing — in the heavenly bodies, the natural elements, the earth, animals, insects, vegetables, stones, in the whole visible and invisible creation. It was this prevalent pantheism that Juvenal satir- ized, when he said, that among the Egyptians it was an impious act to eat a leek or an onion; and that their gods grew for them in their gardens.^ 3. The Egyptian theology was polytheistic. It obscured and jQnally discarded the doctrine of the Divine unity. It recognized eight deities of the first order, twelve of the second, and an enormous multitude of the third, — to say nothing of the natu- ral objects, beasts, birds, serpents, and insects that were deified and worshipped. Nowhere was the doctrine of the oneness of the Godhead more deeply buried beneath hideous superstitions than among the ancient Egyptians. 4. Their religion was further corrupted by ma- terialism. They conceived of their gods as corporeal beings of different sexes, and as marrying and be- » Sat. 15. 190 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. getting children. They almost invariably repre- sented their gods in triple groups — a god, a female god (of whom the first is both son and husband), and a third, the offspring of the other two. In whatever way w^e interpret this triad — Avhether we view it as the obscure and corrupt remains of a primitive belief in the Bible doctrine of the Trinity; or as designed to represent the union of the active and passive principles in creation, and the product thence arising; or as symbols of the self- existent, hidden god; the god creating himself a body and thus becoming revealed; and the god as conceived in the minds of worshippers; the god as self-existing, objective, and subjective — whatever this triad in Egyptian theology may have been originally de- signed to represent, it indicates that the divine na- ture was conceived and represented as a material substance. 5. Beast-worship was universally prevalent. We have illustrated the abominable character and de- basing effects of this superstition by giving an ac- count of Apis and his worship. But many other animals were worshipped as gods — crocodiles, ser- pents, fishes, cats, dogs, goats, vultures, larks, nearly all kinds of beasts, birds, reptiles, and even insects. 6. The Egyptian worship consisted in merely for- mal services, and in indecencies and obscenities.* *In our account of Egyptian theology, we have mainly fol- lowed Ilerodotug, Kenrick, and Wilkinson. * CHAPTER III. HINDU THEOLOGY. The ancient Hindus were pantheists, polytheists, and idolaters. They, indeed, believed in a Supreme Being. The holiest verse of the Yedas is as follows; ^Let us adore the supremacy of that divine sun (op- posed to the visible luminary), the Godhead who illuminates all, who re-creates all, from whom all proceed, to whom all must return.'^ In the Laws of Menu, God is described as 'He, whom the mind alone can "perceive, whose essence eludes the external organs, who has no visible parts, who exists from eternity, who is the soul of all beings, and whom no being can comprehend.'^ But though the writings of the ancient Hindus ascribe eternity, spirituality, and many other divine attributes to the Supreme Being, their ideas concerning him were obscured and deformed by many absurd and monstrous errors. We have already referred to their absurd cosmog- ony.^ But their cosmogony and theology are inti- mately connected, and the absurdity of the one is but the counterpart of the falseness of the other. 1. Brahm is represented as the creator. During a period of time inconceivable in length, he was in a ^Jones' works, vol. 13, p. 367. ^Jones' trans, cli. 1: 7. 3 Part 1, ch. 2. 191 192 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. state of inactivity or sleep. By his thought he first created the waters from his own substance, and placed in them an egg. In that egg Bralim was himself born in the form of Brahma, the forefather of all spirits.^ Brahma, who is thus represented as proceeding from Brahm, as we shall presently see is the universe. Thus the First Cause or Power from which all things proceed, is represented as destitute of character and attributes. After the creation of Brahma, or after he was hatched in his own egg as Brahma, Brahm relapsed into a state of inactivity or sleep. Such a being is not the object either of love, reverence, or fear. He has no temple, and is never worshipped. The sleeping god is an object of indifference. Thus the very first principle, the start- ing point of Hindu theology, is fatally erroneous. Its inventors did not understand the fundamental truth, that the Creator of all things is a living, active, powerful, wise, and good Being. 2. The Hindu theology is pantheistic. Brahma, hatched from the egg of Brahm, is everything. The universe is but the expansion or development of the principles and qualities that were wrapt up in Brahm, and were educed from him. The universe is represented as his manifested form, and as Brahma it is described as a human body of prodigious mag- nitude. This pantheistic idea is set forth in Menu; where it is declared that all nature, visible and in- visible, the boundless universe, the whole assem- blage of gods and all worlds, are seated in the iMenii, cb. 1: 9-32. HINDU THEOLOGY. 193 Divine Spirit, and. that the Divine Spirit pervades all beings in five elemental forms, and, as the su- preme soul^ is present in all creatures.^ Thus in this ancient theology Brahma is in every thing and every thing is in Brahma; Brahma is the universe and the universe is Brahma. 3. The Hindu theology also involved the materi- ality of the Godhead. It represented the supreme god as being hatched out of Brahm as a chicken is hatched from the ^gg, as having a corporeal form, and the different parts of the material uni- verse as the members of his huge body. To all the gods material forms are ascribed. They are represented as male and female, as having sexual passions, as marrying, cohabiting, and begetting children. While the supreme god and all the gods were regarded as having spiritual natures, they were at the same time conceived of and represented as material substances. The Hindus both deified ma- terial things and materialized the Divine Spirit. In their pantheistic conceptions, they confounded the Creator with the works of his hands. 4. This ancient theology was polytheistic. Brah- ma, the w^orld-god, comprehended many gods within himself. The Hindu pantheon contained a vast crowd of deities, male and female, superior and in- ferior, celestial and terrestrial. The number of the Hindu gods has been estimated at three-hundred- and thirty millions. The Hindus were taught not only that there are many gods, but that they are all ^Menu, ch. 12: 118-125. 17 194 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. to be worshipped. The Brahmin was enjoined to offer an oblation of clarified butter every day to the following divinities; first to Agni, the god of fire, and to the lunar god; next to the gods collectively; afterwjird to Dhanwantari, the god of medicine; Cuhu, goddess of the day, after the new moon; Anumati, goddess of the day after the opposition; Prajapati, the lord of creatures; Dyava and Prith- ivi, goddesses of the sky and earth; to Indra, Yama, Voruna, and Soma; to the Maruts (winds), water- gods, and gods of large trees; to Sri, the goddess of abundance; Bhadracalli, the propitious goddess; to Brahma, his household god; and to all the gods as- sembled; to the Spirits of the day and the Spirits»of the night. After sacrificing to all these gods and goddesses, the Brahmin was directed, to present whatever clarified butter remained as an offering to the Pitris, human progenitors.^ 5. As the result of the pantheistic, materialistic, and polytheistic elements in their theology, the Hin- dus were led into many absurd opinions and jyracti- ces. Since they were taught that the universe is God, that He is in everything and everything in Him, they regard everything as possessing divinity. They had a superstitious regard for beasts, insects, plants, stones, and all material substances. This superstitious regard, doubtless, in part resulted from their belief in metempsychosis. They were taught that the souls of men after death inhabit the bodies of other beings; that for certain sins men after death ^Menu, ch. 1: 84-91. HINDU THEOLOGY. 195 assume a vegetable or mineral form ; for others the forms of beasts or birds; for others the lowest of human conditions; that souls endued with goodness attain to the state of deities, and that bad souls pass jnto horses, cows, dogs, bears, snakes, insects, vege- table and mineral substances. Plence, as the souls of men were regarded as sparks of Brahma, pieces of Deity, all animate and inanimate things were regarded as the vessels or vehicles of divinity. Plants, animals, and minerals, were alike con- sidered as having internal conscience, and as being sensible of pleasure and pain.^ The man who sought after beatitude was enjoined to drink water strained through a cloth, lest he might hurt some insect.^ Agriculture was condemned, as involving cruelty by * wounding the earth and the creatures dwelling on it/^ Slaying a cow, working in mines or dykes, and cutting grgen trees, were classed along with adultery, incest, selling a wife or child, and other transgressions; as crimes of the third degree, higher or lower according to circumstances.^ The higher classes of society, by the possession of a larger quantity of divinity, were considered as hav- ing a right to despise and oppress the lower. Brah- mins were declared to be transcendently divine — their very birth to be a constant incarnation of Dherma, the god of justice.^ A king was declared to be composed of particles drawn from the four guardian deities of the w^orld, and to be a powerful divinity in human shape.^ The Brahmin was for- ^Menu, ch. 1: 49. ^Q: 46. nO: 84. *7: 59-G7. ^Menu, 1: 31; 7: 318. ^7: 5-8. 196 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLEJJCE. bidden to marry a Sudra (one of the lowest class) on pain of everlasting perdition. He was also forbid- den to marry into a family in which no males had been produced, in which the Veda had not been read, or which had thick hair, phthisis, dispepsy, or. elephantiasis. He was further forbidden to marry a girl with inflamed eyes, or one with reddish hair, too much hair, or no hair at all. On the other hand, he was required to marry a girl without de- fect of form, with an agreeable name, and who walked gracefully like a phenicopteros or a young elephant.^ The man who killed a cow, even without malice, was subjected to ridiculous and disgusting punish- ments. 'He must drink for the first month barley- corns boiled soft in water; his head must be shaved and covered with the hide of the slain cow; he must fix his abode on her late pasture ground; all day he must wait on the herd and stand quaffing the dust raised by their hoofs; at night having servilely at- tended and stroked and saluted them, he must sur- round them with a fence, and sit near to guard them; he must stand while they stand, follow them when they move together, and lie down by them when they lie down. Should a cow be sick or terri- fied by tigers or thieves, or fall, or stick in the mud, he must relieve her by all possible means; in heat, in rain, in cold, or while the blast rages, he must not seek his own shelter without first sheltering the cows to the utmost of his power. He must not speak a ^Menu, 3: 7-10. HINDU THEOLOGY. 197 word of a cow that eats corn or grass, or of a calf that drinks milk. By waiting on a herd according to these rules for three months, the slayer of a cow atones for his guilt. But, his penance being per- formed, he must give ten cows and a bull, or, his stock not being so large, all he possesses, to such as know the Veda.^ Another absurd and pernicious error embraced in the Hindu theology, is the notion, that the dumb, blind, deaf, lame, and deformed, were thus born be- cause of sins which their souls had committed in a previous state of existence. Such persons were not compassionated as unfortunate, but despised as crimi- nals suffering deserved punishments.^ 6. The Hindu theology was idolatrous. They assimilated the incorruptible and invisible God to the form of corruptible men, and of four-footed beasts and creeping things. There is, indeed, no trace of image-worship in the Vedas, their oldest writings. But they fell into it at an early period of their history. E-espect to the images of the gods is expressly enjoined in Menu.^ 7. The worship of the Hindus was in keeping with the character of their theology. In addition to prayers, hymns, and sacrifices, which constituted an im|X)rtant part of pagan worship in former times, their religious services consisted in bodily austeri- ties, the utterance of magic words, and other trivial acts of devotion. They were taught that sin is to be expiated, and holiness attained, by self-torture and ^Menu, 10: 109-117. HO: 53. 3 2:176. 17* 198 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. other penances. Sliding backward and forward on the ground, standing a whole day on tiptoe, con- tinuing in motion by rising and sitting alternately, bathing at sun-rise, noon, and sunset, and emaciating the body by starvation and other austerities, were enjoined upon them as holy and meritorious acts. He who would attain to holiness and beatitude, was enjoined to withdraw from all society and live in solitude; to have no home and no fire; to beg his food; to eat but once a day and only when very hungry; to wander about continually; to be desti- tute alike of hatred and affection, of joy and sorrow; to avoid giving pain to animal and vegetable beings, but to be completely indifferent to family, friends, and all human creatures; to be constantly engaged in sublime meditation; to repose entirely on God; and thus to raise himself after death to immortal glory.^ These voluntary austerities and tortures were considered only less holy and meritorious than certain trivial acts of devotion. The Sannyasi, a Brahmin in the fourth stage of advancement, was required, by way of expiation for the death of those creatures which he had perchance unknowingly de- stroyed,— such as insects,— to make, after having duly bathed, six suppressions of his breath. Even three suppressions of breath, made according to the prescribed rule, and accompanied with the tri-verbal phrase bhur hhwah swah and the syllable om^ were considered the highest devotion of a Brahmin.^ In such a religion true devotion could have no place. ^Menu, C: 32-63. ^6: G9-70. HINDU THEOLOGY. 199 8. The Hindu theology is characterized by confu- storij incoiisistency , and nhsurdity. It is contained in a literature which is almost interminable, and which, the Brahmins say, is like the ocean un- fathomable. This vast collection of writings con- tains, indeed, some traces of monotheism and some noble ideas of God^s majesty and spirituality; but these are completely overlaid by a vast and chaotic mythology, a confused and contradictory system of pantheism, polytheism, materialism, nature-worship, man- worship, and image-worship; and by absurd speculations and hideous superstitions. The Hindu theologians vibrated between atheistic scepticism and monstrous credulity. They represented the Creator as a being without character and attributes, almost as a nonentity, and altogether as an object of indifference to rational creatures. Their fundamen- tal principle was but one remove from atheism. But around this starting point they piled up a gigantic mass of fables, speculations, and superstitions. In the account which we have thus given of Hin- du, theology, we have followed neither the earliest nor latest Hindu writings. In the Vedas — the most ancient of which, according to Sir W. Jones and other orientalists, Avas written more than fifteen hundred years before the Christian era — the the- ology of the Hindus is not fully developed. But in Menu, it is presented in a matured state, and yet free from the corruptions of modern times. In the Vedas, too, we find the germ of those errors which afterward grew into such gigantic proportions. Pro- fessor Wilson says, that the fundamental doctrine of 200 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. the Vedas is monotheism, but that the titles and functions given to the deities commonly addressed in these invocations give to the religion of the Vedas the character of the worship of the elements; and it is not unlikely that it was so in its earliest and rudest condition.^ In the second hymn of the Rig- Veda there are invocations to Vayu, the god of the air; to Mitra, the sun; to Varuna, able to de- stroy; and to Indra, the god of the firmament. The theology of the Vedas is deeply tinged with pantheism, polytheism, and materialism; and the theology of 3Ienu is but the natural and inevitable development of it. In that work we have a full representation of the theological achievements of the Hindu mind. ^ Essays and Lects. on the religion of the Hindus, vol. 2, pp. 60-2. CHAPTER IV. BUDDHIST THEOLOGY. In the sixth century before the Christian era, two or three centuries after Brahminism had been estab- lished by the code of MenUy there arose a new re- ligion which set itself in opposition to the old, and for a time supplanted it as the state religion of In- dia. This was Buddhism, founded by Gotama, otherwise called Sakya Muni. This religion in some respects is very remarkable. Its success has been astonishingly great. It was for a long time the dominant faith from the Himalayas to Ceylon. After being driven out of the country of its birth, and enduring many a persecution, it continues to hold sway in almost every country of its adoption, and, if second to any other system of religion in re- spect to the number of its adherents, is second only to Christianity. Like Christianity, too, it propa- gated itself by persuasion beyond its own country, which no other systems of note have ever done. But when we consider the dogmas of this religion, we are at a loss to account for its power and suc- cess. In India, where it originated, it was a revolt against the tyranny of the Brahmins, against caste, the popular mythology, and the formalism and pro- hibitions of the old faith. It was, also, catholic in 201 202 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. spirit, addressing itself alike to all classes and ranks. So far, it was likely to recommend itself to the Hin- dus, tired of the restrictions and burdens of Brah- minism. But the affirmative tenets of Buddhism are such as, we would suppose, would make it re- pulsive to all men in whom the natural instinct of religion was not utterly destroyed. Buddhism is but another name for atheism. In- credible as it may at first appear, that a system which denies the doctrine on which all religion is founded, should number so large a portion of man- kind among its firm and devoted adherents, it is de- clared by those most competent to decide, that Sa- kya-Muni denied or ignored the existence of God. Such is the testimony of Burnouf, Miiller, and others. The first of these writers says, Sakya never spoke of God, and held that there is no God.^ Mdl- ier says, that he denied the existence not only of a Creator, but of any Absolute Being.^ Sakya also denied the existence of a real world. He main- tained that there is no objective reality; nothing real but the human soul. He taught that men should seek the annihilation of their souls; that absolute nothingness is the only thing desirable. According to his metaphysical tenets, there is no reality anywhere, either in the past or future; and true wisdom consists in perceiving that the whole world is an illusion, and in desiring to become noth- ing. Since he denied, or at least ignored, the exist- ence of God, he of course did not recognize any such ^ Introduction a 1' Histoirc du Buddhisme, p. 520. ' Chips from a German Workshop, vol. 1, p. 227. BUDDHIST THEOLOGY. 203 thino^ as a divine law. Tlie idea of moral oblioation did not enter into his system. He taught, not that sin is to be abhorred as a transgression or pollution, but that it is to be feared and shunned as a misfor- tune. Sin was supposed to originate in affection, attachment, and desire; and salvation to be attained by the deliverance of the soul from them. But this deliverance of the soul from all feeling and desire, it was thought, could only be effected by its annihi- lation. It seems almost incredible that such a faith should be received by vast multitudes of the human race. Yet the testimony of Buddhist scholars^ does not permit us to doubt that by the entrance of the soul into Nirvana, the heaven of the Buddhists, was meant the total extinction of being. The idea that Nirvana was understood by Buddha and his dis- ciples to be a state of apathy or rest must be aban- doned. *The Buddhist can discover no permanent rest, no eternity of peace, in any world; and he therefore concludes that there can be no deliverance from change and sorrow but by the cessation of ex- istence.^^ Buddhism embraced the doctrine of the transmi- gration of souls. Men who did not attain to holi- ness in this life were not allowed to enter Nirvana at death, but were doomed to a prolonged existence. The means prescribed for the attainment of holiness and annihilation were much better than the Budd- hist tenets would lead us to expect. Buddha laid down ^Four verities;' the first of which asserts the ^ Burnouf, Hardy, and Miiller. ^ Hardy's Manual of Buddhism, p. 508. 204 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. existence of pain; the second asserts that pain origi- nates in sin; the third asserts that pain may cease by Nirvana; the fourth shpws the way to Nirvana. This way to Nirvana consists in eight things; right faith (orthodoxy), right judgment (logic), right lan- guage (veracity), right purpose (honesty), right practice (religious life), right obedience (lawful life), right memory, and right meditation.^ The moral- ity taught in connection with the fourth Verity,' though much inferior to the Christian morality, ap- pears more excellent than all the other systems that have prevailed among men. Yet this morality was deeply tinged with the religious, or rather unre- ligious, metaphysics of Buddhism. Morality was to be practised, not as in itself good or as leading to happiness, but as a self-denial and as the means of self-annihilation. Virtue was defined as that which helped a man to cr^oss to the other shore; and that other shore was the utter extinction of existence. Charity, even, was to be practised in a spirit of self-sacrifice. It is reported that Buddha, when he saw a tigress with her cubs nearly starved, offered his body as a charitable oblation, to be devoured by them. He and his disciples adopted the life of men- dicants. Celibacy and poverty were required of those who embraced a religious life. They were re- quired to dress in rags gathered from cemeteries, and to beg their food. They were to live in forests, and to have no shelter but the shadow of a tree. They were forbidden to lie down even in sleep; and ^ Chips from a German Workshop, vol. 1, p. 247. BUDDHIST THEOLOGY. 205 the only change allowed was their spending some nights in the cemeteries, to meditate on the vanity of all things. This asceticism was the natural result of the belief, that everything objective is unreal; and that all aifections, feelings, and attachments are to be eradicated and destroyed. Actuated by such a belief, the Buddhist arrived at the logical conclusion that the destruction of all thought, consciousness, and even existence, is to be sought after as the greatest good. Truly, as Prof. Miiller says, such a religion is fit only for a mad-house. The theoreti- cal part of it could neither be believed nor under- stood by more than a few, if by any, of those who called themselves Buddhists. Instinctively, and per- haps unconsciously, they would in their own minds reject it. A religion without a God is impossible. He who taught that there is no God, was himself deified and worshipped by multitudes of his follow- ers. Buddhism soon became the worship of Budd- ha; and the greatest merit was supposed to be acquired by offering him presents. Instead of re- garding him as a non-entity after death, according to his own teachings, the Buddhists honored him with prayers and offerings as the Lord of all life and power. Buddhism as a metaphysical system is an anomaly, a contradiction, and a madness. It is in reality not a theology, for it denied the existence of God. It denied the existence of the objective world, with all its changes, misfortunes, and sorrows; and yet it taught that to be emancipated from them the hu- man soul must shrink into annihilation. It asserted 18 206 TflEOLOGICAI. EXCELLENCE. that sin is the cause of all pain ; and yet denied that in sin there is any demerit or pollution. It com- mended charity, and even encouraged men to relieve starving brutes by making oblations of their own bodies; and yet maintained that all thought and feeling, all love as well as aversion, must be sup- pressed and destroyed as pernicious. It seemingly set itself in opposition to the common sense, the re- ligious feelings and instinctive hopes of men, by asserting that external things exist only in human thought, by denying the existence of God, and by teaching that the only thing to be hoped for by men is to be blown out of existence like a candle; yet its success and influence are exceeded only by those of Christianity. What is the secret of that success and influence? Its revolt against the sacerdotal tyranny of the Brahmins, its rejection of their grievous pro- hibitions and requirements, and its setting aside the distinctions of caste, might indeed recommend it to the people of India, but could be of no advantage to it in countries where Brahminism never existed. Its recognition of human sinfulness, and its pro- posed remedy — human merit, and the making of one's-self good by the mortification of evil desire and the performance of external duties — fall in with the prevailing ideas and inclinations of mankind. But, doubtless, the changes introduced into Budd- hism after its first success on its native soil were the main causes of its continued growth and increasing power. Sakya Muni became a god to his followers, and his Nirvana became a place of peace and rest. Thus his system was stripped of the doctrines which BUDDHIST THEOLOGY. 207 outraged the natural and religious feelings and in- stincts of men; and became adapted to the igno- rance, prejudices, and tastes of the peoples among whom it has flourished. Among the more culti- vated people of India, where it originated and gain- ed its first success, it was discarded; and the old religion with its millions of gods, confused myth- ology, and absurd speculations, was re-established in its place. CHAPTER V. THE THEOLOGY OF THE ANCIENT PERSIANS. Among the oldest theologies known among men is that of the ancient Persians. The writings in which it is embodied are supposed by many to be contemporary with the Vedas, and older than the oldest books of the Bible. For our knowledge of these ancient writings and the theology which they contain, we are mainly indebted to the translation of the Avesta by Dr. Spiegel of Germany.^ We shall take little notice of the changes that may have taken place in the religious belief and practices of the Persians from age to age. Doubtless there are evidences of an earlier and later belief to be discovered, as the translator asserts, in the books which he has given to tlie world under the name of 'Avesta, the sacred writings of the Parsees.' But during the whole time covered by this motley collec- tion of hymns, laws, prayers, ritual prescriptions, and moral precepts, the Persian theology remained substantially the same. The ancient Persians, like most other nations, recognized the existence of a supreme Deity. It is * Avesta, die heiligen Scliriften der Parsen, aus dem Grund- texte ubcrsctzt, mit steter Riicksicbt auf die tradition, von Dr. F. Spiegel ; Leipzig. 208 PERSIAN THEOLOGY. 209 pleasing to find that in their sacred writings he is denominated the greatest and best of beings, the holy Spirit, the creator of the earth and all good things; and that to Him are ascribed the kingdom, the might, and the power.^ This ancient people were also taugbt that the soul of man is immortal, and that there is a future state of rewards and pun- ishments. They had a fable about a bridge, called Chinvat, connecting the present and the future world, at which the souls of the dead were supposed to be examined with regard to their past conduct.^ Paradise was promised as a reward to the meritori- ous. Even the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is brought to view in some of their writings, though Spiegel thinks that it was unknown among them at the time the Vendidad, supposed to be one of their oldest books, was written.^ Yet the theology taught by Zarathustra (Zoroas- ter) or attributed to him, embraced many gross and superstitious errors. He taught that there are two creators; Ahura-Mazda (Orrauzd), the creator of good things, and Agra-mainyus (Ahriman), the god of evil. This doctrine of two independent and op- posing deities runs through the entire Avesta. It is to this dualism of the Zarathustric theology that Isaiah the Hebrew prophet alludes, when, in speak- ing of the mission and success of Cyrus the Persian king, he represents Jehovah as declaring that himself alone possesses Diety, and exercises control over both the kingdoms of good and evil: — ^I am the lord, ^Yacna, 36-37. ^ y^jj^jj^jad, 19: 96. »Ven. 18: 110, and 19: 89, note. 18* 210 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLEI^CE. and there is none else; I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil; I the lord do all these things/^ This fundamental error of a duality of gods is the starting point of many other errors. Those who be- lieved in two gods were likely to invent many more. Accordingly we find that Ahura-Mazda, the god of c/oodness, is represented as having sons and daugh- ters, and as being assisted by many inferior deities, called Amesha-cpentas, in the creation and govern- ment of his portion of the universe. These assist- ants of the god of goodness are represented as di- vided into several classes, terrestrial and celestial, male and female, as belonging to different ranks, and possessing unequal powers. Ahura-mazda is only the highest Genius, the chief Divinity, the first of the Amesha-cpentas. There are six others ; Vo- humano, the protector of living creatures; Asha- vahista, the genius^ of fire; Khshathra-vairya, the god of metals; Cpenta-Armaiti, the goddess of the earth and of wisdom; Haurvat, the lord of waters; and, Amereatt, the lord of trees.^ Fire is declared to be the son of God; the earth his daughter. Fire is said to have descendants among the genii or demons, called Yazatas.^ These imaginary beings, called Amesha-cpentas, including Ahura-mazda, were re- garded as the creators and rulers of the world. The Yacna declares that 'the wise Amesha-cpentas have formed all thin^s.'^ In like manner, Agra-mainyus was regarded as a ^ Is. 45 : 6-7. ^ Yacna, 1 : 5, note. » Vis. 19: 2. *Yac.44: 1. PERSIAN THEOLOGY. 211 creator, and as having a multitude of genii or de- mons, called Daevas, under his control. He is the Daeva of the Daevas, the ddef of the devil-gods^ who are worshipped and served by bad men, but who annoy the good, and oppose the god of light and goodness. They labor incessantly to thwart the plans of Ahura-mazda and his assistant Amesha- cpentas. If the Amesha-cpentas send rain and fruitful seasons; the Daevas send drought, cold, or scorching heat. If the former create rivers, lakes, and fertile plains; the latter create deserts, stagnant pools, and barren hills. If the former create horses, cows, dogs, and other useful animals; the latter cre- ate wasps, snakes, wolves, hyenas, and other noxious animals. If the former encourage honesty, justice, industry, and all good deeds; the latter introduce lying, indolence, poverty, disease, theft, murder, and everything pernicious and wicked.^ Every- thing good in creation and providence from Ahura- mazda and his Amesha-cpentas has its evil counter- part from Agra-mainyus and his Daevas. Even the creation of man is a partnership of Good and Evil; his soul being formed by the good Deity, and his body by the devil-gods of Agra-mainyus.^ The theology of the ancient Persians embraced not only polytheism, but also materialism. Ahura- mazda and the other good Deities, were regarded not as pure spirits, but as corporeal beings. In the Zarathustric system, fire was the son of the supreme Amesha-cpenta; earth his fair daughter.^ He who 1 Ven. 1: 1-81. ^ Ven. 9: 69. ^ Ven. 9: 45-6. 212 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. was thought to liave begotten material things from himself, must have been regarded as being a ma- terial substance. Accordingly 'a body, the fairest of all bodies, is ascribed to him;'^ and material ob- jects were worshipped as the offspring of the Most High, and as partakers of his divinity. Herodotus informs us that it was the custom of the ancient Persians to offer on the summits of mountains sacri- fices to Jupiter, designating by that name all the expanse of the firmament; and that they adored also the sun, moon, earth, fire, water, and winds, — which were their original deities.^ The correctness of this testimony has been called in question. Gib- bon declares that Herodotus was led by ^the true spirit of a polytheist' falsely to accuse the Persians of deifying natural objects ; and that these were re- garded by them merely as symbols of divinity, but were not worshipped as gods.^ But the old histo- rian declares that he speaks from personal observa- tion and positive knowledge;* and the researches of modern scholarship prove his account to be correct. Gibbon derived his knowledge of the Persian relig- ion from the French translation of the Avesta by M. d' Anquetil. But the more correct translation of the Avesta recently published in Germany de- monstrates, that the ancient Persians were the wor- shippers of natural objects. The sun, moon, stars, firmament, air, earth, waters, winds, trees, and other material things, are expressly mentioned as objects of veneration. We present some extracts from the ^ Yacna, 36 : 14. ^ B. 1 : 131. ^ Decline and fall, ch. 8. *B. 1: 13,140. PEESIAN THEOLOGY. 213 Yacna, which, though translated from a translation, are sufficiently accurate, we trust to give a proper idea of the polytheistic and pantheistic materialism embraced in the Zarathustric theology. *The Creator, Ahura-mazda, we praise. The Mithra, who possesses wide pastures, a thousand ears, ten thousand eyes, who has a renowned name, and adorable, we praise. ^The Asha-vahista (genius of fire) and Fire, the son of Ahura-mazda, we praise. ^The water, created by Mazda, we praise. 'The Ahura and Mithra (sun), the two great, im- perishable, pure (beings), we praise; and the Stars, and the Moon, the Sun, the Trees, the Mithra, the Lord of all regions, we praise. 'Thee, the Fire, the son of Ahura-mazda, the pure, the Lord of the Pure, we praise, together with all fires. ^ ' These Waters, Regions, Trees, we praise. ' These Places, Spaces, Pastures, Dwellings, and Fountains, we praise. This Lord of the places, the Ahura- mazda, we praise.^^ When the ancient Persian presented offerings to his gods, he made the following declaration: 'With purification, I present offerings to these Places, Spaces, Pastures, Dwellings, Fountains, Waters, Re- gions, Trees; to this Earth, to this Heaven, to the Winds, the Stars, the Moon, the Sun, to the Lights without beginning, the self-created, to all the crea- tures of Cpenta-mainyus, the pure — male and fe- 1 Yacna, 6:1,6, 10, 36, 39, 49. 214 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. male — to the Lords of the Pure.'^ In the chapters from which the above extracts are given, the wor- shipi^er is represented giving praise and olferings to the sun, moon, stars, winds, waters, trees, and all kinds of material and inanimate things; as well as to the Amesha-cpentas, genii, demons and spirits. Never have we found in any writings a more com- plete identification of Deity with material things than in this old Zarathustric ritual. The only par- allel to it is found in the theologies of the ancient Egyptians and Hindus. Like them, the Persians working out the pantheistic and polytheistic ideas, deified all kinds of material objects, and came in the end to regard the Almighty Spirit as possessing cor- poreal substance; and as differing only in degree, not in kind, from the beings and things wdiich com- pose the universe. But the writings attributed to Zarathustra, teach the worship of men, as w^ell as of iimiginary beings and material substances. Again and again, are the souls of the departed addressed as objects of praise and invocation. They are worshipped under the name of Fravashis? Even living men and women receive divine honors: — *The women, the good god- desses, who proceed from the good Father, the well- grown, I invoke with praise.'^ Zarathustra is wor- shipped as second only to the Most High: — ^Here by means of the Zaothra and Berecma, I invoke with praise thee, Ahura-mazda, the heavenly Lord, tlic Lord and Master of heavenly creatures, of the ^Yacna, 7: 50. ^Yac.G: 17,54,26: 11-35. ^Vispered, 2: 17. PERSIAN THEOLOGY. 215 heavenly creation. * * Here, by means of the Zaothra and the Berecma, I invoke with praise,, thee, Zarathiistra, the holy, earthly Lord, the Lord and Master of the earthly creatures, of the earthly creation/^ One of the worst features of the Persian theology was its inculcation of the worship of fabulous and monstrous beings. Mithra, the god of light, was represented as having a thousand ears and ten thou- sand eyes.^ Doubtless his many ears and eyes were at first symbolic of his office and character; but doubtless also by such symbolic representations idolatry and polytheism wxre originated and spread abroad. Often is Uhe navel of the waters' men- tioned as an object of adoration. By this was meant a fabulous chain of mountains, which, according to the Persian cosmology, girdled the whole earth.^ Also, according to the Persian mythology, there was at first a solitary Bull in the world, who was killed by Agra-mainyus. After his death, useful kinds of grain were formed from his body; and his soul ascended to heaven, where it lamented that the world was without protection against the corrupt- ing influences of Agra-mainyus, until the Fravashi (spirit) of Zarathustra was shown to it, whereupon it was comforted. This fabulous animal is often mentioned in the Avesta as the object of religious worship. Both his body and soul are represented as worthy of veneration. Praises are ascribed to him as to a god.^ 1 Vis. 2 : 4, 7. ^ yac. 1:9. » yac. 1 : 15, note. *Yac. 1: Q,note. Vis. 10: 23. 216 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. Another fabulous animal, celebrated in the Zara- thustric writings, is the ass standing in the middle of the sea of Vouru -Kasha. This sea is a fabulous reservoir of pure water, frequently mentioned as the object of adoration along with fire, the firmament, and Ahura-mazda himself.^ This ass was repre- sented in the later mythology as being three-legged. Divine honors are ascribed to him : — ' The pure Ass, that stands in the middle of the sea of Youru-Kasha, we praise.'^ In addition to the worship of fabulous and mon- strous beings, the ancient Persians were led by their theology to perform absurd ceremonies for exorcism and purification. They were taught to believe that Agra-mainyus, the chief of the devil-gods, and some- times called the Serpent, introduced death into the world, as well as other evils. He is represented as employing his Daevas to kill men; and a class of them, called the Drukhs Xacus were supposed to take possession of men's bodies. To drive them out, a tedious process was necessary. They were driven from one part to another by the application of water. It would seem that the Daevas, which infested human bodies, like mad-dogs dreaded water. The water was first poured on the forehead. The process is described by questions and answers, recorded as a conversation between Zarathustra and Ahura-mazda, as follows; 'Creator! When the good water comjs on his forehead, whither rushes then this Drukhs Nacus? Whereupon Ahura-maz- iVis. 8: 18-20. Yac. 07: 14. ^ Yacna, 41: 28, note. PERSIAN THEOLOGY. 217 da answered, Between the eye-brows of this man rushes this Drukhs Nacus. — Creator ! When the good water comes between the eye-brows of this man, Avhither rushes then this Drukhs Nacus? Whereupon Ahura-mazda answered, To tiie back of his head. — Creator ! When tlie good water comes on the back of his head, whither rushes then this Drukhs Nacus? Whereupon Ahura-mazda answer- ed. To his cheek rushes this Drukhs Nacus.' By a continuance of these monotonous questions and an- swers, we are informed how the evil spirit is to be driven from the cheek to the right ear; from the right ear to the left ear; from the left ear to the right shoulder; to the left shoulder; to the upper breast; to the back; to the right nipple; to the left nipple; to the right rib; to the left rib; to the right hip; to the left hip; to the lower part of the body; to the right thigh; to the left thigh; right knee; left knse; right shin bone; left shin bone; right foot; left foot; right knuckle; left knuckle; sole of the right foot. Then the process is as follows: 'With the toes turned down and the heels raised up, sprinkle the sole of his right foot. Then this Drukhs Nacus rushes to the sole of the left foot. Then moisten his left sole, and this Drukhs Nacus will be pressed back under the toes like the wing of a gnat. With the heels turned down and the toes raised up, sprinkle his right toes. Then this Drukhs Nacus rushes to his left toes. Sprinkle his left toes. Then will this Drukhs Nacus be driven back to the northern regions, in the form of a fly.'^ ^Ven. 8: 131-228. 19 218 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. We present those extracts, tedious as they are, because they show what absurd and superstitious ideas abound in the Zarathustric books. The fact that these questions and answers, continued with tiresome iteration throughout many pages, and characterized by childishness, were supposed by the ancient Persians to have been an actual conversation between the Creator and Zarathustra, shows how low and erroneous were their theological ideas. We call attention to one other feature of this ancient theology — the absurdity of its penances and atonements. In the Zarathustric ritual these occupy a prominent place. As specimens we present the following. For giving bad food to a village dog (dogs are much honored in the Avesta), the trans- gressor was required to make atonement by receiv- ing ^on his sinful body' ninety strokes of the horse- goad and ninety of the Craosho-charana. For giving bad food to a cattle dog, the atonement was heavier, — two hundred strokes of the horse-goad, and two hundred of tlie Craosho-charana.^ The punishment for injuring a cattle dog so as ^to di- minish his life-power,' ^vas eight hundred strokes with the horse-goad, and the same number with the Craosho-charana. The punishment for injuring a village dog was not quite so severe, — seven hundred strokes with each of these instruments.^ But for hiUing either a cattle or a village dog, there was no expiation. It is declared concerning the perpetrator of this crime, Miis soul goes, full of horror, and dis- ^Ven. 13: G3-G8. M3: 38-47. PERSIAN THEOLOGY. 219 eased, from this our world to the unearthly/^ For killing a water animal which seems to have been re- garded as a species of dog, and which, according to the fabulous account recognized in the Vendidad, was produced from *a thousand female and a thou- sand male dogs,' a stupendous atonement was re- quired. The transgressor was required to provide ten thousand loads of hard wood, well-hewed and well-dried, for the fire of Ahura-mazda, and ten thousand loads of soft wood for the same purpose; to bind ten thousand bundles for Berecma; to pre- pare teu thousand Zaothras of Haoma and flesh ; to kill ten thousand reptiles which glide along on the earth, and ten thousand ^ which have the bodies of dogs;' to kill ten thousand turtles, ten thousand land lizards, ten thousand water lizards, ten thou- sand ants which ^ carry away the grains of corn,' ten thousand ants which lead 'a mischievous course,' ten thousand mice which live in the dirt, and ten thousand mischievous gnats. He was further re- quired to fill ten thousand impure holes in the earth, and to devote twice seven instruments, axe, hammer, etc, for the expiation of his soul. All this was required as an atonement for killing an animal, perhaps a beaver or a muskrat, to which was attrib- uted a fabulous origin.^ For the purification of the body in a certain case of constructive defilement, a man was required to slaughter a thousand small cattle and the small cattle of all the herds, as an offering; to bring ^Ven. 13: 22. ^14: 1-54. 220 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLE^CE. water; to furnish a thousand loads of hard dry wood and a thousand loads of soft wood; to bind a thousand bundles for Berecma; to offer a thousand Zaothras with Haoma and flesh; to kill a thousand gliding reptiles, two thousand reptiles of another kind, a thousand land lizards, two thousand water lizards, a thousand ants that drag away the corn and two thousand ants of another kind; to build thirty bridges over streams of running water, and to receive a thousand strokes with the horse-goad and a thousand with the Craosho-charana.^ " The purification of fire, waters, trees, cattle, dwellings, men, women, the earth, stars, moon, sun, light, and all good things created by Ahura-mazda, was by the repetition of certain prayers.^ But in some cases the prayers were accompanied by rites of such a character that we must pass them over in silence. The Persian theology may be summed up as fol- lows: 1. The doctrine of a supreme Being ; the immor- tality of the soul, not however to the exclusion of the annihilation of the souls of wricked men; future re- wards and punishments ; and the resurrection of the dead. Probably the resurrection of the dead and the annihilation of the wicked were not taught by Zarathustra, but became known to the Persians after his time. But the doctrine of a supreme Being, Ahura-mazda, greatest, wisest, and most powerful, is prominent throughout the Avesta. 2. Polytlieism. Besides Ahura-mazda the god of »Ven. 18: 136-152. Ul: 6-41. PERSIAN THEOLOGY. 221 goodness, and Agra-mainyus, the god of evil, six good deities, assistants of the former, were recog- nized. In addition to these six principal assistants of Ahura-mazda, a vast crowd of inferior deities — Amesha-cpentas, Yazatas, Fravashis, spirits, de- mons, genii, beings celestial and terrestrial, visible and invisible, male and female — are represented as sharing with Ahura-mazda in the creation and do- minion of the world, and as the objects of worship. 3. Panthelst'iG materialism. Ahura-mazda, thous^h called the holy Spirit, is represented as a corporeal being, as having wives and begetting children. The sun, the earth, fire, light, and other material things, are declared to be his offspring. The an- cient Persians deified not only imaginary beings, human spirits, and the heavenly bodies; but also the earth, waters, winds, trees, metals, and all kinds of material things. In their worship, they scarcely distinguished between the Creator and the creation. They materialized the one, and deified the other. 4. Man-worship. Zarathustra was worshipped as a god. The souls of the departed received divine honors. Some of Hhe good goddesses^ were women. 5. The worship of fabulous and monstrous animals. 6. Absurd and outlandish rites and penances for the exorcism of evil spirits, the purification of the body, and the expiation of sin. Such is the Zarathustric theology — a theology which exerted a powerful influence for centuries over a large portion of mankind. It contained some truth, as does every system of error. But it was made up mainly of fable, speculation, and ab- 19* 222 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. surdity. It prevailed only among the people among whom it originated; and like most systems of reli- gions error, it was destined to perish on the soil that gave it birth. It had in it but little to elevate and purity, but much to degrade and debase, the minds and hearts of men. CHAPTER VI. CHINESE THEOLOGY. Three systems of religion have been prevalent in China — Buddhism, Tauisra, and Confucianism. Buddhism, which was introduced from India, was established as a third state religion about the middle of the first century. Tauism was indige- nous, and sprung up before the introduction of Buddhism. Confucianism is older than either; its doctrines and worship having existed long before the birth of the man after whom it is named. This is the national religion of China. Confucius, though regarded as the founder of a religion, was not an in- novator. He declared himself to be a transmitter, not a maker; one who believed in and loved the ancients. He was conservative in his tendencies, and talked much about the rules of propriety estab- lished by ancient sages. He was the great man of the Chinese; their theological as well as moral in- structor. The theology of China is Confucian. It appears that the monotheistic belief prevailed among tlie Chinese in very early times. At least, the doctrine of a personal God was a part of the faith of their earlier sages. In the She-King, a book composed before Confucius' time, but compiled 223 224 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. by him/ the Creator and ruler of the universe is represented hv a personal name. He there appears as a personal being, ruling in heaven and on earth, the author of man's moral nature, the governor among the nations, the rewarder of the good and the punisher of the.bad.^ But in the Chinese theology as presented by Con- fucius, the personality of God is discarded. In his Analects he does not once designate the Supreme Being by a personal name. He preferred to speak of Heaven. Pie spoke of praying to Heaven instead of to God, and of men offending against Heaven instead of against God. In thus discarding the Divine personality and confounding him with the works of his hands, Confucius gave occasion to his followers to identify him with a principle of reason and the course of nature, and prepared the way for atheistic speculations in modern times. Dr. Legge expresses the opinion that he did not consciously and designedly make any change in the ancient creed of China; that he was itiireligious rather than irreli- gious; and that owing to his coldness in religion, rather than to his positive teachings, his influence is unfavorable to the development of true religious feeling among the Chinese people. But be this as it may, their theology, as expounded by their greatest teacher, is, to say the least, indistinct and hesitating in its utterance of the fundamental truth of all reli- gion— the existence of God. The Chinese theology was tinged with pantheism ^ Chips from a German "Workshop, vol. 1, p. 304. ^ Leggc's Confucius, p. 100. CHINESE THEOLOGY. 225 and polytheism. The rejection of the personal name of God indicates a pantheistic tendency. The wor- ship of Heaven was substituted for the worship of the Almighty living Creator. The Chinese oiFered sacrifices both to Heaven and Earth. They regarded the worship of ancestors as a religious duty. Their ritual provided for sacrifices to three classes of ob- jects— ^Spirits of heaven, of earth, of men.'^ The worship of departed ancestors and of spiritual beings existed in China from the earliest historical times. This practice Confucius approved and followed. ^He sacrificed to the dead, as if they were present. He sacrificed to the spirits, as if the spirits were present.'^ This worshipping of departed ancestors was originally founded on a belief in their continued existence. Those w^ho instituted it certainly did not think that all conscious being ceases with life. But Confucius never spoke explicitly on this subject. When questioned in regard to it, he said; 'While you do not know life, how can you know death?' He enforced the worship of the dead, without recog- nizing the faith from which it sprung.^ His exam- ple and teachings in reference to this matter have led many of his followers to deny the existence of any spirit at all, and to regard their own sacrifices to the dead as a mere outward form, expressive of filial regard. The spirit and tendency of Chinese theology, are indicated by the worship given to Con- fucius himself. Soon after his death, a temple was erected, in which sacrifices were offered to the de- ^ Legge's Confucius, p. 127. ' p. 130. ^ p. 101. 226 TflEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. parted sage at the four seasons of the year. Emper- ors visited his tomb and oifered sacrifices to him. In the year A. D. 57, it was enacted that sacrifices should be offered to him in the imperial college and in all the colleges of the principal territorial divis- ions of the empire. About the same time began the custom of erecting temples to him in connection with all the colleges of the country. In these temples his image is kept. On the first day of every month offerings of fruits and vegetables are presented; and on the fifteenth there is a solemn burning of incense. Twice a year the worship of Confucius is performed with peculiar solemnity. At the imperial college, the emperor is required to attend in state, and is the principal performer. After kneeling twice and bow- ing his head six times to the earth, he invokes the presence of Confucius' spirit. Then, his spirit being present, as is supposed, sacrifices are offered, and a prayer is addressed to him as a * Teacher equal in virtue to Heaven and Earth. ^ Of this homage Dr. Legge says, it is complete; and that it is worship, and not mere homage.^ The Chinese theology may be summed up as follows: 1. The doctrine of a Supreme Beings held from the earliest times and never entirely abandoned. 2. The deification and worship of spirits — beings resi- dent in heaven and earth, who were supposed to be superior to men, and to watch over their affairs. 3. Man-worship — the paying of divine honors to the ip. 93. CHINESE THEOLOGY. 227 dead, and the deification of Confucius himself. 4. All element of pantheism y j)olytheism, and yaateriaUsm ; manifested in discarding the personal name of God, setting aside His personality, offering sacrifices to Heaven and Earth as to the Creator, the identifica- tion of Him with a principle of reason, and the giving of the worship to spirits, to Confucius, and other dead men, that is due to God alone. 5. For- mality— worship maintained as a mere ceremony and show — divine honors paid to deceased ancestors after all faith in the existence of human souls after death, and in the existence of spirits at all, had ceased. 6. We have an exemplification of the spirit and tendency of the Chinese theology in the religious or rather unrellgious character and conduct of Confu- cius— cold, sceptical, and formal; a punctilious ob- server of ancient ceremonies and customs; and en- couraging such ideas and practices as led to his own worship as a god, and to his receiving the honor which is due only to the God of heaven. There is much that is absurd, ridiculous, and dis- gusting in the Egyptian, Hindu, and Persian reli- gions; but we doubt whether they contained any- thing so pernicious as the formality, insincerity, and scepticism embraced in the theology and worship of the Chinese. CHAPTER VII. THE GRECIAN THEOLOGY. The theology of the ancient Greeks may be con- sidered in three aspects; poetic, civil, and philo- sophical. 1. The theology of the poets. The Grecian poets were the religious instructors of the people. Their writings embody the popular theology. As is well known, this was polytheistic. The poets, in accord- ance with the popular belief, celebrated the praises of a vast crowd of gods and goddesses; heavenly, earthly, marine, and infernal — superior and infe- rior— Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, Neptune, Pluto, Vul- can, Juno, Minerva, Venus, Diana, and many others. Hesiod, w4io is perhaps the most ancient of the Grecian poets, speaks of the immortal gods, sub- ject to Jupiter, and guardians of men, as being in number thirty thousand} These imaginary beings, called gods, arc represented as possessing corporeal forms and human passions; as wrangling, quarrel- ling, and fighting with one another; as marrying, and begetting offspring; and as committing tlie sins and crimes that are common among men. Ho- mer, Hesiod, and all the Grecian poets, in their ac- counts of the gods, speak of their intrigues, amours, ^ Oper. et Dicr. 1 : 250. 228 GRECIAN THEOLOGY. 229 wratli, dissensions, drunkenness, adulteries, seduc- tions, falsehood, theft, hypocrisies, feasts, births, marriages, combats, wounds, murders, and beastly vices. According to the poetic and popular my- thology, Jupiter, the chief god, was a selfish tyrant and an adulterous ravisher; Juno, his wife and sister, the queen of heaven, was proud, cruel, re- vengeful, ambitious, and jealous; Apollo, the son of Jupiter by an adulterous intrigue, and the god of medicine and of the fine arts, was a plausible and handsome seducer; Venus, the goddess of beauty and love, was the patroness of prostitutes and adul- terers, and the promoter of lewd desires and de- baucheries. These were among the chief gods cele- brated by the Grecian poets, and worshipped by the common people. Though they did not deify the elements and objects of nature to the same extent as the ancient Egyptians, Hindus, and Persians, their theology was more debasing and devilish. *Tlie- elegant mythology- of the Greeks,' and partly be- cause it was elegant, had a seductive power. The imaginary beings celebrated as gods in the Grecian poetry, with their human passions and vices, were far more attractive and corrupting than the ram- headed Ammon, the ibis-headed Thoth, and Athor with a human face and ears of a cow, that were worshipped by the ancient Egyptians; or than the elements and powers of nature, and the fabulous monsters, that were worshipped by the Hindus and Persians. 2. The civil theology of the Greeks was founded on the mythology of the poets, who but reflected 20 230 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. the belief of the common people. The laws did not, of course, sanction all that the poets imagined and wrote; but they recognized the whole 'rabble of gods,' superior and inferior, supernal and infernal, male and female, that figure so largely in Grecian poetry, and were worshipped by the Grecian people. No new god and no new mode of worship could be introduced without the previous sanction of the magistrates. One of the laws of Draco required the Athenians 'always to pay due homage in public towards their gods and native heroes, according to the usual customs of their country.'^ Socrates was charged with atheism because he did not worship the gods of his country. Plato was forced to dis- semble his religious sentiments in order to escape being called to account by the court of the Areopa- gites. Paul was tried by this court on the charge of being *a setter forth of strange gods.' In short, the civil laws established the poetic mythology, and the popular worship, as the religion of the country. 3. The theology o^ the philoso2:>he}'s was contradic- tory and absurd, and on the whole was no better than the mythology of the poets. Anaximander maintained that the gods are born and die like men. Naximenes taught that the air is God, that he was ])r()duced by generation, and though immense and infinite, is always in motion. Alcma^on of Crotona attributed divinity to the sun, raoun, and stars; and also to the human mind. Pythagoras supposed the Deity to be a soul mixing with and pervading all » Potter's Grcc. Aiitiq., pp. 94, 130-1. GRECIAN THEOLOGY. 231 nature; and that from the divine soul human souls are taken. Xenophanes asserted that everything in the world, including the human intellect, is God. Parmenides conceived an orb of light and heat around the heavens, which he called God. He also ascribed divinity to the stars, war, discord, and the human passions. Democritus classed men's images or conceptions of objects among the number of the gods. Xenocrates maintained that there are eight gods — five, moving planets; the sixth contained in the fixed stars taken together; the seventh, the sun; and the eighth, the moon. Heraclides maintained at one time that the ^vorld is a deity; and at another, the human mind. He ascribed divinity to the wanderino; stars. Cleanthes maintained that the world is God, that the sky is God, and that the stars are gods. Chrysippus maintained that the world is God. He deified fire, earth, water, and air. He also attributed divinity to the sun, moon, stars, and universal space.^ The theological opinions even of the most gifted and wisest of the philosophers w^ere dark, confused, and erroneous. Socrates believed in a supreme Being, but he recognized many gods besides. He defines the pious man as one who knows what is in accordance with the laws in respect to the gods, and honors the gods in accordance w^ith the laws.^ He spoke of the gods as not having bodily forms, but as manifesting their existence and power by their works. ^Therefore (said he) it behooves you not to ^ De Nat. Deor. 1; 10-15. ='Xen. Mem. 4: 6. 232 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. despise the unseen gods, but estimating tlieir power from what is done by them, to reverence what is divine.'^ He manifested his belief in a plurality of gods at the time of his death. Just before he drank the fxtal hemlock, he said; 'It is certainly both lawful and right to pray to the gods that my depart- ure may be happy; therefore I pray, and so may it be.' His last words were; 'Crito! we owe a cock to ^sculapius.'^ Such was the theological belief of the wisest and best of the Grecian philosophers. He believed, indeed, in a supreme deity. He sometimes spoke of the divinity or the divine thing. But he spoke much oftener of a plurality of gods. Unless he was guilty of falsehood and hypocrisy, he be- lieved in and prayed to many of the imaginary be- ings which his countrymen worshipped as gods. Plato also was a polytheist. He does, indeed, acknowledge one supreme Deity, whom he calls the maker, father, and architect of the universe, and the cause of all thiii2:s. But he also reco^-nizes a multi- tude of other gods. He calls the universe 'a blessed god.' He speaks of the Creator forming the chief idea of deity from fire, and distributing it round the ichole heavens. He represents the stars as eternal and divine bodies or animals, and declares the earth to be the first and most ancient of the gods that have been generated within the universe. His ])olytheistic belief is indicated by his use of the phrases 'the heavenly race of gods,' and 'the visible and generated gods.' In one place, after saying 1 Xen. Mem. 4: 3. ^ phtedo, 152, 155. GRECIAN THEOLOGY. 233 that the generation of the gods should be credited in accordance with tradition and the laws, he states that generation as follows : — ^ Ocean and Tethys were the progeny of Heaven and Earth ; and frony these sprung Phorcys, Kronos, and Rhea, and many more with them; and from Kronos and Rhea sprung Zeus, Hera, and all that we know are called their brethren; together with others still, who were their progeny. When, therefore, all such gods as visibly revolve and show themselves when they please were generated, the artificer of the universe thus addressed them : Gods of gods, of whom I am the creator and father.'^ He enjoins that there shall be three hun- dred and sixty five festivals yearly, so that there may be a sacrifice offered every day to some god or demon.^ He proposes that there shall be twelve festivals in honor of the twelve gods after whom the tribes were named. He declares that the festivals of the infernal gods must not be confounded with those of the celestial gods. He speaks of the sun and moon as the great gods.^ In the Epinomis he says, or is represented as saying,* that the things in the heavens are to be regarded as gods or as images of the gods, and are to be honored pre-eminently above statues; that the stars are visible gods, who, with a most acute sight, behold all things, and therefore are the first in rank and are the most to be honored.^ The remark of Velleius concern in cr Plato, as reported by Cicero, seems to be entirely just; viz. that Plato taught that the world, and ^ Timjfius, 16. 2 Laws, B. 8. ^ B. 7. ' Epin. 7 : 8. *The genuineness of the Epinomis has been questioned. 20* 234 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. heaven, and the stars, and earth, and souls, and tliose gods whom we have received according to the oustoras of our ancestors, are all to be regarded as gods.^ The theological opinions of Aristotle were similar to those of Plato. He recognized a supreme Being, whom he calls an eternal substance. But he speaks of other eternal substances, derived from the primary eternal substance as from a fountain. He represents the heavens and the stars as secondary eternal sub- stances, and as possessing divinity. In confirmation of this opinion, he states that ^it was traditionally reported from the earliest times and by very ancient philosophers, that the heavenly bodies are gods, and that deity comprehends the whole system of nature.'^ He rejected, however, as fabulous, the tradition that these gods subsisted in human form, or were in ap- pearance like some of the lower animals. Aristotle certainly did not believe in the Grecian mythology. He rejected the accounts of gods appearing in the forms of men and beasts. But he at least assented to the doctrine of a plurality of gods. He also as- sented, like Socrates and Plato, to some of the pantheistic and materialistic ideas which prevailed among the Grecians as well as among most other ancient nations. They both deified the universe, tlie heavenly bodies, the earth, and all kinds of ma- terial things; and they materialized the Divine nature, ascribing to their gods corporeal forms, and representing them as marrying and begetting children. ^ De Nat. Deor. 1:12. ^ Metaph. 11:8. GRECIAN THEOLOGY. 235 Such were the theological opinions of the Grecian ])hilosophers. They groped in the errors of polythe- ism, pantheism, and materialism. Whatever they may have thought of the mythology of the poets, and the religion of their countrymen, they made no effort to correct prevailing errors. They fell in with and winked at the theoloo^ical errors of their ao-e and country, or advocated errors equally absurd and per- nicious. The declaration of one of the interlocutors of Cicero, after the presentation of a synopsis of the philosophical theology of the Greeks, is perfectly just: ^Thus far I have been exposing the dreams of dotards, rather than the opinions of philosophers. Not much more absurd than these are the fables of the poets; who owe all their power to the sweet- ness of their language.'^ It is, indeed, questionable whether the theology of the philosophers or that of the poets was the more pernicious. There was much in the theology of the poets that was vile and pollu- ting, but on the whole it may have been better than hypocrisy and atheism. The speculations of the philosophers — for their theology was mere specula- tion— was good just for one thing, the destruction of whatever earnest religious belief the Grecians had. They had nothing of value to offer as a sub- stitute for the popular mythology. However inge- nious and profound speculatists some of them were, their theology was a barren, })owerless thing. In their system, God was not represented as a living, conscious Agent; nor as the Creator and Governor 1 De Nat. Deor. 1 : 16. 236 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. of the world. They denied or set aside his person- ality and moral attributes. Their divine ^princi- ples/ 'essences,' and 'substances/ their world-gods, star-gods, four-element-gods, and all their gods, being impersonal things, mere abstractions in fact, — could not be the objects of love, fear, or rever- ence; and could be worshipped only in form. The philosophical theology of the Greeks could in most minds produce only indifference, formality, scepti- cism, atheism. Vile and polluting as the popular and poetic theology in many respects was, it had for a time a deep hold on the minds of the people in general, and perhaps was not so demoralizing as atheism would have been, and hence perhaps did not produce as deplorable consequences as would have resulted from the general prevalence of the theology of the philosophers. 4. The religious worship of the Greeks consisted in processions, prayers, the singing of hymns, offer- ings of wine, fruits and flowers, and bloody sacri- fices. In addition to these modes of worship, which have been almost universally prevalent among men, the Greeks practised others that were very objection- able. Human sacrifices were not unknown among them. The story of Iphigenia and Polyxena does not prove that human beings were actually offered in sacrifice; but it shows that the projiriety of such sacrifices was at one time recognized. Themis- tocles, the Athenian general, was compelled to offer up three Persians as a sacrifice to Bacchus. Her- odotus states that human sacrifices were offered in GRECIAN THEOLOGY. 237 Achaia.^ At the altar of Diana in Sparta, boys were lashed until the blood gushed out; in some cases until they died. Whether the design was, as some assert, to honor the goddess by staining her altar with human blood, it is certain that this flog- ging of boys was practised as a religious service. In Arcadia, young damsels were beaten to death at the altar of Bacchus. Aristomanes of Messenia ofiPered in sacrifice to Jupiter three hundred men, among whom was Theopompus, king of Sparta. The Athenians yearly put to death two malefactors at the Thargelian festival, with sacrificial ceremo- nies. In this case punishment for crime was* com- bined with expiation for sin. At one period the custom prevailed, of casting every year a criminal from the Leucadian promontory, as a sacrifice to propitiate Apollo. When Alexander of Macedonia conquered the Cusseans, he slaughtered all the adults as an offering to the manes of Hephsestion; whom an oracle of Jupiter Amnion had directed him to revere as a demi-god. Other instances of human sacrifices among the Greeks might be given. From the facts stated it is evident, that such sacri- fices were regarded as acceptable to the gods. Hu- manity alone kept them from becoming commoiT. The gods themselves were supposed to be pleased with such offerings; but it was only in exceptional cases that the Greeks were willing to propitiate them at the cost of human blood. At one period human sacrifices were probably common. But ^7: 197. 238 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. during the historic period, they were only local and exceptional. Their general disuse was owing to the dictates of humanity; and their partial con- tinuance to the influence of an abominable theology. The Greeks in their religious worship also prac- tised some things that were indecent and vile. Ve- nus, the goddess of wantonness, was worshi])ped in a Avay suited to her character. The rites performed in her honor were so abominable, that we must pass them over in silence. Cotytto, another goddess of wantonness, was honored with rites equally inde- cent. She was thought to be delighted with noth- ing s» much as with lewdness and debaucheries. At the festivals of Bacchus, called orgies, persons of both sexes, with garlands and comical dresses, ran hither and thither, dancing in ridiculou? postures, filling the air with hideous noises, and practising rites too indecent to be mentioned. Accordino^ to Diogenes Laertius,^ it was a saying of Plato's, that it was not proper to get drunk except at the festival of Bacchus; and he so teaches in his Laws} Be- side prayers, hymns, gifts, sacrifices, festivals, and processions, the Grecian worship consisted in revel- ings, hootings, bowlings, drunkenness, debaucheries, prostitutions, and human sacrifices. ^3: 26. =^6: 18. CHAPTER Yin. THE ROMAN THEOLOGY. The Romans adopted the theology as well as the literature of the Greeks, and hence all the religious errors that prevailed among the latter prevailed also among the former. The Romans, however, in one respect erred more egregiously than those whom they imitated. They carried the polytheistic idea farther than the Greeks, or than any other nation of whom we have any knowledge. They adopted the gods of Greece and of nearly all other countries, and invented a large number of their own. They had gods greater and less, male and female, select gods, gods celestial, earthly, and infernal, gods of the sea, gods of rivers and fountains, gods of the mountains, gods of the trees, gods of the plains, gods of the fields, gods of the gardens, tutelary gods, and household gods. They worshipped the sun, moon, stars, winds, and tempests as gods. They deified kings and heroes. They deified also the virtues and affections of the human mind; as piety, faith, friendship, and hope. They erected temples and offered sacrifices to mere abstractions; as virtue, victory, safety, and honor. They deified even diseases, passions, and vices. They worshipped certain gods that they might do them good; and 239 240 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. others that they might do them no harm. They invented a god for every power, function, attri- bute, quality, relation, habit, affection, operation; for every class of objects, actions, phenomena, and existences. They had, for instance, a god for every operation in agriculture, and for grain and fruits in every stage of growth. Ceres was the goddess of grain and tillage. Seia was the divinity of seed under ground; Proserpina, of seed germinating; Segetia, of crops above ground ; Neodotus, of the joints of stalks; Volutina, of leaves in rolls or folds; Patelana, of leaves unfolded or opened; Flora, of crops flowering; Lacturnus, of grain in a milky state; Hostilia, of crops earing; Matuta, of crops maturing; Runcina, of crops taken from the earth; Tutilina, of crops stowed away. We will not mention the gods that were supposed to super- intend the generation and birth of infants.* The prevalent ideas concerning delicacy make it im- proper for us to do so. Vatlcanus was the God of the first crying of infants. He was supposed to open their mouths in crying. Immediately after the birth of an infant, it was laid on the ground. If the father acknowledged it, he took it up. His refusal to take it up was equivalent to repudiation, and it was killed or exposed. Lcvana was the god- dess of this taking-up of infants. Rumina was the goddess of milk for infants; Potina, of potions for them; Educa^ of food; Paventla was the goddess of their fears; Stimula stimulated them; Agenoria en- *The learned reader will find a discussion of these matters in Augustine's De Civitate Dei, 1. 4: 1, and 1. 7 : 2-3. ROMAN THEOLOGY. 241 abled them to act; Strenia strengthened them; Nu- meria taught them to count; Camoena to sing; Cunina was the goddess of the cradle. Other gods and goddesses had charge over children for good or ill. The goddess Juventas took charge of the boy at the age of seventeen. Fortuna Barbata furnished him with a beard. Jugutinus, ]omQA him in mar- riage to his wife. Domiducus was the god of lead- ing home a wife. Domitius kept her in the house, and Manturna kept her with her husband. The favor and assistance of other gods and goddesses were to be invoked by the husband.^ The Romans had also several money-gods. At first, when cattle was almost the only medium of exchange, they had but one, Pecunia. But as different kinds of money were introduced, they invented gods to correspond; a god of brass money, a god of copper money, and a god of silver money. They had a goddess of vaca- tion or respite from business, a god of grinding, a god of sewers, a god of bad smells, and two gods of manure. This ridiculous and monstrous god-making was not confined to the illiterate and more superstitious portion of the Roman people. Their poets, priests, prophets, and law givers concurred and assisted in it. As long as there was earnest belief in the absurd and vile system, no voice was raised against it. It was only near the commencement of the Christian era, when the Romans were beginning to lose faith in their religion, that men like Varro and Seneca ^ De Civitate Dei, 6: 9. . 21 242 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. disapproved of prevailing errors. Even they wished to reform the existing system, not to overthrow it. They even commended the theology and worship established by the civil laws, which recognized the vast crowd of gods referred to above. The efforts of Cicero, and authors of similar views, tended to destroy belief in the prevailing system, and to pro- mote indifference, formality, and atheism. They saw many of the absurdities and errors in the exist- ing religion; but they could suggest no remedy but unbelief. Dilapidated, outlandish, and monstrous as the polytheistic superstructure was; had they piled it in ruins, no graceful edifice, no building of any kind, would have taken its place. They had no building materials. They could be only 'architects of ruin.' The ruin of the old system would certain- ly have been desirable, could something better have been substituted in its place. But that was impos- sible until the introduction of Christianity. Pre- vious to that event, the choice was between the monstrosities of the polytheistic system on the one hand, and devilish atheism on the other. Since the Roman theology embraced the grossest polytheism, pantheism, and materialism, the deifi- cation of kings and heroes, the ascription to the gods of the infirmities, passions, and vices of men, and the making of gods for every profession, art, attribute, habit, affection, quality, relation, and operation, — the Roman worship could not but be characterized by formality, absurdity, and impurity. Idolatry was universal. The gods were supposed to ROMAN THEOLOGY. 243 inhabit their images, as the human soul the body.^ We have noticed the indecency of some of the reli- gious rites of the Greeks. The Romans in this respect went at least as far astray. Many obsceni- ties were practised at the festivals held in honor of the goddess Cybele. The priests used indecent ex- pressions, and performed actions suggestive of im- purity. Great indecencies were also practised at the Lupercalia, a festival celebrated in honor of Pan, the shepherd god who was represented with the horns, legs, feet, and tail of a goat. At this festi- val, youths almost naked ran about the streets with whips, and lashed all whom they met. The Flo- ralia, games in honor of the goddess of flowers, presented a scene of unbounded licentiousness. This festival was celebrated by strumpets, who ran to and fro naked, and performed indecent actions. Un- mentionable rites were performed in the worship of the god Liber.^ But the greatest abomination which the Komans practised as a religious rite, was the offering of hu- man beings in sacrifice. From the earliest times, persons guilty of certain crimes were by law, said to be the law of Romulus, devoted to Pluto and the infernal gods; and might be slain with impunity. In later times, a consul, dictator, or praetor might offer himself or any one of the legion as an expia- tory victim. Accordingly the Decii devoted them- selves in battle as sacrifices to obtain the favor of the gods; or, if they rushed among the enemy ' De Civitate Dei, 8 : 23-4. '7: 21. 244 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. merely to set an example of bravery and patriotism, the way in which the Romans regarded and repre- sented their conduct and death sliows, that there was a prevalent belief in the propriety of human sacri- fices. Plutarch informs us that at the commence- ment of one of their wars with the Gauls, the Ro- mans buried alive, in the ox-market, two Greeks, (a man and a woman), and also two Gauls.^ Livy states that they repeated the sacrifice at the begin- ning of the second Punic war.^ Human sacrifices were prohibited by a decree of the senate 95 B. C, in the 657th year after the building of Rome. Nor did they altogether cease then. About fifty years later, in the time of Julius Caesar, two men were sacrificed by the priests of Mars. Sextus Pompeius threw men, as well as horses, alive into the sea, as victims to Neptune. Augustus, after his victory over Antony at Perusia, sacrificed four hundred Roman senators and knights, or as some say three hundred, as victims on the altar of Julius C?esar. It thus ap- ])cars that human sacrifices were offered by the Ro- mans until after the introduction of Christianity. Doubtless the shedding of human blood in honor of the gods was regarded as an awful thing, and the number of victims was never large. But it appears that until near the commencement of the Christian era, when the faith of the Romans in their religion was dying out, the prevalent belief at all times among them was, that human slaughter was the most efficacious means of gaining the favor of the • In vita Marcelli. ^Lib. 22: 5.7. ROMAN THEOLOGY. 245 gods. They adopted it only as a last resort, in times of impending danger, and when great inter- ests were at stake. Hence, notwithstanding their infrequency, human sacrifices were a part of the re- ligious worship of the ancient Romans. The Roman religion was the latest and fullest de- velopment of polytheism prior to the dissemination of Christianity. The Romans, indeed, carried the business of god-making to a greater extent than any other nation of ancient or modern times. Their theology was more debasing and demoralizing than any that is known to have preceded it. It, more than any other, encouraged beastly passions and vices, and a reckless disregard of human life. We will hereafter see that, under its influence, Roman society became shamefully and shockingly corrupt. Yet amid the endless multiplication of Roman gods, and the consequent debasement of minds and morals, the true God left himself not without a witness. There are intimations of an approximation to mono- theistic belief among the Romans — references to Deity as not belonging to ^Olympus' motley rout' — as if there were an effort to break away from the polytheistic creed, and return to the worship of the one God. The dreadful errors of the Romans were in opposition to a monotheistic principle, instinct, or longing within them; as well as to the revelation in God's works around them. 2V CHAPTER IX. ARABIC THEOLOGY. The Arabic theology in its best form is contained in the Koran. Mohammed taught the unity, person- ality, and spirituality of God; his holiness, justice, and mercy; and the necessity of pure and spiritual worship. His theology is free from the monstrous errors that are brought to view in the preceding chapters. But this excellence of the Arabic the- ology is due to the Bible. Mohammed believed in the supernatural inspiration of the Old Testament, and in the divine mission of Jesus Christ. He re- fers again and again to Moses, David, and the prophets; and quotes largely from them. It is evident that whatever is good in histheology isfrom the Bible. The Koran claims to be only an addi- tional revelation to it. Mohammedism - is but an imperfect and mutilated Christianity. Carlyle says that 'at the fairs of Syria Mohammed came in con- tact with a quite foreign world — with one element of endless moment to him, the Christian Religion. * * * Islam is definable as a confused form of Christianity; had Christianity not been, neither had it been.^^ Hence, the superiority of the Moham- medan theology to the theologies considered in pre- ^ Hero-worsliip, pp. 47, 51. 246 ARABIC THEOLOGY. 247 vious chapters is but a proof of the theological excellence of the Bible. Hereafter when we speak of the errors of the world-theologies, we are not to be understood as including among them the the- ology of the Koran. We will hereafter show that Mohammed erred much more in morality than in theology. CHAPTER X. ANCIENT THEOLOGY IN GENERAL — DETERIORATION. In the theologies that have been reviewed in pre- ceding chapters, there are many traces of monothe- istic belief and worship. It seems unquestionable, that monotheism was the primitive religion of man- kind. But there has been constant deterioration. Mankind have been advancing in general knowl- edge, but until the dissemination of Christianity they constantly retrograded in theology. The con- stant tendency has been to abandon monotheism ; to break up the Deity, as it were, into separate frag- ments ; and to deify the different parts of the material creation. Believing in the Bible account of the fall of man, we of course attribute this tend- ency to the dreadful perversion thereby of his moral nature. But whatever may be the origin of this tendency, its existence is demonstrated by the his- tory of the nations that existed before the dissemi- nation of Christianity. Until the Bible began to leaven the world with its influence, the nations went deeper and deeper into polytheism, pantheism, materialism, nature-worsliij), element-worship, im- age-worship, man-worship, and beast-worship. The earlier theology of the Egyptians was more simple 248 DETERIORATION OF ANCIENT THEOLOGY. 249 and less erroneous than their later. They went on inventing imaginary gods, dividing and sub-divi- ding Deity into minute parts, and deifying the various parts of the material creation, until they made gods of beasts, birds, fishes, and reptiles. The tlieology of the Vedas is less confused and con- tradictory, less absurd and monstrous, than that of the Puranas; and many of the hideous superstitions current among the Hindus of the present age are not inculcated in the Puranas. The same progress in error is brought to view in the earlier and later writings of the Persians. The Greeks made re- markable progress in literature and art, but their theology and worship were more erroneous and in- decent in the time of Plato than in the time of Homer. The deterioration in the Koman theology was still greater. It received constant accessions from the national mythologies, and from the god- making inventions of the Romans themselves; until they became the most polytheistic, idolatrous, and morally corrupt nation known in history. Not only did every one of these theologies de- teriorate, but theology in general deteriorated. The later theologies in many respects were worse than the earlier. The Roman and Grecian theoloo^ies and worship were more seductive and corrupting — tended more, through the deification of kings and heroes, and the assimilation of the gods to depraved men, to inflame beastly passions and encourage beastly vices — than those of the Egyptians, Hindus, and Persians; and the Roman theology was the worst of all. 250 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. The eiforts made to overthrow or reform these ancient systems, show that the human mind could devise no substitute for the errors they embraced but unbelief and atheism. Sakya Muni, in his re- volt against Brahminism, denied that there is a God or a real world; maintained that the only real thing in existence is the human soul; and taught that the only hope for men is the total extinction of their being. But Buddhism in its turn revolted against this atheistic and nihilistic theory, and worshipped as a god him who declared there is no god and an- nounced his own complete annihilation. Confucius, who taught his countrymen to engage in religious service as a mere ceremony,- and who really taught unbelief in the national theology, succeeded only in producing an atheistic spirit; and has been and is now himself worshipped as a god by millions and millions of people who have no fliith in the God of heaven, and no belief in the existence of spirits. The Grecian philosophers, so far as they had any religion at all, were polytheists, pantheists, and ma- terialists. They encouraged disbelief in much of the current mythology. But their notions about divine substances y essences and principles ^ and their virtual rejection of the divine personality and attri- butes, would in reality leave the world without a God, and man without hope. The influence of Cicero was no better. Until made acquainted with Christianity, the Gentile mind groped in the mists and darkness of prevailing superstitions, or stum- bled into the abyss of irreligion and atheism. CHAPTER XI. HEBREW THEOI.OGY. The excellence of the Bible theology as contrast- ed with other theological systems, appears in several particulars. 1. The unity of God. As we have shown, all other ancient theologies except Buddhism— which was an atheistic denial of all theological truth, and really not a theology — were polytheistic. But the Bible teaches the existence of the one living and true God. We believe, indeed, that it teaches a trinity of persons in the Godhead. Sceptics may set this doctrine in opposition to the unity of God, and thus endeavor to prove an inconsistency in the Bible. But whatever sceptics may say in regard to this supposed inconsistency, it is undeniable that the Scriptures clearly and uniformly teach that there is but one God. The Hebrew lawgivers, historians, psalmists, prophets, apostles, and evangelists, all assert that there is no God but Jehovah. 'Thou shalt have no other gods before me^ — Hear, O Is- rael! the Lord our God is one Lord^— Thus saitli the Lord, the king of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of hosts ; I am the first and I am the last ; and beside me there is no God.'^ This doctrine was em- 1 Ex. 20:3. ^Deut. 6:4. 'Is. 44:6. 251 252 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. phatically asserted by Moses in the Law. It runs through the historical parts. It appears in the Psalms. It is taught in the Prophecies. It is re- affirmed in the Gospels. It is treated as an indis- putable truth in the Epistles. It is prominent throughout the whole Bible from Genesis to Eeve- lation. ' Doubtless there are many persons in Christian countries who do not consider it a remarkable fact, that the teachers and writers of the Hebrews assert- ed and maintained the doctrine of the Divine unity. Such persons forget that their own ideas on this subject are derived from the Scriptures, and that it is entirely owing to their teachings and influence that the belief in the doctrine of one God exists among men. Except the Jews and those who have derived their religion from them, all nations have fallen into polytheism or atheism. As we have seen, the Gentile nations in general deified the heavenly bodies, the natural elements, imaginary and monstrous beings, departed heroes, beasts and all kinds of animals. If some of them avoided these monstrous errors, they ran into errors equally monstrous; atheism and nihilism. The Jews alone of all the ancient nations avoided errors in both di- rections, and retained the grand and fundamental truth — that there is one God and one alone. 2. The t^pirihiaUtij of God. On this subject also, the Scriptures are very explicit. Though they speak of God as having eyes, ears, hands, and other bodily parts, yet such language is plainly figurative. This immateriality is asserted in express terms. *God is HEBREW THEOLOGY. 253 a Spirit/^ He is declared to be ^tlie invisible God, whom no man hath seen or can see.^ We consider all those passages, which speak of God ag appearing to men in visible form and being seen by corporeal eyes, as entirely consistent with the truth that God has no material substance or form, but is a pure Spirit. But it is not our business at present to ex- plain any supposed discrepancies between different parts of the Bible. So far as our argument is con- cerned, we may allow the sceptic to maintain, if he chooses, that in the earlier books of the Old Testa- ment there are passages which impliedly teach that God has a corporeal and visible form. Such an ad- mission would not affect the excellence of the Bible theology. For in the later books the perfect spirit- uality of God's nature is most distinctly asserted. Even in the book of Job, which is at least among the older books of the Bible, the invisibility of God is a prominent idea.^ Isaiah teaches that God has no conceivable likeness, and that he is not compar- able to any known form, or to any known being.^ John the Baptist declared; ^No man hath seen God at any time.'^ Jesus, called the Christ, who, viewed merely as a man, was the greatest teacher that ever appeared among the Jews, reminded them that they had never heard God's voice, nor seen his shape.^ If the infidel deny that these declarations were made by the persons to whom they are attributed, he must admit that they are a part of the Scrip- tures, and that they unmistakably teach that God is ' John. 4: 24. '^ 1 Tim. 6: 16. Col. 1 : 15. '23: 8, 9. *40: 18, 25. Uohn. 1: 18. Uohn. 5: 37. 22 254 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. an immaterial, spiritual Being. There is really no countenance given in the Bible to the idea that God is a material substance, has a corporeal and visible form, and is under the influence of corporeal appe- tites and passions. It contains no such absurdity as that the material creation is a part of the Godhead, or that the heavens and the heavenly bodies and the natural elements are the sons of God. Nowhere in it is to be found the nonsensical idea, that all ma- terial things were spun or hatched from the Divine essence; as tlie web from the spider, or the chicken from the egg. The Bible is free from all those speculations and theories which would degrade the Creator from a pure, almighty, infinite Spirit, into a piece of matter. While the leaders and teachers of the nations were sinking lower and lower in their ideas of God's nature, assimilating Him more and more to a material substance, and conceiving of Him as a corporeal being with corporeal appetites and passions, — the leaders and teachers of the Hebrews were attaining to a clearer understanding and a more explicit statement of His perfect spirituality. This doctrine, as well as that of the Divine unity, has been taught by them to the rest of mankind. 3. The persoiialUy of God. The Bible writers al- ways represent God as a distinct personal Being. They never identify the Creator with the works of liis hands. They neither represent the world as God, nor deify any part of the material universe, any material substance, or any created thing. They do not speak of God as a substaiice, essence, principle^ or even as di first cause. Such errors as these abound HEBREW THEOLOGY. 255 in the writings of all the poets, philosophers, and theologians of the ancient Gentile nations. In all the world-theo logics, except the Buddhist, which was the negation of all theology, there was a con- founding of the Creator with the creation; a wretch- ed compound of pantheism and materialism; a de- gradation of the Deity into a mere abstraction — a Being without character and attributes. But in the Hebrew theology, God is represented as a personal Being, an intelligent Agent, the efficient Creator and Ruler of the universe. Throughout the Bible, He is represented as knowing, thinking, feeling, loving, and hating. It thus inculcates a soul-stir- ring belief in His personality; and represents Him ' to men as an object of interest, reverence, and love. The personality of God is another of the doctrines which mankind have learned from the Bible. There is nowhere to be found, not even in the theological writings of modern times, a clearer or more anima- ting statement of this fundamental truth than in the old Hebrew writers. 4. The character of God. The Scriptures repre- sent God as transcendently great, powerful, merciful, holy, just, and good; infinite, eternal, and unchange- able. They ascribe to Him every admirable, ami- able, and venerable attribute; all dignity, verity, and sanctity; every glorious perfection. It is true they represent Him as repenting. But this repre- sentation is figurative, and is no more inconsistent with the immutability of God than is the ascription to Him of eyes, ears, hands, and other bodily parts, with His perfect spirituality. Throughout 256 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. the Bible, the character and purposes of God are represented as unchangeable:— ^ My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure^ — I am the LORD, I change not^ — With Him is no variableness neither shadow of turning.'^ It is denied that he repents in such a sense as implies any degree of mutability: — 'And also the Strength of Israel will not lie or repent; for He is not the son of man that he should repent.'* The Bible also represents God as experiencing anger, and as having a disposition to exercise ven- geance. But the anger of God and his disposition to exercise vengeance are the result of His holiness, jus- tice, and hatred of sin. Did He not experience a feeling analogous to anger in men, in view of the dreadful w'ickedness practised on earth, he could not be the infinitely holy God. The vengeance ascribed to God in the Scriptures is, the infliction of deserved punishment. Aside from the Bible, it is evident that God is a Being of justice; and that he inflicts terrible punishments on the transgressors of his laws. He employs the earthquake, volcanic erup- tions, pestilence, fire, and famine as the ministers of his wrath. The world, wdiich is ruled by God, is full of sickness, pain, death, misery, and woe. Whoever believes that there is a God in heaven, who rules in earth, must admit that He is just such a Being as the Scriptures declare. Nor is the divine commission which the Israelites claimed for the destruction of the Canaanites incon- ^Is. 4G: 10. 2 Mai. 3: 6. =» Ja. 3: 17. * 1 Sam. 15: 29. HEBREW THEOLOGY. 257 sistent with the excellence of God's character. God has again and again destroyed nations for their sins and crimes. He employs for this purpose not only the natural elements, but also the agency of men. It is no more inconsistent with the goodness of God that He should employ men for the annihilation of a wicked nation, than that He should employ the pestilence and the earthquake. The extermination of tribes and races by the slings and swords of Jewish warriors, viewed as a Divine procedure, is not different from God's killing men with fever or cholera. Had *the blue-eyed nations of the north,' that ravaged the E^oman empire, been made con- scious that they were accomplishing the purposes of God, the havoc and slaughter which they perpetra- ted would not have been changed in character as Providential dispensations. The super-naturalness of the commission which the Israelites claimed for the destruction of the inhabitants of Canaan, how- ever incredible it may seem to the rationalist, is, then, not inconsistent with the excellence of the Di- vine character as presented in the Bible. If any such inconsistency is apparent, it is no more real than the apparent inconsistency between the dread- ful misfortunes and miseries of mankind, and the benevolence of God as revealed in creation and providence. The Bible represents God as declaring his own character as follows: — ^The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty; 22* 258 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the chil- dren unto the third and fourth generation.'^ In this grand declaration, both the goodness and sever- ity of God are asserted; just as they are revealed in creation and providence. God does punish the guilty. He does visit the sins of one generation upon succeeding generations. Often do the thief, the drunkard, and the murderer bring misery and ruin upon their children. Yet God is good and merciful, notwithstanding the severity of his judg- ments. The character of God as proclaimed in the Bible, corresponds to his character as revealed in his works. The Bible not only asserts the attributes of God, but asserts them with unequaled clearness, fullness, and eloquence. He is declared to be omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent; terrible in majesty, glorious in holiness, dreadful in power; infinite in justice, mercy, and goodness; eternal and unehange-^ able in his nature and character. To him is ascribed every great and glorious and amiable quality; every attribute that can make him worthy of love, rever- ence, admiration, and awe. There is not one single virtue that is not comprehended in the character of God as presented in the Bible. The world has not been able to suggest any improvement in it. Scep- tics cannot point out any defect in it. The utmost that they do, is to endeavor to show that the Scrip- tures ascribe to God particular states of feeling, and particular actions, inconsistent with this perfect ^Ex. 34: 6-7. HEBREW THEOLOGY. 259 and transcendent excellence. Such lofty and glorious conceptions of God the great men of the Gentile na- tions never reached. PJato, Aristotle, and all the ancient philosophers fell far below this grand ideal. The best that the most profound theologians can yet do, is to re-produce the conceptions of God's charac- ter furnished by the Hebrew writers. 5. TJie attributes of God as exemplified in the char- acter of Christ. Jesus is set forth in the New Testa- ment as a revelation in himself of the character of God. He is represented as saying, — ' I and my Father are one^ — The Father dwelleth in me^ — He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.'^ Paul makes the declaration concerning Christ, that 4n him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.'^ It matters not, so far as our argument is concerned, whether rationalists admit or deny that Jesus claim- ed to be an exemplification of the Divine character. This is claimed for him in the Bible. And he is the most admirable and lovely character known among men. Such a combination of rare qualities — meekness, condescension, love, disinterestedness, self-sacrificing aflPection, gentleness, forgiveness, dig- nity, and lofty grandeur — has never been exhibited by any other man, nor described by any but the Hebrew writers. * The best of men That e'er wore earth about him, was a sufferer; A soft, meek, patient, humble, tranquil spirit ; The first true gentleman that ever breathed.'^ 1 John. 10:30. n4: 9. H4: 10. * Col. 2:9. ^ Decker. 260 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLEISCE. When we come to treat of the moral excellence of the Bible, we will advert to this subject again, and will prove the perfection of Christ's character by the admissions of infidel writers. It is not neces- sary to our argument to assume or to prove that Christ was more than man. We may even allow the infidel to maintain if he chooses, that no such person ever existed. The character of one called Jesus of Nazareth is described in the New Testa- ment. The most thorough-going scepticism cannot deny the reality of the description. The character described, whether it be regarded as real or ideal, is the most lovely and exalted that the human mind has conceived. It is set forth as an exemplification of God's character. Now it is by our knowledge of love, mercy, holiness, justice, and other virtues manifested in men, that we are enabled to form con- ceptions of the attributes of God; and the ideal of excellence in Christ's character, as described in the New Testament, enables us to approximate much more nearly the conception of the perfect and infin- itely glorious character of God. The New Testa- ment writers, in exhibiting the matchless excellence of him they call Jesus, though viewed merely as a human or even as an ideal character, have done more to elevate men's conceptions of God, and to improve theology, than all the philosophers and theologians of ancient and modern times. But the point to which we call special attention is this, that in the Bible theology, the lovely and exalted character of Christ is set forth as a revelation of the glorious and infinite excellence of God. HEBREW THEOLOGY. 261 6. Purity of worship. In this respect there is a marked contrast between the Hebrew and all other theologies. Neither the theology of the Egyptians, Hindus, Persians, Chinese, Greeks, nor Romans taught the true worship of God — love, reverence, gratitude, humility, penitence, resignation, and an obedient spirit. The attention of the worshipper M^as turned to outward things. He was taught to depend upon ritual observances for the Divine fa- vor. Some of these observances also were outland- ish and indecent ; even horrible and monstrous. But the Hebrew theoloo;v is in contrast with all this. It, indeed, enjoined a burdensome ritual to be observed for a time. Its Sveak and beggarly ele- ments' were suited to the mental and moral condi- tion of a people that were at first debased by slavery and ignorance, and that never became highly culti- vated. But underlying the Old Testament rites and ceremonies, there was a system of spiritual truth and religion. Image- worship and idolatry in all its forms, were expressly and positively forbidden. The worshipper was taught that mere outward ob- servances were worthless; and that a pure heart, clean hands, and a devout spirit were necessary to acceptance with God. Along with ceremonial ob- servances, obedience to the Ten Commandments was required. Supreme love to God was declared to be necessary. Every man was commanded to love his neighbor as himself. The spirituality and purity of the worship which the Hebrew theology taught, are set forth in such declarations as the followinac : — *If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not 262 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. hear me^ — The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God! thou wilt not despise^ — He that covereth his sins shall not pros- per; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy^ — For I desired mercy and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt-offer- ings.'* These and similar declarations place the Old Testament worship of the Hebrews far above that of every ancient nation, in spirituality and purity. In the New Testament, the necessity of inward devotion is still more emphatically asserted: — ^God is a Spirit; and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and truth^ — We are the circumcision, who worship God in the spirit/^ By the reformation set on foot by Christ and his apos- tles, the Hebrew worship was stripped of its burden- some rites, and became a simple system of pure de- votion. To the exercises of prayer, singing of praise, and the reading and preaching of the word, were ad- ded Baptism and the Lord's Supper, — the one repre- senting moral purification; and the other reminding the worshipper of the founder of Christianity, who is set forth as a revelation of the excellence of the divine character, and as an example for the imitation of men. The excellence, then, of the worship enjoined In the Bible, consists in its freedom from all Indecent and obscene rites, and from all rigorous and burden- some services; in Its denunciation of idolatry, and of all symbolical representations of the Deity; In Its ^Ps. 66: 18. 'Ps. 51: 16-17. 'Prov. 28: 13. *Hos. 6: 6. ^John. 4: 24. «Phil. 3: 3. HEBREW THEOLOGY. 263 rejection of human sacrifices, and its denunciation of the penalty of death against those who offered them ; in its demanding inward devotion rather than outward observances; in its requiring the wor- shipper to forsake his sins, and to cleanse his hands, as a condition of acceptance; and in its requiring justice, mercy, love, and forgiveness toward men, as accompaniments of the worshipful feelings of love, reverence, gratitude, humility, resignation, and ado- ration towards God. The only pure worship offered to the God of heaven has been by the Hebrews, or by those who have adopted their religion. 7. Another peculiar excellence of the Bible the- ology, consists in the comprehensiveness and depth of its teachings. Many of its simple statements have profound meaning; — 'And God said, i AM that i AM; and he said. Thus shalt thou say unto the chil- dren of Israel, i am hath sent me unto you^ — God is a Spirit^ — God is love^ — God is light^ — God is a consuming fire/^ These brief declarations contain more true theology than all the writings of the Gen- tile authors together. There is more truth concern- ing the nature and attributes of God contained in these declarations, than could be condensed from the works of Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, and all the gifted authors of the ancient heathen. They not only pre- sent the most important theological truth, but they also present it in such a way as is best fitted to arouse attention and make an impression. They contain no philosophy lialsely so called, no ingenious ' Ex. 3: 14. 2 John 4: 24. ' 1 John 4: 8. *1: 5. *Heb. 12: 29, 264 TflEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. speculations, no disquisitions about an eternal sub- stance, a first principle, or a first cause. But they represent God as a conscious Being, an almighty Agent, the Author of all life and light; and point out those attributes that entitle Him to our rever- ence, love, and obedience. 8. The progressive improvement of the Hebrew theol- ogy. We have adverted to the fact that all other theologies deteriorated — that, through speculations, poetic inventions, fables, legends, and the adoption of foreign gods, they became more and more con- fused and contradictory; more and more erroneous and corrupt; less and less worthy of the respect and regard of rational beings. But there was a progres- sive improvement of theology among the Hebrews. Their later books contain clearer and fuller views of God's character and worship than their earlier. This advancement, according to their own histori- ans, was often in opposition to the views and incli- nations of the people at large. It appears, indeed, that the religion of the primitive Hebrews was polytheistic and idolatrous;^ and that, though they were persuaded to abandon. polytheism and idolatry, the nation relapsed into these errors again and again. According to the testimony of the Hebrew writers, there was an almost constant contest between the people and their religious teachers in regard to polytheism and idolatry. Jehovah's prophets were often ])ersecuted, and some of them were killed. Nevertheless the monotheistic belief and worship ^ Josh. 24: 2,14. HEBREW THEOLOGY. 265 triumphed. Notwithstanding the defections and op- position of the people and their rulers, the monothe- istic teachers denounced idolatry, and continued to make fuller and clearer statements of theological truth. They reproved hypocrisy, formality, and mere outward show in religion ; and urged the ne- cessity of moral purity and spiritual devotion. It was under these circumstances that the theology of the Hebrews was expanded and improved. Finally, by the reformation effected by Jesus and his apostles amid deadly persecutions, it became so excellent and perfect that no subsequenji improvement has been made to it during eighteen hundred years of investi- gation and progress. In all history, there is not a similar example. AVith the exception of the He- brews, all the nations continued to sink lower and lower in their theological ideas and religious wor- ship; and in every case their leadt*rs and teachers urged on the retrograde movement, or at least made no earnest opposition to it. This progressive im- provement in theology among the Hebrews is, then, very remarkable. Among other nations it deteri- orated, but among them it improved; improved, too, in spite of the frequent opposition of a majority of the people. 9. The peculiar and mysterious doctrines of the Bible theology — the Trinity, Incarnation, and A- tonement — add to its excellence. These doctrines are certainly not incredible in the proper sense of that word. For they have been believed by a ma- jority of learned men and intelligent people during eighteen centuries. These doctrines are, therefore, 23 266 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. not properly incredibley i. e. incapable of being be- lieved. They are, however, mysterious. But a the- ology which embraces no mysteries, nothing but what is fully comprehensible, must be very super- ficial and barren. For God is incomprehensible, i. e, not fully comprehensible by finite minds. There are depths in his nature which men cannot fathom. There are mysteries in his creative and providential works. Vegetation, generation, combustion, elec- tricity, the circulation of blood in animals, the union of soul and body in human beings, the soul itself, life, death — all are mystej^jous. There are mysteries within us and all around us. God, too, is a myste- rious being; and true theology, a system which tells us much about God, must embrace many mysterious truths. Since the most familiar things around us are in some respects mysterious; since man is a mystery to himself; is it not unreasonable to reject a theological doctrine merely on the ground that it contains a mystery? Since in man there is an in- comprehensible union of two natures — body and spirit — in one person, is it not possible that in God there is an incomprehensible subsistence of two or three persons in one nature or essence? And does not the same incomprehensible union of two natures in the person of every human being suggest the possibility of the incarnation — the incomprehensible union of the Divine and human natures in the per- son of Christ? Since the death of a human being, though a familiar fact, is an insoluble mystery, why object to the death of the Son of God, as brought to view in the Bible, on the ground of its strangeness HEBREW THEOLOGY. 267 and incomprehensibility? Nay, the very mysteries embraced in the Bible theology are neither unnatu- ral (though above nature) nor monstrous, but are in keeping with the infinity and incomprehensibility of God. The peculiar and mysterious doctrines of the He- brew theology are seen to be excellent also in this respect, that they powerfully illustrate and commend God's moral attributes. Among these mysterious doctrines, the primary and central one is that of the Atonement — the sufferings and death of the Son of God to expiate the sins of men. It is declared that he became incarnate for the suffering of death. If there be not more than one person in the Godhead, the Incarnation was impossible, and the death of Jesus was but the death of a mere man. Now, the vicarious sufferings of Christ, which are the great and central fact in the theological system of the Bible, are adduced as a proof and illustration of the excellence of the divine character. Christ's work of redemption, and especially his dying as a substitute in the room of sinners, is declared to be a manifesta- tion of God's tender love and concern for errintj men : — *God so loved the world that he gave his only be- gotten Son^ — But God comraendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.'^ The Scriptures also teach, that the Atone- ment is a remarkable and striking Exhibition of God's mercy, justice, hatred of sin, and readiness to pardon it — that God's love and mercy determined Him to pardon sin and save sinners, even through his be- •John 3: 16. '^ Rom. 5: 8. 268 THEOLOGICAL EXCELLENCE. loved Son's agony and death — and that his justice, hatred of sin, and regard for the majesty and holi- ness of moral law, led him not to spare his own Son but to deliver him up for us all. Thus the blood and agony of Calvary illustrate the glorious charac- ter of God. His moral attributes, in their harmony and perfection, are reflected in the light that streams from the Cross. We enter into no discussion in re- gard to the Atonement itself, nor in regard to any of the peculiar doctrines of the Bible. There is no intimation of these doctrines given in creation and providence, and our acceptance of them as true and excellent depends on our belief in the Bible as a di- vine revelation. But the question in regard to the correctness and excellence of these doctrines them- selves being left out of view, they add to the excel- lence of the Hebrew theology, inasmuch as they illustrate God's love, mercy, holiness, and other at- tributes, which constitute the moral excellence of his character. 10. The transcendent excellence of the theology of the Bible, then, is seen in the following particulars: it teaches the unity of God ; the spirituality of his nature; his distinct personality; his great, glorious, benevolent, merciful, holy, just, and unchangeable character; his majesty, omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, and all his adorable and awful as well as amiable perfections. It sets forth the lovely and complete character of Jesus of Nazareth as an exhibition of the moral attributes of God; and thus elevates our ideas of Him, by enabling us to ap- proximate the conception of infinite perfection. It HEBREW THEOLOGY. 269 teaches the comparative worthlessness of outward forms and ceremonies, and forbids all indecent and impure rites; it asserts the nature and value of true worship, and demands the sincere, inward devotion of the soul; it teaches that all religious services are vain, unless accompanied with justice, mercy, benev- olence, forgiveness, and a pure life. Its simplest declarations contain deep and far-reaching theologi- cal truths, which the genius, wisdom, and philosophy of the world never conceiv^ed, and which are not yet fully understood; by these simple declarations, it has made the common property of enlightened peo- ple conceptions and ideas of God, that were unknown until the dissemination of Christianity among the nations. Even its peculiar and mysterious doctrines, which are above reason — though not known to be contrary to reason — and which must be received, if received at all, on the authority of supernatural revelation, serve to give larger views of God's moral perfections. The best theology known among men, and the only theology which enlightened people believe, is the theology of the Bible. Some objec- tors carp at it, but do not presume to furnish a better. Its excellence is generally admitted even by those who deny the supernatural inspiration of the Scriptures. The majority of skeptics agree sub- stantially with Renan, who says; ^The Semitic race, guided by its firm and sure sight, instantly unmask- ed Divinity; and, without reflection or reasoning, attained the purest form of religion that humanity has known. '^ ^Studies of Religious His. and Crit. p. 115. 23* CHAPTER XII. CONCLUDING REMARKS. In view of what has been presented, the question may be asked, how came the secluded and half-en- lightened Hebrews to possess so pure, exalted, and ennobling conceptions of God's nature, character, and worship? Whence was it that they had the purest and best religion known to humanity; the only religion which an enlightened man can adopt? Why did they not, like other nations, sink lower and lower in their theological ideas, until they wor- shipped the heavenly bodies and the natural ele- ments; birds, beasts, and creeping things; imagin- ary beings, departed heroes, and fabulous monsters? How came it to pass that, unlike all other nations, they rose higher and higher in their theological ideas; until, by the reformation of Jesus and his apostles, their religion became so pure and perfect, that the wisdom, learning, philosophy, and genius of the world, during eighteen hundred years, have failed to suggest any improvement? While other nations, with the encouragement or consent of their greatest and best men, were falling into polythe- ism, pantheism, materialism, idolatry, nature-wor- ship, man-worship, beast- worship, and the practice of unclean rites; or into hypocritical formality, skep- 270 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 271 ticisra, and atheism; and while the Hebrew people were imitating them; — whence was it that the He- brew poets, prophets, apostles, and evangelists re- sisted the defection, carried on an almost uninter- rupted contest with their countrymen, encountered persecution, danger, and death, and continued to make fuller"and clearer declarations concerning the character of God and the purity of his worship? How is the fact to be accounted for, that thouirh the Jewish people again and again fell into polytheism and idolatry, into the practice of indecent rites and other errors common among mankind, — there is not to be found in the whole Bible, embracing the writ- ings of about fifty Jewish authors who lived at dif- ferent periods and in various countries, a single word favorable to such errors? And how is that other fact to be accounted for, that this noblest theology — this purest religion known to humanity — is embodied in psalms and prophecies and epistles and histories, the sweetest, most beautiful, most eloquent, and most sublime that the world possesses? Has the Hebrew intellect — not very highly cultivated and somewhat narrow and bigoted — originated by its own unaided powers both the sublimest theology and the sub- limest literature? There are, however, other excellences of the Bible to be presented as evidence of its supernatural ori- gin. PART III. THE MORAL EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. F^RT III. THE MORAL EXCELLENCE OF THE BIBLE. CHAPTEE I. THE DISTINGUISHING PECULIAEITIES OF THE BIBLE MORALITY. The Bible morality has, of course, some things in common with many other systems. In some re- spects, however, it is superior to every other system known among men. Its general excellencies it is now our business to consider. 1. Its underlying ideas and principles. Every moral system is founded on some ideas or principles wdiich give tone and character to it, and from which it de- rives its authority and sanctions. Every Gentile system of morality w^as founded on, and derived its authority and sanctions from a false theology. How low and defective must have been the ideas concern- ing moral law and obligation held by those, who daily worshipped bulls and crocodiles, or imaginary beings male and female with the worst human pas- sions, or departed heroes famous for brutal courage and bloody achievements; or who believed God to be a mere substance or principle; or who, like the primitive Buddhists, denied the existence of God 275 276 MORAL EXCELLENCE. altogether! "Those whose theological ideas were so erroneous and absurd, could not but have low and defective ideas of moral truth and duty. But the morality of the Hebrews sprung from grand theo- logical ideas, and had the highest authority and sanctions. They were taught that there is but one God, the universal Sovereign, who is transcendent in glory, dreadful in holiness, infinite in goodness, om- niscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent; eternal and unchangeable. This great and glorious Person was to them the source of all law, authority, and obliga- tion. They were also taught that the soul is im- mortal; that there is a future state of rewards and punishments; that all men are accountable to God and will finally be judged by Him; that He is the Creator and Father of all men; and that all men are on an equality before Him. These doctrines gave strength and character to their moral ideas. The excellence at which they were taught to aim was the perfection of Him who combines in Himself every thing great, glorious, and good. The authority of their moral code was expressed in the words — Thiis saith the Lord, The reward promised for obedience was the favor of God, a glorious resurrection, ac- quittal in the day of judgment, and the everlasting glories and joys of heaven. The penalty threatened for disobedience was the displeasure of God, a resur- rection of shame and contempt, condemnation in the final judgment, and the miseries of eternal damna- tion. The morality which sprung from such ideas of God's sovereignty and of his good, great, glori- ous, and paternal character; and of men's relations DISTINGUISHING PECULIARITIES. 277 to Him and to one another; and which was armed with so great authority and so powerful sanctions; could not but be good, grand, and ennobling. 2. The Bible morality is more excellent also in this respect, that it deals with the inward affections y motives, and purposes, rather than the outward ac- tions. It seeks to infuse good principles into the heart, rather than to govern men by minute rules. Moralists in general discuss outward actions, partic- ular states of mind, and mere abstractions. Very different is the spirit of the Hebrew writers. Except in the Levitical law, which was designed for the Jews alone and was of temporary obligation, they lay down no minute rules. Their system of moral- ity is characterized by broad, high, far-reaching principles, and by the inculcation of affections, the fruit of which is cheerful outward obedience. When a lawyer made trial of Jesus of Nazareth by asking him which command is the greatest, the reply was, — ^Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind : This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.'^ It matters not whether the infidel admits that Jesus spoke these words or not. He must admit that they are con- tained in the Scriptures, and form a part of their moral system. These few words present principles which reach to the bottom and to the top of human 1 Mat. 22: 36-40. 24 278 MOPwAL EXCELLENCE. obligation; principles which underlie and include all the duties which men owe to God and to one another; principles which, if implanted and fully developed in the hearts of men and fully obeyed in the outward life, would lead to the practice of every virtue, and prevent the commission of every sin. It is worthy of notice that the two great com- mandments, on which all that is written in the law and the prophets is declared to depend, and which include all duty and all morals, are taken from the Old Testament, and are contained in the code first given to the Jews. This peculiarity of the moral teaching of the Hebrews — this dealing with princi- ples rather than rules — this seeking to infuse right affections and inclinations — and this aiming to con- trol men by conscience and purified feelings rather than by minute prescriptions and mechanical rules, — begins to appear in the Law, is more fully developed in the Psalms and Prophecies, and is a prominent feature of the New Testament. This peculiarity places the Bible morality above every other known among men. 8. The excellence of the Bible morality is farther seen in the comprchciisiveness and brevity of its state- ments. The Decalogue is a wonderful summary of moral duties — of the duties men owe to God and to one another. For simplicity and completeness, for brevity and compreiiensiveness, it surpasses every thing to be found outside of the Bible. Every command enjoins some important duty and impli- edly forbids every opposite sin, or forbids some great sin and impliedly enjoins every opposite duty. DISTINGUISHING PF.CULIARITIES. 279 Every duty expressly enjoined is the representative of a whole class of duties; and every sin expressly forbidden represents a whole class of sins. The ex- press injunction of a particular duty impliedly in- cludes every thing necessary or helpful to its per- formance. The express prohibition of a particular Bin impliedly includes every thing that leads or tends to the commission of it. The beauty and ex- cellence of the Decalogue consist in this, that in a very small space it enjoins, expressly or impliedly, all the duties that men owe to God and to one another; and expressly or impliedly forbids all the sins a man can commit. For sententious brevity and far-reaching comprehensiveness, there is no par- allel to it in the whole domain of human learning. All the wit, wisdom, genius, and philosophy of the world, have failed to produce anything equal to it. No improvement on it has ever been made or even suggested. Even the opponents of its super-human origin tacitly admit its perfection. The Sermon on the Mount is also a noble example of brevity and comprehensiveness. It contains all morals. It enunciates ideas and principles which include all our duties to God and to one another. Only the pure in heart shall see God. Only those who have a forgiving spirit, can obtain forgiveness. If we injure our fellow men and live at enmity with them, God will not accept our services. Be- fore offering our gifts at the altar, we must go to our injfured brother and be restored to his friendship and favor. All ostentation in the performance of duty is to be avoided. Sincere, brief, secret prayer is 280 MORAL EXCELLENCE. very acceptable. Men should trust in God, who feeds the birds, arrays the lilies in their beauty, and clothes the fields with grass. Uucleanness is not so much in the outward act, as in the heart, its thoughts and desires. Whoever uses abusive, provoking lan- guage, or is angry without a cause, has the seeds of murder within him. Not the rich, not the power- ful, not the successful are blessed; but the meek, the merciful, the poor in spirit, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, and those who are persecuted and re- viled for the sake of truth and of God. Such are some of the precious gems that abound in this rich mine of moral truth. From the Sermon on the Mount, as from an exhaustless fountain, there flow out living streams to purify and ennoble the souls of men. It comprizes within a few pages more of enlightening and purifying truth than can be found in all the writings of all the moralists and philoso- phers of ancient times. This brevity and compre- hensiveness, beauty, and power of statement, are not confined to the discourses of Christ. They charac- terize the Psalms, Prophecies, Gospels, and Epistles. Had such a passage as Rom. xii. 9-21, or 1 Thess. V. 14-28, been found in the writings of Plato, Aris- totle, Cicero, or any of the world's moralists or philosophers, — it would have been an oasis in the desert, a gem among heaps of base metals and dirt. The excellence of the Bible morality is seen, then, in the following particulars: its underlying principles are of the deepest significance, and arm it with the highest authority and the most powerful sanctions; DISTINGUISHING PECULIARITIES. 281 it deals with the heart, conscience, feelings, and motives rather than the outward actions, and seeks to govern men through purified affections rather than by prescriptions and enactments; and, its prin- ciples and precepts are stated with remarkable brev- ity and comprehensiveness. 24* CHAPTER 11. OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. The transcendent excellence of the Bible moral- ity is generally admitted, as we will hereafter show; yet objections are sometimes made to it. 1. It has been asserted that the Bible counte- nances impurity, by the indelicacy and even obscen- ity of some of its allusions and statements. Voltaire in his so-called PI ulosophical Dictionary ^\\q?^ several quotations from the prophet Ezekiel and also from the most obscene piece of the Roman poet Horace, and then remarks, that Hhe words of Horace and other elegant writers appear to us still more in- decent than Ezekiel's expressions.'^ The artful ob- jector thus contrives, by a seeming apology for the Hebrew prophet, to place him in the same category with the lascivious heathen poet. That there are some things in the Bible that ap- pear highly indelicate to the enlightened people ot' this age, is true. But the standard of delicacy is very arbitrary, and is constantly changing. Many things that are delicate and becoming in one ago, become indecent in another. Ideas that are suf- ficiently chaste when expressed in certain words — as, for instance, generation, birth, and conjugal in- ^ Art. Ezekiel. 282 OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 283 fidelity — are intolerable when expressed in words almost synonymous. In physiological works, which the most refined may read, subjects are treated ex- tensively and minutely, which when alluded to in the Bible, are regarded by cavilers as unfavorable to moral purity. Even Voltaire, in his article on Eze- kiel referred to above, stultifies himself, by speaking in the most vulgar way of what he declares unfit to be mentioned. The most refined women hear from their medical advisers what under other circum- stances would be highly offensive. The manner in which the Bible speaks of things considered indelicate in this artificial age, constitutes one of its moral excellences. It calls things by their right names. If mankind would speak as the Bible does, sin would be stripped of many of its attractions. It is one of the excellent peculiarities of the Bible, and one which makes it powerful for good, that it exhibits vice in all its deformity and hatefulness. The squeamishness of modern delicacy is not evi- dence of superior virtue, but of a corrupt state of society. The plain bluntness of the Bible does not render it acceptable to the licentious and impure. The debauchee does not gloat over its pages. Wan- ton females do not titter over its so-called indeli- cate allusions. The pimp does not carry round the Scriptures in yellow-backed covers to arouse the passions of ^young men void of understanding,^ and entice them to 'the house of the strange woman whose lips drop as a honey-comb.^ No; such per- sons dislike the Bible. It declares to them the baseness of their character and conduct, and inter- 284 MORAL EXCELLENCE. feres with their success. The very plainness of the Scriptures (or, if the infidel will have it so, their coarseness and indelicacy,) make them more hated by those who pursue the ways of vice than any other book, and constitute them a safe-guard of chastity and virtue. 2. It has also been asserted, that there are some things in the Bible which tend to encourage injus- tice and cruelty, — such as the alleged command of God to the Israelites to exterminate the nations of Canaan, and the direction to punish with death the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath. These things do, indeed, appear to us harsh, and even cruel. But if we therefore conclude that the moral- ity of the Bible is imperfect, we must, in order to be consistent, conclude that moral perfection does not characterize the works and providence of God. His- tory and observation show that God often does what in men would be cruel and wicked. The permission by God of physical and moral evil is seemingly as inconsistent with infinite benevolence and wisdom, as anything attributed to God by the Hebrew wri- ters. He is continually doing things that are as terrible as the destruction of the Canaan ites by the sword. Generation after generation is struck down by death in its various forms. Even tender infants, in the providence of God, suffer and die. The pes- tilence is often employed by Him to decimate com- munities and nations. Occasionally He strikes down by lightning persons no worse than their fellows, and no more guilty than the Israelite who was put to death for gathering sticks on the Sabbath. The --- OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 285 earthquake overthrows cities to their foundations, and crushes and mangles the inhabitants beneath the ruins. The avalanche rolls down the mountain-side and buries alive hundreds beneath its cold weight. The volcano pours out rivers of red-hot lava which suffocates and burns men, women, and children in its course. All these terrible things take j^lace in the providence of God; and if any man objects to the conduct attributed to Him in the Bible, he must, in order to be consistent, object to the providence of God; or at once turn atheist and murmur darkly, Svith the fool, in his heart,' that ^ there is no God.' With the probability or possibility of a supernatural indication to the Israelites, that God willed the de- struction of the Canaanites, or the execution of the Sabbath-breaker, we have nothing now to do. It is sufficient for our purpose to point out the fact, that God does indict just such terrible punishments, and even more terrible, on men for their sins and crimes. The Bible represents Him as employing the Jews as well as other nations as instruments to execute his will, just as he employs the natural elements for the same purpose. In the transactions above referred to the Jews are to be considered as acting the part of soldiers, who at the word of command shoot down a comrade for cowardice, or for sleeping at his post. Neither their lawgiver and teachers, nor the Bible, bases these terrible punishments on the- moral prin- ciples which should guide the conduct of men in general, but on the special appointment of God. Hence they have no more to do with the Bible mo- rality than God's destruction of millions and mil- 286 MORAL EXCELLENCE. lions of human beings by fire, flood, earthquake, volcano, and pestilence has to do with morality iu general. Should it be said that the alleged em- ployment of the Jews in the infliction of God's wrath for sin, and their alleged conscious agency in it, must have had a demoralizing influence on them, — we would reply that the assertion is not supported by fact. For among the Jews was produced a sys- tem of morality which, as we will hereafter show, is admitted to be the best that the world possesses. 3. It has been further objected that the Bible encourages hatred and revenge. This objection is founded partly on rais-translation and mis-interpre- tation. The passage in which king David is repre- sented as on his death- bed charging his son Solo- mon to put Shimei to death is mis-translated.^ The words 'but his hoar head bring thou down to the grave with blood' should read, ^but his^ hoar head bring thou not down to the grave with blood,' as is shown by the context.* Accordingly, Solomon did at first spare the life of Shimei, and would have con- tinued to do so, had he not violated his oath in his clandestine departure from Jerusalem. Besides, the command of David to Solomon concerning Shimei is not declared to have been just and right. The his- torian merely records it, without expressing any opinion concerning its moral character. The ac- count of the punishment of the Ammonites by Da- vid ' under saws, harrows, and axes,' and by 'making U Kings, 2: 9. *According to Hebrew usage, the negative in the first clause of the verse is to be understood in the second. OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 287 them pass through the brick-kiln/ does not show that he put them to death; but that he spared their lives, and subjected them to hard service in various kinds of manual labor. Here again, king David's conduct is recorded without either condemnation or approval. The Psaluis that are regarded by some as breathing a spirit of malice and revenge, do not really express such feelings. Take as an example the declaration in the 139th Psalm, — ^ Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred; I count them mine ene- mies;' or take some of the declarations in the 69th and 109th Psalms. In regard to them several things are to be observed. (1) These declarations relate to persons incorrigible and abandoned in their wicked- ness. The enemies whom the Psalmist denounces are the determined and open haters of God, and of all that is good. The hatred which he expresses is hatred for the character and conduct of such persons. (2) There is no intention or desire expressed by the Psalmist to take the punishment of these evil-doers into his own hands. His declarations contain pre- dictions and imprecations of punishment. Pie heart- ily approves of God's judgments. But he leaves the most detested transgressors in the hands of God, to be punished according to their deserts. There is no liftinu: of his own hand to take vens-eance. His declarations encourage men only to look to God for the redress of wrongs. (3) The Psalmist, doubtless, knew and understood the command 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' His desiring, praying for, 288 MORAL EXCELLENCE. and approving of the punishment, yea, the destruc- tion of incorrigible oiFenders,"^ are no more incon- sistent with mercy and benevolence, tlian is the arresting, condemning, and hanging of murderers inconsistent with mercy and benevolence. (4) Con- strue these declarations as we may, they do not af- fect the excellence of the Hebrew morality. Christ, the great expounder of it, forbade all malice and revenge. He and his apostles taught that men should love their enemies, and return good for evil. If the Psalms any where encourage a vindictive spirit, it affects indeed the question of ijlenary in- spiration, but not our argument; since the more expanded Hebrew morality of the New Testament forbids all malice and revenge, and requires the re- turning of good for evil. 4. The execution of Saul's two sons and five grandsons, for his wickedness committed years be- fore,^ has been cited as an act of cruel injustice, sanc- tioned by the Almighty. The latest citation of this kind that has fallen under our eye is as follows: 'We read of a God who smote a whole country with plague for the mis-deeds of a king long since dead, and whose wrath could be appeased only by the cru- cifixion of seven innocent meu.'^ But the wrath of God in this case was justice — displeasure at gross crime. Saul had made an attempt to exterminate the Gibeouites, an innocent and defenceless people, and had slain some of them in cold blood. It was ** Avenge, O Lord! thy slaughtered saints, whose bones Lie scattered on the Alpine mountains cold!' — Milton. 1 2 Sam. 21: 1— IL ^ West. Review, Oct. 18G4, p. 175. OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 289 murder, innocent blood shed by the Israelltish king, which Avas the alleged cause of God's anger. The Gibeonites were foreigners; but this whole transac- tion showed that the killing of a foreigner, as well as an Israelite, was to be regarded and punished as a detestable crime. The punishment of the crime years after its commission, only made the lesson more emphatic and impressive. To say that the seven men who were executed were innocent, as ie^ done in the above extract, is to take for granted what is not known, and to make an unsupported as- sertion. The sons and grandsons of Saul may have concurred in his crime, and have been in reality as guilty as he was. But the transaction is an excep- tional one, so far as it is to be viewed in its human aspect. The Jewish law declared that ^the fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers; every one shall be put to death for his own sin.^^ This statute regulated human punishments among the Jews. But they were taught to believe that God S^isits the iniquities of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation.'^ And this is what God actually does. Often do the crimes of men entail dreadful miseries upon their posterity. The children of the thief, the drunkard, the mur- derer, and other transgressors, suffer for the sins of their fathers. By such dispensations God manifests his displeasure at sin, and warns men to abstain from it for the sake of their children, as well as for iDeut. 24: 16. ^^x. 20: 5, 25 290 MORAL EXCELLEISCE. themselves. The execution of Saul's sons and grand- sons, in accordance with the Divine direction, was therefore in keeping Avith God's way of dealing with men. It is not presented in the Bible as an ex- ample to be followed in the infliction of human punishment, but as a special case, in which God ac- complished by the agency of men what he general- ly accomplishes by providential arrangements and natural laws. This special case no more affects the character of the Bible morality, than the dreadful miseries which men by their crimes often bring on their posterity affect morality in general. But view this matter as we may, the Bible represents God as inconceivably just, merciful, and benevolent; forbids that the children shall be punished for the sins of their parents; and teaches the duty of universal be- nevolence. These alleged examples of cruelty and injustice have a bearing upon the question of the perfection and infallibility of the Scriptures; but do not affect the excellence of the Hebrew morality,— especially as presented, in its matured state, in the New Testament. 5. The passage which represents the children of Israel as borrowing jewels of silver and jewels of gold from the Egyptians just before the exodus, has often been referred to by infidels as justifying fraud and falsehood by the divine sanction.' It has, how- ever, often been shown that the word translated bor- row, means merely to ash or require without any promise of restitution. But the objection will prob- »Ex. 11: 2-3. OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 291 ably continue to be urged, no matter how often or how clearly refuted. 6. The morality of the Bible has also been ob- jected to on account of polygamy. The Old Testa- ment tolerated, but does not approve of polygamy. It declares that marriage originally was between one man and one woman. It teaches that this was the original design — 'Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and they shall be one flesh. '^ This is declared to be the law of marriage, as enacted by the Almighty. The existence of polygamy is recognized in the civil laws of the Jews, and some of its evils are provided against, but it is not sanctioned. King David and other good men (or, if the infidel prefers it, men who are represented in the Bible as good) had more wives than one. Our common translation reads that Solomon 'had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines; and his wives turned away his heart.'^ We hold that the declaration that these thousand women were the wives of Solomon is not justified by the original Hebrew. But it matters not so far as the present discussion is concerned how many wives he had. His polygamy is very point- edly condemned. He violated an express law in marrying many wives. For it was enacted that the king should not 'multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away.'^ King David's polygamy was condemned by the same law. The polygamy of other men is merely recorded. That the teach- 1 Gen. 2 : 24. M j^i^gg ^^ . 3 3 D^ut. 17 : 17. 292 MORAI^ EXCELLENCE. ing of the Old Testament is unfavorable to polyg- amy is evinced by the fact, that it ceased among the Jews. In the time of Christ and the Apostles it was unknown among them; or at least monogamy was the prevalent custom. It is undeniable that the teaching of the New Testament is decidedly against polygamy. Since, then, the Bible teaches that the oriirinal law of marriage is that a man shall have but one wife, nowhere sanctions polygamy, and by its influence abolished it among the Jews; and since the New Testament clearly condemns it; there is no well-founded objection to the Bible morality on ac- count of it. 7. The last objection to the morality of the Bible that we will notice is, that it favors slavery. AYe admit that it does not expressly condemn it, but its spirit is opposed to it. The principles which it in- culcates in regard to the brotherhood and equality of men are unfavorable to it. Its precepts, faith- fully carried out, mitigate its evils, and finally eradi- cate it. The opposition to slavery has generally been by Christians; and even infidel abolitionists have ever made their strongest appeals in the lan- guage of the Bible. Some Christians, indeed, have been slaveholders; but slavery exists wdierever the Bible is unknown. Slavery has often been abolish- ed through the iufluence of the Bible and Christi- anity, and seldom or never in any other way. To say the least, the Bible impliedly condemns slavery, mitigates its evils, and prepares the way for its ex- tinction. 8. We close our discussion of the objections that OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 293 are urged against the morality of the Bible, with a few general observations: (1) Some of these objec- tions are founded, as we have shown, on mis-trans- lations and mis-interpretations. The persistent pre- sentation of these, after their real character has been repeatedly pointed out, indicates that even the sup- posed errors of the Bible morality are not very nu- merous. (2) Others of these objections are founded on the actions of men recorded in Bible history. Some of the actions of good men recorded in the Bible are approved, some are disapproved, and some are neither approved nor disapproved — except so far as the general principles of the Bible have a bearing upon them. The mere fact that the conduct of a man, declared to be good and pious, is recorded in the Bible, is not an approval of it. Yet some of the objections urged against the Bible have no other foundation. (3) Others, again, of these objections are founded upon the assumption, that God may not authorize men to do as his agents what He is con- tinually doing by natural means. The objection drawn from the destruction of the Canaanites as- sumes that, though it might have been very proper for the Almighty to cut off those wicked tribes by a flood or earthquake, yet it is intolerable that He should employ the agency of men for that purpose. (4) Many of the objections urged against the Bible morality lie with equal weight against natural reli- gion, and the moral government of God. The most dreadful punishments are inflicted on men for their sins. Famine, pestilence, and war hurry thousands 25* 294 - MORAL EXCELLENCE. upon thousands to premature graves. Fire, flood, earthquake, volcano, and avalanche burn, drown, smother, boil, bake, crush, and mangle the bodies of men, women, and children. Men also are involved in each other's punishment. The errors and sins of one generation often come with crushing weight upon those that follow. If there is a God in heav- en, who rules over men, he is continually manifest- ing his anger at their sins by these tremendous punishments. Gothe, skeptic though he was, speaks of Hhe strong naturalness of the Old Testament.' Its very morality is confirmed by the actual state of thino:s in this world. All those dreadful actions which it ascribes to God He actually performs, or else He does not rule in the earth. We might close the Bible, and, guided by the light of nature alone, say to the infidel, who art thou that repliest against Godf (5) Lastly, the Hebrew morality is not fully revealed in the Old Testament. Some things were permitted among the Jews on account of the hard- ness of their hearts; as, for instance, the divorce- ment of wives by their husbands. A species of involuntary servitude was allowed; but by the in- stitution of the Jubilee a system of emancipation was established. Kingly despotism was denounced and forbidden; but it was tolerated, and its evils cur- tailed. That the Jews were left in ignorance in regard to some points of morality, we admit. That many things morally wrong were tolerated among them, we also admit. We do not admit that any- thing morally wrong was actually sanctioned either in their moral or civil code. But if such were the OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 295 case, it would not constitute a well-founded objection to the morality of the Bible. For there was a pro- gressive advancement in morality as well as theology among them. AVe might admit, so far as our argu- ment is concerned, that in the Bible 'there are nar- ratives which cannot well be surpassed for their superstitious and demoralizing character, for gross credulity, and barbarous vindictiveness.' For not- withstanding the superstitious credulity and vindic- tive animosity that may have existed among the Jews, and notwithstanding any moral errors that may be supposed to be contained in the books of Moses, the Psalms, or any of the older parts of the Bible, their teachers and writers continued to make fuller and clearer enunciations of moral truth, until finally the Hebrew morality became so comprehen- sive and complete, that during eighteen hundred years of advancing civilization no error has been detected, and no improvement suggested. Nor does it matter whether this advancement was very grad- ual, or whether the Hebrew morality was almost at once brought into a state of perfection. It did at- tain to a state of perfection in the time of Christ and his apostles; and this wonderful phenomenon is all the more wonderful because of the barbarous cred- ulity and vindictiveness which, the skeptical objec- tor asserts, darkened and dwarfed the Jewish mind. Most assuredly we ought to judge of the achieve- ments of the Hebrew nation, not by what they were and did when emerging from the degradation of slavery, nor merely by their earlier writings; but by their literature, jurisprudence, theology, and moral- 296 MORAL EXCELLENCE. ity when these were carried to the highest state of perfection. The very objections that are urged a2:ainst the morality of the Bible, only make their attainments in moral science more unaccountable, — except on the ground that they received supernatural aid. CHAPTER III. THE MORAL PERFECTION OF JESUS. Jesus is set forth as the model man. The writers of the New Testament enjoin upon all, the imitation of his spirit and conduct. Unlike all other charac- ters presented in the Bible, he is declared to be sin- less and perfect. Hence he may be considered as the embodiment of the Hebrew morality. The poets and historians of the world celebrate the praises of successful kings and warriors; but the New Testament writers record the sayings and doings of one who had none of the trappings of earthly pomp and greatness to recommend him to admiration and applause. Contrary to the expec- tation of the Jews in regard to the Messiah, Jesus appeared as a poor man, the son of a carpenter, and an inhabitant of the despised city of Nazareth. In his personal manners, he was meek, patient, gentle, kind, and condescending. He was dignified, but familiar. Unlike the founders of Jewish sects, he was without ostentation and without austerity. lie refused not to enter the houses of the rich and to partake of their bounteous hos])itality; yet none were so lowly and mean as to be beneath his notice. He acted in direct opposition to Jewish pride and prejudice, in eating with unwashen hands, and in 297 298 MORAL EXCELLENCE. fitting at table with publicans and sinners. He re- ceived all of every name and class. He was never idle, and never trifled. 'He went about doing good.' He healed the sick, fed the hungry, instructed the ignorant, comforted the sorrowful, cast out devils, and raised the dead. He turned not away, indeed, from the rich, the noble, and the great; but he es- [)ccially sympathized with and blessed the poor, the unfortunate, and the wretched. But, gentle though he was toward honest inqui- rers after truth, and compassionate though he was to the poor and the distressed, he was unsparing in his denunciations of pride, fraud, and injustice. He overwhelmed hypocrites and captious opponents with scathing rebukes and invectives. He fearlessly assailed the pride, covetousness, and deceit of the Jewish rulers and teachers; and indignantly denoun- ced the formal, bigoted, and self-righteous scribes and Pharisees. His teaching had tremendous power. *He spake as one having authority.' The very men who were sent to arrest him went away confounded, and declared to their employers, 'Never man spake like this man.' lu the advocacy of truth he was uncompromising and daring. In the cause of hu- manity and righteousness, he confronted danger and death. He entangled not himself with worldly af- fairs. He meddled not with matters merely politi- cal. He declared, *My kingdom is not of this world.' He claimed to be a king, indeed; but a king of tr'ith and righteousness, ^yith singleness of purpose and entire consecration of soul, he labor- ed for the welfare of men. AVith dauntless courage, THE MORAL PERFECTION OF JESUS. 299 unshaken purpose, and burning love of mankind, he toiled on, unmoved by weariness, reproach, per- secution, danger, and death. As to the matter of his teaching, it included all theology and all morals. His doctrines include all human duties, and forbid every sin. He gave the preference to faith, love, mercy, and justice, over sac- rifices and tithes. Instead of ceremonial observances; he enjoined inward purity and devotion. His teach- ing w^as armed with the authority of God; and with sanctions high as heaven, deep as hell, and lasting as eternity. Both as a teacher and as an individual, he exhibited a perfect combination of the rarest qualities. He rebuked the hypocritical scribes and Pharisees in tones of indignation; yet took little children in his arms and blessed them. Thouo-h bold and unflinching in the advocacy of truth, and fierce in his denunciation of party-spirit and hypoc- risy; he wept at the tomb of Lazarus. He w^as no Stoic; yet he stood calm and gentle before Herod and Pilate, while the excited multitude under the influence of his blood-thirsty enemies bayed and howled around him. With consummate dignity, infinite self-respect, and unbounded claims to hom- age and obedience; he ever manifested patience, meekness, and humility. Claiming to be the Son of God and the Lord from heaven; he made himself the servant of all, and even washed his disciples' feet. Though with a sort of religious fury he drove the traders and thieves out of the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers; he stood in gentle dignity before his accusers and judges, and suffered 300 MORAL excelle:s^ce. Avith meekness all the indignities and injuries that were heaped upon him. Though he poured out his indignation on self-righteous hypocrites; he prayed for his crucifiers, saying, ^ Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do !' One thing very remarkable in the character of Jesus is its perfect consistency. He is ever the same. He is always dignified, meek, calm, and condescending. At all times and under all circum- stances— in the vast assemblage, and in private intercourse; in company with his friends and disci- ples, and in conflict with his enemies; in the temple, in the synagogue, on ship-board, on the mountain- top; at feasts, at marriages, by the sick-bed, at the side of the grave, in his addresses to the multitude, in solitary prayer; when healing the sick, when feeding the hungry, when casting out devils, when raising the dead ; in the storm-tossed vessel ; while walking on the sea; at the tomb of Lazarus; in the upper room at supper; when he washed the feet of his disciples; while suffering and praying in the garden; while confronting his judges and accusers; when scourged, spitted on, and crowned with thorns ; when nailed to the cross; while praying for his cru- cifiers; while breathing his last; in his interviews with his disciples after his resurrection ; at his de- parture from them and in giving them his parting blessing; — at all times, in all places, under all cir- cumstances, he exhibited the same combination of amiable and glorious qualities; the same simplicity and calm dignity; the same self-respect and the same condescension; the same consciousness of j^ower and THE MORAL PERFECTION OF JESUS. 301 worth, and the same meekness and self-sacrifice; the same loathing of pride, hypocrisy, covetousness, for- malism, self-righteousness, and sin in all its forms, and the same tenderness and compassion for sinners; the same benevolence, devotion, and humility ; and the same loftiness and grandeur of soul. Never did he utter a word of impatience or fretful com- plaint; and never did he perform an act unworthy of his avowed mission, or of the exalted character which he claimed as the Son of God. Yet the sacred writers present his character in a calm and simple narration. They employ no eulogy. They express little or no admiration. They professedly report merely what Jesus said and did, and thus make his character stand out before us like a living reality. As we have had frequent occasion to remark, it matters not, so far as our argument is concerned, whether the infidel admits or denies that Christ spoke and acted as his biographers assert, or even that such a person ever existed. The New Testa- ment gives us the historical portrait of a Jew named Jesus the CJirist; and his character, whether real or ideal, is the exponent of moral excellence according to the Hebrew standard. This master-piece of ex- cellence is set before us in the New Testament for our imitation. Its writers declare that in spirit, conduct, and character, we should be such as they describe Jesus of Nazareth. The unparalleled excellence of this model charac- ter is generally admitted even by those who disbe- 26 302 MORAL EXCELLENCE. lieve the New Testament history. Some skeptics can scarcely find words adequate to express their enthusiastic admiration. We have already presented an extract from the writings of Rousseau in proof of the literary excellence of the Gospel narratives. This French infidel also expressed great admira- tion for the moi;al excellence of Christ's character. * Where is the man, where is the sage who could thus suffer and die without weakness and without ostentation? * * * What prejudice, what blind- ness it is, to presume to compare the son of Sophron- iscus with the son of Mary! What a distance be- tween the two! * * * Xhe death of Socrates, tranquilly philosophizing with his friends, is the most pleasant one could desire; that of Jesus expir- ing in agonies, abused, taunted, cursed by a whole people, is the most horrible one could fear. Socrates blessed the executioner who wept in presenting the poisoned cup; Jesus, amidst frightful tortures, pray- ed for his enraged tormentors. Yes, if the life and death of Socrates were those of a sage, the life and death of Jesus were those of a God.'^ Renan, who maintains the human origin of the Bible and Chris- tianity, expresses the highest admiration of Christ's cliaracter as a man. He calls him ^the incomparable man, to whom the universal conscience has decreed the title of the Son of God.' He also speaks of him as 'this sublime person;' and declares that ^in him is condensed all that is good and lofty in our na- ture.'^ Gothe tells us that he loved Christ, as well ^ Emile, 1. 4. * Vie de Jesus, chs. 1, 28. THE MORAL FERFECTION OF JESUS. 303 as tbo Scriptures.^ In his WanderjaJire, published by him in his seventy-second year, he styles Christ the Divine man, a pattern and an example, a model of exalted patience. In his eighty-third year, he de- clared his belief in the genuineness of the four gos- pels, because he saw in them a reflection of the greatness which emanated from the person of Christ. lie said, *If I am asked whether it is in my nature to pay him devout reverence, I say, certainly! I bow before him as the divine manifestation of the highest morality.'^ These declarations do not indi- cate that the German poet was a genuine believer in Christianity. He was, indeed, a genuine doubter; but he regarded the character of Christ as a master- piece of excellence, admirable for its beauty and per- fection. Strauss, who maintains that the gospel narratives are made up of myths, conscious misrep- resentations, and an uncertain quantity of truth, speaks of the portraiture of Christ as the ideal of the greatest, best, and holiest man; and as the high- est type of excellence conceivable by the human mind. He further styles him the greatest man that ever trod the earth, a hero in whose fate Providence is in the hiii:hest deo-ree o-lorified.^ Theodore Park- er, who agreed with Strauss in many things, and who gained his reputation mainly by the reproduc- tion of the ideas of German rationalists, bore very decided testimony to the excellence of Christ's char- » Truth and Poetry, B. 15. ^ Life and Works of Gothe by Lewes, vol. 2, p. 397, ^ 3 Leben Jesu, B. Ill, s. 147. 304 MORAL EXCELLENCE. acter. Said he, 'I think Jesus was a perfect man — perfect in morality and religion/^ Such are the opinions expressed concerning the moral excellence of Christ's character by the most prominent opponents of his Deity and of the super- natural inspiration of the Scriptures. A volume might be filled with such testimonies. We deem it sufEcient to give the above as specimens. Doubt- less, most readers are aware that the more consider- ate class of skeptics concede the moral perfection of Christ's character, as portrayed in the New Testa- ment. Now, this faultless character is the exponent of Bible morality. Christ is set forth as the model man. It may, indeed, be objected that he cannot be a model for every class of men, nor for any class in every respect. But parents of forty or fifty years of age should and can teacli their young ciiildren by example as well as by precept; and most assuredly Christ may with as much propriety be an example to mankind in general as parents to their children. Christ set forth in his conduct the motives and spirit by which all mankind should be actuated. Men, women, and children should have the same mind that was in him. They should be holy, just, tem- perate, benevolent, merciful, forbearing, meek, hum- ble, condescending, self-denying, and self-sacrificing, as he was. So the New Testament teaches and com- mands. The Hebrew writers, in thus exhibiting a character of perfect excellence and in commanding^ ^ Life and Cor., by Weiss, letter to S. J. i\[ay. THE MORAL PERFECTION OF JESUS. 305 US to imitate it, teach a perfect morality. In setting forth Jesus Christ as the model man, they have done more to elevate the standard of human virtue, and exalt human character, than all the philosophers and moralists of the world. 26* CHAPTER IV. THE HEBREW MORALITY COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. We will be enabled better to appreciate the ex- cellence of the Bible morality by comparing it with other systems. 1. The morality of the ancient Egyptians, The moral system of this renowned nation, if moral sys- tem they had at all, was especially defective in those great truths which lie at the foundation of all true morality as well as religion. They believed in the immortality of the soul; but this doctrine was in their minds encumbered and obscured with the ab- surdities of transmigration. They believed, too, in a judgment after death, and in future rewards and punishments. But they by no means attained to the clear ideas on these subjects that we are accustomed to in the Scriptures. God's hatred of sin, men's ac- countability to Him, his coming to judge the world at the last day, the resurrection of the dead, the as- sembling of all mankind before the judgment- throne, their giving an account of all the deeds done in the body, the immortality of the soul in a state of con- scious existence, the blessedness of the righteous, the misery of the wicked, — doctrines wdiich are intimate- ly connected with right moral ideas and feelings, 306 COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 307 and which were so clearly announced to the Jews by their teachers and writers, — were either entirely un- known to the Egyptians, or were held by them ob- scurely and feebly. They had no such code as the Decalogue. They were ignorant of most of the doc- trines contained in the Sermon on the Mount. They never attained to a knowledge of the grand truths that abound in the Scriptures. They knew nothing of such commands as ^Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,' and ^Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' Famed as they were for wisdom and learning, they were especially barren in moral- ity. Their moral ideas were few and limited. They were of all nations the least governed by principles. Among them almost every thing was controlled by rules, customs, and legislative enactments. AYith all their achievements and their prolonged national ex- istence, they did little or nothing for the moral im- provement of the world. In all the ransacking of Egypt's tombs and mummies, in all the studying and deciphering of her hieroglyphics, in all the examina- tions of her obelisks, sphinxes, and pyramids, and in all that is recorded of her history, arts, laws, and learning in Grecian and E-oman authors, — not a single discovery has been made that is now, in a moral point of view, of any value to mankind. Her morality is as worthless a thing as one of her own ragged mummies, of interest only to the antiquarian. If air that is known of ancient Egypt were lost and forgotten, the world morally would be none the poorer. But if the Hebrew Decalogue, the Sermon on the Mount, the Golden Hule, or the Lord's 308 MORAL EXCELLENCE. Prayer, were blotted out of existence, a blank would be created which the learning and philosophy of the world could not fill. What the actual state of morals among the ancient Egyptians was, cannot be fully known. It is ascer- tained, however, that the inter-marriage of brothers and sisters was allowed and practised. Polygamy was sanctioned and allowed to all classes but the priests. Slavery in its worst form was an estab- lished institution. There is reason to believe that drunkenness was common even among the women.^ According to Moses, the Egyptians were cruel and oppressive.^ Their barbarity in destroying the male children of the Israelites has rarely been surpassed. These, however, were not their worst immoralities. For when we consider the debasing influence of their beastly theology, and its inevitable effects upon their minds and manners, we cannot but conclude that the most shameful practices prevailed and were encour- aged among them. We have already alluded to the fact, that Herodotus speaks of some of their cus- toms as being too indecent to be mentioned. We have also referred to the laws which Moses enacted against bestial impurity and other abominations among the Jews, immediately after their coming out of the land of Egypt, as indicating the vile contam- inations to which in that land they had been ex- posed.^ According to the testimony of Herodotus,'* chastity among the Egyptian women was very rare. ^ Wilkinson, vol. 1, pp. 51-3. ^ Ex. 1 : 9-22. spartii, ch. 2. *B. 2: 11. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 309 This testimony is strengthened by Moses in his ac- count of Joseph.^ It is evident, therefore, that the morality of the ancient Egyptians was vastly inferior to the moral- ity taught in the religious books of the Jews. With the actual morals of the Jews we have nothing now to do. According to their own writers there was often a shock in 2: state of morals amono; them. But this only makes the perfect and sublime morality taught by their poets, prophets, and apostles more wonderful. Whereas the immoralities of the Egyp- tians were in accordance with the teach ino;s and ex- ample of their priests, theologians, and leaders. 2. The Hindu morality. The doctrines which lie at the foundation of all pure morality were un- known to the Hindus, or were very imperfectly un- derstood by them. They were taught, indeed, that there is a God — or rather a vast multitude of gods; that the soul is immortal; that there is a future state of rewards and punishments; and that the future condition of men is influenced by their character and conduct in this life. But they had no such ideas of the personality, majesty, holiness, justice, and good- ness of the one true God, as are taught in the Bible. Their doctrine of the soul's immortality was degra- ded by the fable of transmigration. iVnd the salu- tary influence of the doctrine of future rewards and punishments was destroyed, or greatly decreased, by their mistaken and absurd views in resrard to hu- man merit, caste, purification, penance, the sacred- ^ Gen. 39: 7-12. 310 MORAL EXCELLENCE. ness of animals, and tlie conscious life of plants and minerals. In their writings are found no such views of God's hatred of sin and of his awful justice, his boundless love and mercy, the value of inward purity above outward observances, the glorious re- wards of the righteous and the dreadful miseries of the wicked, as are included in the Bible. The re- straining, purifying, and elevating truths which it teaches in regard to God, the human soul, the char- acter of true virtue, the strict accountability of men, life, death, heaven, hell, and immortality, — are un- known in the Hindu system. It is characterized also by the absence of those simple, yet compre- hensive and grand utterances, which abound in the Bible. Like the ancient Egyptians, they had no Decalogue, no Golden Rule, no Sermon on the Mount. They had no hymns which an intelligent man of modern times would use for the moral in- struction of his children. They had no book of Proverbs the reading of which would confirm the faltering virtue of young men, and strengthen them against the temptations of vice. They had no books so abounding in significant moral utterances as to be suitable to be used as a text-book in moral science, or as the basis of popular discourses on individual and national duties and sins. They had no Songs, Epistles, nor Histories, which it would not be an out- rage to read at funerals or at the bedside of the sick and dying. No sane man would employ any of their writimi^s to strenj^then and comfort the miser- able and broken-hearted. Thus their vast inferior- COMPAPvED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 311 ity in moral significance and value to the Old and New Testaments is demonstrated. The vast inferiority of the morality of the Hindus is further seen, in their beau-ideal of human excel- lence. Their model man was a wandering, wretch- ed, half-starved, self-righteous hermit. The Saniii/- asiy who was supposed to attain to union with the Supreme Being, and to be absorbed into his essence, was a Brahmin who spent the fourth period of liis life in prayers and austerities. He forsook his family and friends, and lived in total solitude. He had no shelter, no fire, no home. He begged his food, ate but once a day, and only when very hungry. He had no hatred, fear, or love toward any human beino^. He drank water strained throucjh a cloth to avoid injuring minute insects. He purified himself by suppressions of his breath and by the repetition of mystic words.^ Such was the model man of the Hindus — such the ideal excellence which they were taught to imitate. How different the moral excellence enjoined upon the Hebrews! — ^Is it such a fast that I have chosen? a day for a man to afflict his soul? is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the Lord? Is not this the fast that I have chosen; to loose the bands of wicked- ness, to undo the heavy burdens and to let the op- pressed go free, and that ye break every yoke? Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou > Menu, 6: 22-79. 312 MORAL EXCELLENCE. bring the poor that arc cast out to thy house? when thou seest the naked, that thou cover him, and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh ?'^ The difference, the immeasurable difference, between the Hindu morality and the Hebrew is seen in the con- trast between the Sannyasi and Jesus of Nazareth, — the one, unsocial, solitary, selfish, unfeeling, hag- gard, emaciated, self-righteous, relying upon austeri- ties, ceremonies, and incantations for acceptance with God; and the other, kind, compassionate, social, sympathizing, enjoying whatever hospitalities and comforts are offered him, laborious and self-sacrifi- cing in the service of others, and showing by ex- ample as well as by precept the beauty and excel- lence of moral purity and disinterested benevolence. The teaching of the Hindu authors tended to pro- duce the spirit and conduct of the secluded, selfish, and unfeeling Sannyasi; the Scriptures present the perfect and glorious character of Christ for the imi- tation of men. Many of the laws of the Hindus were very im- moral. Polygamy was authorized. Slavery of the most deiiradinsf kind was an established institution. Women were declared never to be fit for independ- ence; and, as inferior beings, were forbidden to read the Vedas. Adultery was allowed in persons of tlie same class. Chiklless wives of the servile class were permitted to have children by the brothers or other kinsmen of their husbands. A wife incurably dis- eased might be superseded by another wife. A J Isaiah, 58: 5-7. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. ol3 childless wife might be superseded in the eighth year; a wife whose children were all dead, in the tenth ; one who had only daughters, in the eleventh ; one who spoke unkindly, without delay. It was provided that a diseased wife who was virtuous, though superseded, should not be disgraced. A king who was incurably diseased, was required to seek death in battle, or by starvation. A Brahmin who was incurably diseased was required to 'feed on water and air until his body totally decayed.^ A wife, after her husband's death, was forbidden to pronounce the name of another man, and was re- quired to emaciate her body by slender diet and the performance of harsh duties. A Brahmin, though convicted of all possible crimes, was not to be punished. The king might, indeed, banish him, but with his property secure and his body unhurt.^ These are some of the objectionable enactments of the Hindu civil and moral code. The Institutes of Menu are supposed to have been compiled nearly 1300 years before Christ. But we discover in them the spirit and ideas which led to worse errors after- wards. The widow-burninirs, child-drowninirs, Juo:- gernaut-immolations, and other hideous practices among the modern people of India, are but the earlier Hindu ideas gone to seed. The Hindu mind moved on in the direction of its first lerrors. What- ever was bad in the Hindu system struck its roots deeper and deeper, grew stronger and stronger, and finally produced fruits at which humanity shudders. » Menu, 4: 157-8; G: 31; 8: 204; 9: 18-323. 27 314 MORAL EXCELLENCE. Whatever was evil in the Hebrew system was merely ])ormitted, was curtailed and counteracted, and final- ly in the time of Christ and the Apostles was abol- ished, leaving a pure and perfect morality as an inheritance of the nations. The Hindu morality was for ages unknown to mankind. Now that it has become known, it is found, as compared with the IVihle system, to be very defective and erroneous. It contains nothing of value which is not better ex- pressed in the Bible; it omits many important truths and duties altogether; and it enjoins many things that are pernicious, outrageous, and abominable. 3. The morality of the Buddhists. As we have be- ibre remarked. Buddhism is of Hindu origin, Gota- nia its founder being an Indian prince. Though it was suppressed in the land of its birth, it exerts a powerful influence over millions and millions of people in many lands. The primitive Buddhists ignored or denied the fundamental principles of morality altogether. Since Gotama denied the existence of God and the reality of an external world, his moral precepts were with- out authority. Buddhism acknowledges really no such thing as moral law or moral obligation. The only obligation which it recognizes as resting on men is such as they impose on themselves. The Buddhists believed in transmigration ; and that, for sins committed in this life, the human soul may be forced after death to inhabit one of the lower ani- mals; and that, by the performance of meritorious deeds in this life, a man may raise himself to the condition of a god hereafter. They regarded desire, COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEitS. 315 affection, thought, all mental activity, as the source of evil; and hence they placed beatitude in the de- struction of all thoughts and desires. But this could only be by the cessation of all existence. Hence their whole moral system had for its ultimate object the final annihilation of the soul. They did not regard sin as a pollution, but as an obstacle in the way of reaching Nirvanaj nothingness. Vice was merely a misfortune. Virtue was the means of ^crossing to the other shore.' Charity, humility, pa- tience, and other virtues, were to be cultivated and practised, not as good in themselves, not for the pur- pose of doing good, but as the means of self-annihi- lation. Hence Buddhism as a moral system was a, vast scheme of profits and losses. Its highest motive, and its only motive, was selfishness. The acquire- ment of merit by the Buddhist, says Spence Hardy, is as mercenary an act as the toils of the merchant to secure the possession of wealth.^ The idea that all sin originates in desire and in- clination leads to asceticism. It was thought that austerities and penances tended to the destruction of all desire and inclination, and therefore were meri- torious. Hence Buddha's disciples were required to clothe themselves in rags, live in forests and without shelter, sleep without lying down, and to afflict themselves in various other ways. Hence, too, vir- tue was to be practised not merely a*s laying up a stock of merit, but also as a means of self-mortifica- tion. For the same reason, the charity which would * Manual of Buddhism, p. 508. 316 MORAL EXCELLENCE. lead a man to oifcr his body as food to a starving tiirer, was commended as heroic and meritorious. Such being the ideas embraced in the system of Buddhism, we would naturally suppose that its ad- herents could hardly be anything else than monsters of vice. We would think that their atheism, their disbelief in the existence of a real world, their hoping for and seeking after the annihilation of their souls and bodies, their exaltation of the merit of human actions and self-mortification, — these mad specula- tions and notions, one would think, would have utterly degraded and debased their ideas on all moral subjects. Yet, strange to say, many of their moral prece})ts are excellent; and Buddhism as a system of morality is perhaps second only to that of the Bible. It commended charity, modesty, patience, and courage. Humility, which has been supposed by many to be exclusively a Christian virtue, was em- braced in it. Its founder ignored caste, and taught the equality of all men. He also taught religious toleration. Like the Hebrews, the Buddhists had a decalogue. Their ten commandments are as follows : (1) Not to kill; (2) Not to steal; (3) Not to commit adultery; (4) Not to lie; (5) Not to get intoxicated ; (6) Not to eat solid food after mid-day; (7) Not to attend upon theatrical amusements, music, and danc- ing; (8) Not to use personal ornaments and per- fumes; (9) Not to have large or honorable seats and beds; (10) Not to receive gold or silver. This code, though perhaps not equalled by anything produced among the heathen, is much inferior to the Deca- logue of Moses. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 317 (1) The Buddhist code makes no reference to the duties which men owe to God. Its author and those to whom it was given denied that there is a God in heaven. (2) These ten commandments are merely negative. They point out no duties to be performed, but merely acts to be avoided. They were intended to be subsidiary to the destroying of desire and attachment, and were denominated Hhe ten precepts of aversion.' The ten commandments of the Hebrews, though some of them are negative in form, enjoin positive duties. They are the carry- ing out of the two great commandments, which require a man to love God supremely and his neigh- bor as himself. (3) Five of the Buddhist precepts were for professed disciples only. Only the first five were considered binding on all men. These five negative commands — commands which declare merely what a man ought not to do — express the Buddhist idea of human responsibility and duty. How much more exalted is the Bible idea of the whole duty of man! (4) The Buddhist code errs by excess, as well as defect. The first precept, for in- ( stance, not to kill, includes all animal life. This re- sulted from the doctrine of transmiorration : beasts, birds, reptiles, and insects being considered as ani- mated by human souls that had sinned in a previous state of existence. Hence the first commandment of the Buddhists ))rohibited the taking of the life of anything — man, beast, bird, reptile, or insect. Tiie natural result of such an enactment was, the disre- gard of human life. Such a law is worse than no law at all. It is not surprising to learn, that among 27* 318 MORAL EXCELLENCE. the Buddhists the life of a man is no more regarded than the life of an ox. (5) Every one of the pre- cepts of the second table of the Buddhist code pro- hibits as pernicious and sinful wliatis really harmless and proper. The sixth commandment forbids par- taking of food in the afternoon. This ascetic rule is unreasonable. Common sense teaches that it is just as ])roper to eat after mid- day as before it. The seventh commandment, among things that are ^vrong, forbids music and songs — another unreason- able ascetic prohibition. So also the eight, ninth, and tenth precepts err by excess, prohibiting per- sonal ornaments and perfumes, large beds and seats, and the use of money. ^The twelve observances,' designed for those who were still further advanced in the religious life, erred still farther in the same direction; requiring the devotee, as we have before remarked, to live without shelter, fire, or bed; to clothe himself in rags ; to eat only one meal a day and in the fore-noon ; to beg his food ; and to sleep without lying down, and with his back against a tree. It is seen, therefore, that Buddhism, though a revolt against Brahminism, had much in common with it. The doctrine of transmigration, asceticism, self-mortification, the meritoriousncss of ceremonial performances as well as of acts of charity and se^lf- denial, and the possibility of securing future blessed- ness by living like savages and dogs on earth, are taught in both systems. There is but one step from the idea of Brahm — the inactive, sleeping God — as held by the Brahmins, to the atheism of the Budd- COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 319 hists. The Bucklliistic disbelief in the reality of the external world, goes only a little beyond the con- temptuous regard of the Brahmins for present and visible things. Nirvana is but the carrying out of the Brahminic idea, that blessedness consists in apathy, repose, absorption of conscious existence into the Almighty Spirit. Besides this, many of the im- moral regulations and customs which the founder of Buddhism found existing among the Hindus, he adopted into his own system, or at least tacitly ap- proved of them. The inferiority of Buddhism as a moral system to Christianity, is unquestionably and immeasurably great. Were any man, in a country enlightened by Christianity, to advocate the moral ideas of Buddha, and to practise according to his ten precepts and twelve observances, he would be universally and de- servedly regarded as a lunatic, a savage, or a mon- ster. 4. The Persian morality. The ancient Persians believed in the immortality of the human soul, the accountability of men to their Creator, a future state of rewards and punishments, and a judgment after death. Yet their morality was very defective. Their moral ideas were few and limited. The books prepared for their instruction contain, indeed, very little elevated sentiment of any kind. There is more of elevated, purifying moral sentiment in one of the Hebrew Psalms, or a chapter of the Proverbs, than we have been able to discover in the Yaena, Vendidad, Yispered, and Khoda-avesta together. Except as sources of information in regard to the 320 MORAL EXCELLENCE. beliefs and customs of the ancient Persians, these books are worthless. Their recent translation into a living language will not add one moral idea or truth to the stock already possessed by mankind. They contain no profound utterances, no grand truths, no comprehensive statements of duty, no far- reaching principles. They omit many of the most important virtues and duties, — such as supreme love to God, repentance, resignation, gratitude, humility, disinterested and self-sacrificing benevolence, com- j:)assion to the poor and miserable, kindness to wid- ows and orphans, forbearance and forgiveness. The universal fatherhood of God and the universal broth- erhood of men are not recosrnized in these old wri- tincrs. The duties which arise out of the relations of men to society, government, and to one another, are not mentioned. We do not assert that all these important virtues, duties, and principles were un- known to the ancient Persians and their teachers. Doubtless they had some knowledge of some of them. But the omission of all mention of them in their writings constitutes, so far as systematic mor- ality is concerned, a radical and fatal defect. The great amount of frivolous matter contained in these writings makes it still more evident how limited, meagre, and barren were the moral ideas and doc- trines of their authors. There is more said in the Avesta about dogs, and the proper way of treating them, than about kindness to the poor and the un- fortunate. There is more said about agriculture than about justice and benevolence, or the duties which men owe to God and to one another. The COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 321 first, second, and third thing declared most accepta- ble to Ahura-mazda pertains to husbandry. The beau-ideal of human character among the ancient Persians was, a thrifty farmer and cattle-raiser, who had one or more prolific wives and plenty of dogs. In the early period of their history, they were an agricultural people, and perhaps were generally peaceful and industrious. Of a higher order of morality they seem to have had no idea. Schlegel expresses the opinion that the intellectual religion of the Persians deserves to rank next to the Chris- tian faith and doctrine.^ However it may be in re- gard to their religion, their morality was certainly inferior to that of the Buddhists. In addition to its authorizing polygamy, the intermarriage of brothers and sisters, and other evils, — it failed to inculcate many of the higher virtues and duties of men. In the latter respect it fell much below Buddhism; and immeasurably below the moral system of the Bible. 5. The Chinese morality. In speaking of the Chi- nese theology as expounded by Confucius, we showed that there was a tendency in it to atheism. By his disuse of the personal name of God and in other ways, he discountenanced belief in men's accounta- bility to Him. He refused to express any opinion in regard to the existence of men after death, thus indicating that he at least doubted the immortality of the soul. He ignored the doctrine of future re- wards and punishments. His moral principles were ^ Aesthetic and Misc. Works, B. 2, ch. 4. 322 MORAL EXCELLENCE. mere ^ rules of propriety/ having no higher author- ity and sanctions than the usages of former times. Dr. Legge says, 'This propriety was a great stum- bling-block in the way of Confucius. His morality was the result of the balancings of his intellect, fet- tered by the decisions of men of old; and not the gushings of a loving heart, responsive to the prompt- ings of heaven, and in sympathy with erring and feeble humanity.'^ Beside destroying the founda- tions of morality in the minds of his disciples and worshi])pers, he was characterized by Chinese exclu- siveness and bigotry. He did not teach that God is the Father of all men. He did not recoo-nize the paternal character of God at all. He denied, or at least ignored, the universal brotherhood and equal- ity of men. His 'rules of propriety' were designed only for his countrymen. Among the Chinese even, he recognized but 'five relations of society,' viz. the relation of sovereign and minister, father and son, husband and wife, elder brother and younger, and friend to friend. He confined the application of his 'rules of propriety' to these five relations, main- taining that all moral duties arise out of these re- lations, and that the faithful discharge of these duties would secure peace and happiness 'all under heaven,'" — that is, througliout tlie Chinese empire. From these facts it is seen that the Confucian mor- ality must be narrow and superficial. Accordingly we find it contains no deep utterances; no grand, comprehensive, far-reaching truths; nothing com- ^ Life and Teaching of Confucius, p. 113. 'Legge's Confucius, p. 104. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. o'26 parable to the depth, power, and beauty of the mor- al teachings of the Bible. It has often been said, that Confucius anticipated the Golden Rule. He did indeed enunciate some- thing similar to it — ^What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.'^ Dr. Legge very properly calls attention to the negative character of this rule. It only forbids men to do what they feel to be wrong and hurtful. It requires the perform- ance of no duty, but merely abstinence from doing injuries. The command of Christ is positive, re- quiring men to do w^hatever they feel to be good and right — ^All things whatsoever ye w^ould that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them.' Christ's rule is for all men under all circumstances. The dictum of Confucius was deliv^ered only to the Chinese for their guidance in the five relations of society. As it respects the question of priority, though Confucius was before Christ, the latter says in regard to his rule, Hhis is the law and the proph- ets.'^ He only announced the truth that had been in substance taught by the Hebrew teachers long before. It has also been said that Confucius taught the duty of forgiveness, and repaying injury with kind- ness. In truth, however, he inculcated a revenge- ful spirit. When asked what he thought of the principle of recompensing injury with kindness, he repHed; 'With what, then, will you recompen.se kindness? Recompense injury with justice, and rec- * Legge's Confucius, p. 111-12. Ana. 15 : 23. ^ Mat. 7 : 1 2. 324 MORAL EXCELLENCE. ompense kindness with kindness/^ Another of his declarations was, that ^He who returns good for evil is a man who is careful of his person.' In regard to the murderer of a father, mother, brother, or other near relative, he affirmed the duty of blood-revenge in the strongest terms. The bad eiFects of this teach- ing are said to be evident in China even at the pres- ent time. The revengeful disposition of the Chinese keeps whole districts in a constant state of feud and warfare.^ In regard to some of the duties of ^the five re- lations of society,' Confucius taught very serious errors. He maintained that women should be kept in an abject condition — that a woman when young must obey her father and elder brother; when mar- ried, her husband ; when a widow, her son : that she may not think of marrying a second time; that her business is simply the preparation of food and wine; that she should not be known beyond the threshold of her own apartments; and that she must not come to any conclusion on her own deliberation. ^He taught that a wife might be divorced for seven rea- sons [of these, however, our author specifies only six], — disobedience to her husband's parents; not giving birth to a son; dissolute conduct; jealousy of her husband's attentions to other inmates of the harem; talkativeness; and thieving. These reasons, however, might be over-ruled by three considera- tions,— first, if the wife, while taken from a home, has no home to return to; second, if she has passed ^ Legge's Confucius, p. 113-14. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 325 with her husband the three years' mourning for his parents; third, if her husband has risen from poverty to wealth.^ The assigning as reasons for divorce lier not giving birth to a son and talkativeness j indicates an utter disregard for the importance and sacredness of the relation of husband and wife. He spoke of the faithfulness of husband and wife among the common people, when the husband takes no concubine, as * small fidelity.'^ It appears that he treated his own wife with indifference, and finally divorced her. He treated his son with dio-nified and distant reserve, manifesting but little affection for him.^ It appears, too, that he was guilty of in- sincerity and untruthfulness. He, indeed, taught that sincerity and truthfulness are important duties, but he regarded deceit as not inconsistent w^ith them. He feigned sickness in order to excuse himself from seeing an unwelcome visitor.^ He also deliberately violated his oath, and afterward justified himself in doing so. Being taken prisoner on his way to the city of AYei, he was released on making promise by oath that he would not proceed to that city. This oath he violated. On being asked whether this per- jury was right, he replied, ^It was a forced oath. The spirits do not hear such.'^ Confucius was by no means the sincere, frank, truthful man whom the Christian morality teaches us to admire. This error in the example of Confucius, and this evil trait in his character, have a very pernicious influence in China to this day. Foreigners complain of habitual ^ Legge's Confucius, p. 106. ^ Ana. 14: 18. 3 17 : 20. * Life of Confucius, p. 102. 28 326 MORAL EXCELLENCE. deceitfulness on the part of the Government and the people in general. It is thus seen, that the Confucian morality was very defective and erroneous. It denied the great truths which arm morality with authority and power. It rested on mere custom, propriety, and expediency. It took a very narrow and superfi- cial view of human relations and duties. It taught revenge as a duty, encouraged deceit, degraded wo- men, justified almost unlimited divorce, and approv- ed of concubinage. Such was the Chinese morality, as improved and expounded by their greatest teach- er. It will not bear comparison with the broad, deep, lofty morality of the Bible. 6. The Grecian morality. The morality of the Greeks is presented in its best form by their philos- ophers. Socrates, who was perhaps the best of all the heathen philosophers, taught the existence of God (or rather of many gods), the accountability of men, the immortality of the soul, and future retri- bution. A short time before his death, he expressed a hope that his soul would go into the presence of a good and wise god.^ Yet the doctrines of immortal- ity and retributioi^ were obscured and enfeebled in his hands by the absurdities of transmigration. He declared it probable that the souls of those who gave themselves up to gluttony and wantonness, will after death enter the bodies of asses and similar animals; that the souls of those who practise injustice, tyr- anny, and rapine will enter wolves, hawks, and ' Phffido, 68. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 327 kites; that souls which practise temperance and jus- tice, without philosophy and reflection, will migrate into bees, wasps, ants, or into human bodies again; and that the souls of philosophers, the true lovers of wisdom, will pass into the rank of the gods.^ Such views are certainly not calculated to restrain vice or stimulate virtue. The belief that a man may secure his transformation at death into a wasp or ant by the practice of justice and temperance, and that unjust and tyrannical men will probably be changed into wolves or hawks, cannot have much restraining or purifying influence, since men would about as lief be changed into beasts or birds .as into insects. In regard to many moral questions Socrates held very erroneous opinions. He is brought forward by Plato as the advocate of slavery, community of wives and children, the training of women for war, the co- habitation of brothers with sisters, the appearance of men and women together naked in public, abortion, infanticide, and all the immoralities and indecencies that are proposed in Plato's Republic, of which we will soon make more particular mention. Perhaps he should not be charged with all the opinions of which he is represented in that. Tt^ork as the advo- cate. Yet Aristotle quotes the Republie and the Laws as containing his well known sentiments. He even refers to these works as the productions of Soc- rates.^ He mentions expressly his advocacy of the community of wives and children, and the training of women for war. Doubtless he held in the main » Phaedo, 70-71. 'Pol. 2: 2-7. 328 MORAL EXCELLENCE. the immoral opinions attributed to him, and that Plato represents his revered master as saying noth- ing inconsistent with his known sentiments and character. His regard for modesty and chastity was certainly not very high. He visited the cour- tesan Theodota, and gave her directions how to se- cure the greatest success in her wicked course.^ He was on friendly terms with Aspasia, the paramour of Pericles.^ He disapproved of a Corinthian girl as a mistress merely on the score of health. He is said to have loaned his wife Xantippe to Alcibiades. He spoke of licentious indulgence on the part of men as a matter of inclination and choice.^ Plato held the views in regard to immortality, accountability, future retribution, and transmigra- tion, which he attributes to Socrates. His views, however, in regard to transmigration and retribu- tion were still more fanciful and absurd. He held that timid and unjust men are in their second gener- ation changed into women ; that men without vice, but light-minded and curious about things above, are changed into birds; that men who make no use of philosophy and never inquire into the nature of the universe, are changed into quadruped and mul- tiped animals with feet and head turned toward the earth; and that the most unthinking and ignorant are changed into fishes and other aquatic animals.* Suck views as these, so far as their influence upon tl^ character and conduct of men is concerned, arc v^Bp better than the doctrine of the soul's annihila- ▼ ^ Mem. 3: 11. ' Pint, in vita Periclis. ='Mem. 2: 2. * Tim. 72-3. COMPAKED AVITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 329 tion. To teach that timid and unjust men will be changed after death into women as a punishment for their sins, and that the unphilosophical class (which embraces the vast majority of mankind) will be changed into four-footed beasts and creeping things, is to make a mockery of immortality, accountability, and retribution. Plato's representations might al- most be taken as a burlesque upon these doctrines. His opinions on many points of practical morality were very erroneous. He taught, and he represents Socrates as teaching, that slavery is lawful and de- sirable; that agriculture should be committed to slaves, and that all classes of foreigners might be enslaved/ that women as well as men should be trained to war; and that men and women should appear together naked in gymnastic exercises. The reason assigned by him for this mingling of the sexes was, that male and female dogs are employed to- gether in watching and hunting. The supposed in- decency of men and women appearing naked to- gether in public was in his view the result of mere prejudice.^ He also taught as follows: that wives and children should be common, and that parents and children should not know each other; that chil- dren should be taken with their parents to war so as to be inured as soon as possible to danger and car- nage; that the best men should as often as possible form alliances with the best women, in order that, as in the case of dogs and birds, the breed may be im- proved; that worthy young men should be allowed 1 Laws, 7: 13; Rep. 5: 15. ^Rep. 5: 3. 28* f 330 MORAL EXCELLENCE. ample liberty of access to women as a reward for their virtue, and in order that tlie greatest number of children may be born of good parentage; that the children of worthy persons should be carefully nur- tured, but in such a way that no mother should rec- ognize her own child ; that the children of depraved parents, and maimed and lame children, should be destroyed by the public guardians; that children should be born of women from the age of twenty to forty, and of men from the age of thirty to forty- five; that men over forty-five and women over forty should *be common to one another; that abortion or exposure should be employed to destroy the children begotten by parents over the prescribed age; and that, as drugs were trusted to physicians while pri- vate persons were not allowed to meddle with them, so governors might practise lying for the good of the state, though private citizens should be truth- ful.^ He approved of the cohabitation of brothers and sisters. He also in reality approved of the co- habitation of fathers with daughters, and of sons with mothers. For in his model republic, parents are not to know their own children, and relatives are such only by adoption.^ He advised, for the purpose of making husbands and wives acquainted with one another before marriage, that young men and maidens should often meet in sports and dances without clothing.^ These views need no comment. They are beastly and abominable. If carried out, they would degrade the citizen into a mere tool of Ulep. 3: 3; 5: 8-9. ^Rep. 3: 3; and 5: 7-14. ' Laws, 6 : 15. f COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 331 the state, abrogate marriage, overthrow the family institution, desecrate and destroy the holiest social ties and affections, take away from both men and women all modesty, chastity, and decency, and in- troduce practices known only among brutes, and practices unknown even among them. Yet these are the views of the so-called divine Plato, the. prince of philosophers; who reports them as the views of Socrates, the wisest and the best of the Greeks. Aristotle went farther than either Socrates or Plato in obscuring and nullifying the fundamental princi- ples of morality. He often speaks of God as an eternal and immovable suhstancCj a divine esseiice, first jjrincipley and by other words which represent Him as a mere entity without personality and attri- butes. He presents no animating views of God's character or providence. Indeed he seems to deny, or at least doubt, that God's providence extends to the earth, or that he takes cognizance of the actions of men. His opinion in regard to the immortality of the soul appears also to have been indefinite and variable. In one place he speaks of the dead as still existing, but of their condition as doubtful.^ But in another place, he speaks of death as the cessation of existence.^ In the latter place his language seems to imply that the souls of the dead are no more. At all events, the doctrine of the immortality of the soul in the writings of Aristotle has no moral power. He makes no use of it to deepen man's sense of ac- ^Eth. 1: 10-11. 2Eth. 3: 6. 332 MORAL EXCELLENCE. countability. The idea of future retribution is not presented, that we are aware of, in his works. Since the ideas of God, accountability, immortality, and retribution have so deep moral significance, exert so much influence over men's moral feelings, and arm conscience and right with so much power, it is seen how extremely defective the moral system of Aris- totle must be. He sunk below the beast-worship- pers of ancient Egypt in regard to the fundamental ideas of morality. On some points of practical morality, he held opinions similar to those of Plato. He justified slavery as a natural and just institution. His defi- nition of a slave is, *a tool with a soul in it.' He declared that the ox is in the place of a slave to the poor man; that foreigners should serve the Greeks; that a foreigner and a slave are by nature one and the same; that some men are formed slaves by na- ture, and are fitted to be the chattels of others;^ that slaves may be used, some as stewards and others as drudges,^ and that all husbandmen should be made slaves, and be so treated as to be deprived of all spirit.^ He also prescribed that in every family only a certain number of children, fixed by law, should be allowed; that every additional child born in tlie family should be destroyed ; and that every child born imperfect or maimed should be disposed of in the same way; or, in case the customs and feel- ings of the people will not permit the destruction of infants, that the excess of j^opulation should be ' Pol. 1 : 2-5. 2 Econ. 1:5. ' Pol. 7 : 10. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 333 prevented by the use of abortion.^ He calls theft, adultery, poisoning, pandering, enticing away of slaves, assassination, and false witness involuntary actions, on the ground that their origin is involun- tary.^ He maintains further, that if a man acts not from deliberate preference, but from passion, he is not unjust though he performs an unjust act; not a thief, though he steals; not an^ adulterer, though he commits adultery.^ He, however, denominates as unpardonable, acts performed through passion, neither natural nor human.* He approves of re- venge, the returning of evil for evil. He does not justify retaliation under all circumstances. For ex- ample he does not think that an officer, who strikes some one, should be struck in turn.^ Yet he advo- cates the retaliation of injuries generally. He de- clares that the meek man errs by defect, since he is not inclined to reveno;e — but to foro^ive.^ Besides these and other errors that were advocated by the Grecian philosophers, they obscured and en- feebled moral truth by their manner of presenting it. Their wriRngs are metaphysical, tedious, prolix. Every gem they contain is imbedded in a heap of rubbish. What little genuine moral sentiment they contain is surrounded by a mass of definitions and discussions of ideas, essences, entities and entelechies, that bury it almost out of sight. We scarcely ever find a clear, pithy, comprehensive sentence. The depth, strength, and earnestness of expression, the fullness of meaning, and the rich profusion of soul- *Pol.7:16. 'Etli.5:2. ^b\(S. *5:8. ^5: 4. M: 5. 334 MORAL, EXCELLENCE. stirring sentiment and just maxims, which are found in the Bible are altogether wanting; and instead, we have definitions, distinctions, disquisitions, and long-winded illustrations. Thus the very manner of presenting moral truth that characterizes Aris- totle and Plato, and also Socrates though in a less degree, places them as moralists much below the writers of the Bible. Another thing which places these philosophers in a still more unfavorable light is, that though occu- pying the position of moral teachers, they acquiesced in and sanctioned many of the worst immoralities that prevailed around them. That great immoral- ities, both private and public, prevailed in their time is well known. Un chastity was perhaps the most common vice. The poet Homer represents his * godlike' heroes as keeping mistresses, and as there- by doing nothing that was improper. The custom prevailed in later times. Pericles, the statesman, who was contemporary with Socrates, had Aspasia as his mistress. Before his connection with her, he had parted from his wife by mutui# consent, and she had been married to another man. He had by liis mistress an illegitimate son, who is said to have been sold, according to the Athenian law, as a slave. Pericles in this matter did nothing contrary to law or public opinion. The practice referred to was al- lowed by one of Solon's laws. Adultery was re- garded as disgraceful and was severely punished; but men who kept mistresses were not regarded as adulterers. Even the prostitutes themselves attain- ed to high consideration. No women in Greece had COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 335 SO great fame or influence as the courtesans Aspasia, Theodota, Thargelia, and Thais. After the death of Pericles, Aspasia made one of her paramours, named Lysicles, the most considerable man in Ath- ens. Socrates, as stated above, visited both Aspasia and Theodota. The advice which he gave to The- odota indicates his familiarity with unclean passions and practices. Plato in his Menexenus represents him as calling Aspasia ^ my mistress.' We have already mentioned that he is said to have loaned his wife to Alcibiades; and that he disapproved of a Corinthian mistress on the score of health. Plato kept a courtesan named Archianassa. Aristotle married or lived with the concubine of Hermias, while Hermias was still living. Many of the Athe- nian laW'S in regard to marriage were very bad. A man might marry his half-sister, the daughter of his father. An heiress was required to marry a near relative, a brother or uncle. If she and her husband had no children, she was allowed to cohabit with any of her husband's kinsmen whom she might select. The marriage contract was voidable by the mutual consent of husband and wife. The dissoluteness of the Spartans was still more open and undisguised. Many great immoralities were established among them by law and oustoui. Young men and women were required to engage together naked in the public exercises, and to dance together naked at the public festivals. Community of wives was practised ; husbands loaned their wives to one another. The women were proverbially dis- solute. Aristotle says they indulged without re- 336 MORAL EXCELLENCE. straint in every impropriety.^ Feeble infants were thrown into a cavern near the mountain of Tayge- tus. Slaves received a certain number of stripes every day, in order that they might not forget their degraded condition; and were murdered by thou- sands, lest they should become so numerous as to en- danger the state. The greatest licentiousness, how- ever, prevailed at Corinth. In the temple of Venus in that city, a thousand prostitutes were maintained; and their lewd practices were regarded as honors paid to the imaginary goddess. Such were the immoralities of the laws, customs, and practices of the Athenians and other Grecians in the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. But in regard to these immoralities they were silent. Instead of denouncing and opposing the licentious- ness and corruptions that prevailed around them, they reasoned against the Sophists; theorized and disputed about ideas, essences and substances; or ad- vocated slavery, training of women for war, com- munity of wives, and the slaughtering of feeble and supernumerary infants, as means of improving so- ciety and building up the State. Such was the morality taught and practised by the best and most gifted of the Greeks. The best treat- ises on theoretical and practical morality furnished by Greece, ignore or obscure the great fundamental ideas of morality; are destitute of moral strength and earnestness; contain no grand moral utterances, nor brief, comprehensive, far-reaching statements of ^Pol. 2: 9. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 337 truth; and advocate many things so base and atro- cious, that we scarcely dare mention them. Such are the moral achievements of the finest philosophi- cal genius, so far as is now known, the world has ever produced. 7. The Roman morality. The Romans adopted the morality as well as the literature and theology of the Greeks. They produced nothing better than the Memorabilia and the Nicomachean Ethics unless it be the moral writings of Cicero; who was an eclec- tiCj and endeavored to bring together the best from all systems and theories. Like an artist wdio forms a figure of associated beauties, — taking a head here, an arm there, and a hand yonder, — Cicero appropri- ated whatever seemed to him true and p:ood in the writings of all preceding authors. Yet he by no means presents a perfect system. In his treatise on DutieSj he hurries over the duties of men toward God without telling in what they consist. He does not teach that moral duties have the sanction of God's authority; nor that men should imitate his charac- ter. His standard of right and duty is the honestum — the honest and honorable. The idea of future retribution is scouted by him. He doubted the im- mortality of the soul ; but thought that if it exists at all after death, it must be happy. Thus he neglect- ed, doubted, or denied the doctrines which have so important a bearing on morality. On many subjects his opinions were very erroneous. He speaks of Ly- curgus as the inventor of a most admirable and bene- ficial system of jurisprudence, without expressing any disapprobation of the indecencies and immoralities 29 338 MORAL EXCELLENCE. which it embraced.^ He approved of slavery as nat- ural and right.^ He justified the enslavement of the common people according to the Spartan code; though the taking of the lands of the rich to be cul- tivated by them he condemned as unjust.^ He also justified suicide. It is true that he teaches that a man should not depart out of this world without the command of God. But he held that under certain circumstances, men have the command or permission of God to kill themselves. He refers, as examples, to Socrates and Cato;'' the latter of whom killed himself with his sword. He teaches that, in regard to life, the same law should be observed which regu- lated the banquets of the Grecians — ^Let a man either drink or depart' — and, that a man by killing himself may avoid the misfortunes which he cannot bear.^ Another of his errors was the approval of the retaliation of injuries. He thought, indeed, that it might be sufficient if the offender would repent and not repeat the injury; but at the same time, he approved in general of returning evil for evil.^ He also justified hypocritical formality in religion. He did not believe in 'the rabble of gods' worshipped by the Komans. Like many modern skeptics, he denied the possibility, or at least the credibility, of the supernatural. Yet he enjoined conformity to custom, law, and public opinion; declaring that the gods accounted celestial ought to be worshipped; and that divine honors should be paid to Hercules, 1 Rep. 3:9. ^ i : 43. ^ 3 : 0. * Tusc. Quest. 1 : 30. ^Tusc. Quest. 5: 41. « De Offic. 1: 7; 3: 19. COMPARED WITH OTHER SYSTEMS. 339 Komulus, and other deified men.^ He did not be- lieve in divination and augury; but he directed that there should be public augurs to examine the pre- sages and auspices, and that military officers and civil rulers should be guided by them. He himself held the office of augur, and declared it to be one of the greatest and most important.^ In thus recom- mending hypocritical conformity to custom and law in regard to religion, Cicero followed the example of preceding and contemporary philosophers. Yet his conduct was very reprehensible, involving, as it did, insincerity and falsehood. Probably the most griev- ous error of this highly gifted man was his justifica- tion of sexual impurity. ^When was this not prac- tised? When was it found fault with? Can the time be mentioned when this practice, which is now lawful, was not accounted so?'^ The incompetency of Cicero and all his contem- poraries as moral teachers is shown, by their ina- bility to oppose the licentiousness which prevailed around them. The morals of the Romans in his time were most deplorable. Bribery, fraud, oppres- sion, slavery, infanticide, conjugal infidelity, pros- titution, sexual uncleanness of every kind, vices too indecent to be mentioned, prevailed without re- straint from law or public opinion. Women as well as men were destitute of honesty, modesty, and de- cency. Women of the higher class were so depraved and licentious that men were unwilling to contract matrimony with them, and instead of wives kept 1 De Leg. 2:8. ^De Leg. 2:12. » Orat. pro Ccelio. 340 MORAL EXCELLENCE. mistresses and concubines — often their own slaves. Women desired to be childless in order that they might indulge in licentious gratifications without restraint. The government put a premium on mar- riage, and offered rewards to women who had many children. Childless women were forbidden to wear jewels. Penalties were imposed on the unmarried. But all efforts to correct the evil by legislation were unavailing. All relish for domestic happiness, and all pure love between the sexes, w^ere destroyed. Virgins practised shameful indecencies. Gentlemen and ladies went to the bath together. To behold naked exhibitions, men without clothing stabbing and killing- one another, the blood spouting, and the dead and dying dragged by hooks out of the arena, was the amusement of both sexes and of all classes. Triumphs and holidays were celebrated with human blood and butchery; and at the sight of death-wounds, and of prostrate, bleeding, gasp- ing forms, the amphitheatre resounded with shouts and cheers, and women and girls laughed and clap- ped their hands. Drunkenness, gluttony, adultery, incest, murder, and crimes that must not be named, became so common that they ceased to be disgrace- ful. That this picture is not overdrawn can be shown by a short quotation from Tacitns, who speaks of ^ the ceremonies of religion violated ; enor- mous adulteries; the sea crowded with exiles; the rocks stained with the blood of murdered citizens; E,ome itself a theatre of still greater horrors; there nobility and wealth marked men out for destruction; di?G FOR ITS ORIGIN. tleness and beauty. The turtle-doves were lively and graceful. The storks had a grave and modest air. The blue-birds were so small as not to bend a blade of grass with their weight. The little brook- turtles had quick soft eyes. The very mules had large black eyes shaded with long lashes. Jesus himself was gifted with infinite charms of person and speech; and by means of these external advan- tages delighted and captivated the people. He was a favorite especially among his fair country-women, who rivaled one another in their affectionate esteem and devotion, and in listening to him and serving him; and one of whom, named Mary of Magdala, was cured of nervous diseases by his pure and gentle beauty. Thus surrounded with beauty and delight, Jesus lived as in an earthly paradise; and as he tra- versed Galilee on a fine black-eyed mule, enjoyed a perpetual holiday.^ Such is a specimen of Kenan's Life of Jesus, In it romance and conjecture are pre- dominating elements. In the end it will be regarded on all hands, yea is now regarded, as one of the many abortive attempts to account for the Christian literature, morality, and religion, as the natural pro- duction of the human mind. Even skeptics speak of it with contempt. Tlie Westminster Review de- clares tjiat it is a wonder how Renan 'can cheat him- self into the idea that his picture is anything more than a dream.'^ His theory founded on assumption and conjecture, and recommended by little else than a romantic and brilliant style of thought and dic- ^Chs. 2, 9, 10. 2 Oct. 18G6, p. 148. INFIDEL THEORIES. 475 tion, needs no refutation. This unsuccessful effort is but another proof that the origin of the Bible and Christianity cannot be solved on infidel principles. 5. Gibbon's account of the propagation of Christian- ity. This celebrated historian does not pretend to treat of the origin of the Bible and Christianity; but he evidently wishes to insinuate that they were ori- ginated by mere men. Beginning after apostolic times, he treats professedly of the success of Christi- anity; which he attributes to five secondary causes. But none of these causes had in reality anything to do in originating Christianity, and some of them hindered its subsequent success. The first cause he mentions is, Hhe inflexible and intolerant zeal of the early Christians.' The intolerance of Christianity (by which is meant its refusal of alliance with other religions, audits demand for their complete aban- donment,) could hardly have recommended it to pa- gans and polytheists; and certainly does not in any degree account for its origin. Christianity existed before there were any Christians to be intolerant. The second cause assigned for the success of the Gospel is, Hhe doctrine of a future life.' But how could the denunciation of everlasting fire as a pun- ishment, not only for flagrant crimes, but also for pride, selfishness, and godless pleasures, and the pro-, mise of nothing in the future world but pure and spiritual delights as a reward for faith and holiness in this life — how could such teachings as these rec- ommend Christianity to people who were character- ized by the love of worldly and sensual pleasures? But even if the doctrine of a future life did promote 476 MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOR ITS ORIGIN. the success of Christianity iu the first centuries, the statement of this fact gives us no information con- cerning its origin. The third cause which Gibbon mentions is, *the miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive Church/ Real miracles would of course promote the growth of the church. But pretended miracles were doubtless in the mind of the historian, and it is at least questionable whether a pretense of this or any other kind could be of any real advantage. But we have as yet no light thrown upon the origin of Christian doctrine. The church, of course, exis- ted before miraculous powers were ascribed to her, and Christianity existed before the church. * The pure and austere morals of the Christians' are as- signed as the fourth cause of the rapid progress of Christianity. It is, again, questionable whether this cause accelerated or retarded the progress of Christi- anity among the immoral and pleasure-loving peoples embraced within the Roman empire during the first and second centuries. But at all events Christianity existed before it was recommended by the moral purity of its adherents. The fifth and last cause as- signed is, Hhe union and discipline of the Christian republic' But this cause, like some of the preced- ing, though it may have contributed to the increased success of Christianity, had nothing to do in origin- ating it. Thus the historian fails to tell us any- thing as to how Christianity got its start in the world. He does indeed say, willingly or unwil- lingly, sincerely or insincerely, that the victory of Christianity over the established religions of the earth was owing * to the convincing evidence of the INFIDEL THEORIES. 477 doctrine itself, and the ruling providence of its great Author.' But, aside from the admission implied in calling God the author of Christianity, the historian says nothing about its origin. His five ^secondary causes' are all the accompaniments or results of a religion already in rapid progress. He tells us that *a pure and humble religion gently insinuated itself into the minds of men;' but says nothing as to whence it came, or how it came, except that God is its Author. No intelligent man will refer to the 15th chapter of Gibbon as giving a satisfactory account, or an account at all, of the origin of the Bible and Christianity. CHAPTER TI. INFIDEL THEORIES CONTINUED — FACTS AND CONSIDERATIONS FURTHER ILLUSTRATING THEIR INSUFFICIENCY. The insufficiency of the infidel theories to ac- count for the origin of Christianity is shown by their statement, but may be further illustrated by several facts and considerations. 1. In the first place, infidels do not grapple with the whole difficulty. Their efforts are mainly di- rected to reconcile what they claim to be false ac- counts of miracles in the New Testament with the apparent candor of the writers. They endeavor to tell how the stories concerning Christ's supernatural birth and character, his working miracles, and his resurrection and ascension, originated. They con- cern themselves mainly with the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles; and only with these so far as they bring to view the supernatural element. But even if they could explain the supposed falsehood in the accounts of miracles, and reconcile the claims of Christ and the excellence of his character and teach- ing with his mere humanity, they have a stupendous difficulty to encounter in the unparalleled excellence of the Biblical writings in general. Let the reader bear in mind what has been demonstrated in regard 478 INFIDEL THEORIES CONTINUED. 479 to the political, literary, moral, and theological ex- cellence of the Bible considered as a whole, and in regard to its influence over the minds and affairs of men. How could rude, bigoted, narrow-minded Jews produce books so free from extravagance and absurdity, so consistent with science, so true to uni- versal nature and to man, so full of grand and beau- tiful conceptions, so catholic in spirit ; — books that embody all the true morality and theology in the world, and not only have become the standard for the world in morals and religion, but are also studied as specimens of poetic beauty and sublimity, and as models of style; — books the most read, admired, loved, quoted, imitated, and plagiarized of any in the world ; and that are so substantial in their excel- lence, that they may without serious detriment be translated into any language, and are at home in every country and in every clime; — books that have enriched and ennobled all modern literature, and that exert a controllinoj influence over the thoug^hts and feelings of men ; — how was it, and whence was it, that such authors wrote such books? The theory that they were impostors, or that they consciously dealt in fiction — the mythical or legendary theory — if substantiated, would enable us to treat any of their historical statements as either true or false, at pleasure; and thus to reject their accounts of mira- cles. But the miracle of the book itself would still be left on our hands, and would be rendered all the more remarkable and striking by the way in which its own accounts of miracles had been set aside. 2. In proposing and advocating their theories, 480 MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOR ITS ORIGIN. infidels pursue a very arbitrary, inconsistent, and illogical course. They can reject the miracles re- corded in the Bible only by impeaching the charac- ter of its writers as historians. Yet, though denying their historical veracity, they accept much on their testimony alone. These infidel theorists declare one passage in the Gospels inaccurate; another untrue; another incredible. They charge the evangelists with inventing or recording lies, fictions, myths, legends. If this charge be true, the evangelists are altogether untrustworthy as historians, and we should believe nothing on their testimony alone. The witness who is proved to have testified falsely in one case, is declared incompetent, and is ordered out of court. Yet skeptical writers accept as true much of the gospel history. In order to set aside the accounts of miracles, they represent its writers as untrustworthy; yet they claim to know much about matters treated of by no other historians. Now, we have the very same kind and degree of evidence that Christ wrought miracles, and that he himself rose from the dead and ascended to heaven, as that there was ever such a person in existence. If infidels, in endeavoring to eliminate the supernat- ural element from the Gospels, should succeed in proving that impostures, fictions, * tendency- writ- ings,'^ myths, legends, are recorded in them as ver- itable history, the character of their authors as his- torians would be completely destroyed, and in that case we could know nothing and should believe * TcndenZ'Schriften. INFIDEL THEORIES CONTIXUED. 481 nothing concerning the work and character of Christ. Inih^ed in that case it wouhl be donhtful whether such a person ever existed. This fact is recognized sometimes hy skeptical writers. One of tliis class declares in substance, that if the miracles of the Gospels are to be thrust aside as incredible, it fol- lows irresistibly that the credit of the Gospels is in every respect gone, and it argues an unbounded credulity^ if we accept particular details as historical without corroborative evidence from other witnesses known to be contemporary. He further says, that as the state of things it not much more satisfactory in the Acts of the Apostles, we cannot be said to know any more of the first preachers of Christianity than of its founder.^ But this ' unbounded credulity' is exhibited by skeptical writers in general. They write biographies of Jesus, of whom according to their own showing they know nothing, and in sup- port of their theories and speculations cite witnesses whose testimony they continually impeach. Scarce- ly any two of them agree as to how much of the Gospels is to be accepted as historical and how much is to be rejected as imposture, fiction, and legend. Yet each one advocates his own views, as if noth- ing but prejudice, ignorance, or obstinate stupidity could with-hold assent. Thus inconsistency, assump- tion, dogmatism, and — to use the phrase of the writer quoted above — 'unbounded credulity,' characterize the reasoning; of the infidel theorists in sreneral. 3. As we have already shown, infidels not only * Westrniiistcr Review, Oct. 18GG, i>p. 148-151. 41 482 MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOR ITS ORIGIN. differ in regard to the character of the Gospels, but also in regard to their origin. One class maintains, or rather did maintain (for their theory is almost en- tirely abandoned,) that they originated in imposture and fraud, that they contain palpable lies, and that their authors were knaves and liars. But another class of infidels declare that this theory is entirely too gross and vulgar, and that writings so pure and elevated could not have been produced by base or bad men. This class maintains that, though honest and candid, they invented and recorded fictions, assert- ing as true and real what they knew to be false, and practising deception for pious purposes. But neither is this theory satisfactory to the majority of infidels. Indeed, only a few rely on it as explaining the ori- gin of the Gospels. Hence the mythical theory has been started, acquitting the writers of intentional fraud and of conscious invention, but representing them as the compilers of fictions and stories uncon- sciously wrought out by others. This theory asserts the Gospels to be a conglomeration of facts and fictions, unconscious inventions, and an uncertain amount of historical verity — a sort of deposit from the debris of Jewish history, fancy, and floating tra- dition. But even this theory has but few advocates. Its greatest champion has virtually repudiated it, and gone back to the older theory of conscious in- vention, which he advocates under the new name. The legendary theory has but one advocate — its ro- mantic founder. It is thus that theory after theory is proposed to show that tlie Bible and Christianity are merely human, or rather Jewish productions. INFIDEL THEORIES CONTINUED. 483 It IS thus that Infidels oppose and demolish each other's theories. Every little while a theory is start- ed that is welcomed by infidels as settling the whole question ; but it is soon displaced by another, that lives its short day, and then gives place to a third. The writings of the Tyndal and Morgan school are now obsolete, and would be almost unknown, but for the accounts of them in Leland's View of Deisti- cal Writers, The majority of educated infidels are ashamed of such writers as Voltaire, Bolingbroke, and Paine. Strauss sets aside the theory that the evangelical writers were guilty of contrivance and intentional deception. Baur, under the name of tendency-ihQory J renews and advocates the charge of contrivance and intentional deception. Strauss yields to his stronger rival, and under the name of the mythical theory revives the stale charge of fiction and fraud. Parker ridicules and laughs at Strauss. Renan deviates from them all. The Westminster Review denounces the assumptions, dogmatism, and inconsistency of E-enan; and exposes his 'unbounded credulity.' And this infidel journal stultifies itself by speaking at one time of the fascinating character — the solemn grandeur — and elevating, enriching, guiding, glorious career of the Saviour while on earth ;'^ and by asserting at another, that the gospel narratives are not trustworthy ; and that we cannot be said to know anything either of the Founder or the first preachers of Christianity. It thus contradicts itself, and subjects itself to the charge of boundless ^ April, 1863, p. 269. 484 MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOB ITS ORIGIN. credulity which it fastens upon Renan. Thus infi- dels have done, and are doing, little but demolishing each other^s theories. Their writings and conject- ures remind us of the Bible account of the slaughter of the Philistines by Jonathan and his armor-bearer: — * Behold, the multitude melted away, and they went on beating down one another.'^ Hence we thmk Christianity has nothing to fear from the mul- tiplication of infidel books. They but contradict and refute one another. It is the mercenary and mate- rialistic spirit of the age, and its selfishness and friv- olity, rather than the theories and argumentation of infidels, that resist the influence of the Bible, and re- tard the progress of Christianity. Infidelity by its assumptions, dogmatism, inconsistencies, contradic- tions, and ^ boundless credulity,^ will work its own cure in earnest and reflective minds; while the trans- cendent excellence of the Bible above all other books will ensure the recognition of its supernatural origin and divine authority. UBam. 14: 16. CHAPTER III. THE INFIDEL ASSUMPTION THAT MIRACLES ARE INCREDIBLE. The abstract impossibility of miracles is asserted by few if any intelligent men who believe in the existence of God. It would take an irreverent and daring man, or a very ignorant one, to assert that the Almighty cannot work a miracle. It is a dictate of common sense that the Infinite Being, who crea- ted the heavens and earth, can arrest the sun and moon in their course, and change the motion of the earth. He, who creates the human body and soul, certainly has power to reanimate a human body, — to replace the soul in a body from which it has been removed by death. The almighty Creator, — who knows all the bones, muscles, veins, arteries, nerves, and all the organs, vessels and tissues of the human body, and all the diseases to which they are subject, — certainly has the power instantaneously to cure every such disease. For aught that men on earth can know, there may be in some of the starry worlds intellectual beings whom God by his infinite power might transport to earth as messengers of his will. Who will assert that God has not the i)0wer to transport a human being alive to some of the planets or fixed stars, and to bring him back again 41* 485 486 MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOU ITS ORIGIN. to earth? He who believes that there is a God in lieaven must admit that such things are possible with God, and therefore must admit the abstract possibility of miracles. God, who is a supernatural Being, possesses su})ernatural power, and can, if he chooses, do supernatural things. But infidels seldom deny the abstract possibility of miracles. They generally assert only that ^ mir- acles are incredible, if not impossible.' Tacitly or expressly admitting their abstract possibility, they roundly assert their incredibility. But the possibil- ity of miracles demonstrates their credibility. A possible thing is a thing that may be or may take 'place. An incredible thing is a thing that cannot be believed. If a man admits that a thing is possible, he admits that he believes that it may be, or may take place. To say that a thing is possible but not credible, is virtually to say that though a thing may take place, it is impossible to believe that it may take place! To assert that miracles, although possible, are not credible, is virtually to assert that though a miracle may take place, no one can believe that a miracle can take place. Hence the possibility of miracles demonstrates their credibility. Indeed, it seems strange that any man who knows anything about human history, or the religious opinions of mankind, should assert that miracles are incredible; that is, that it is impossible to believe in them. For the majority of men in all ages have believed in them. The Egyptians, Hebrews, Hindus, Persians, Chinese, Greeks, Romans, Arabians, and every na- tion and race known to us in history have believed CREDIBILITY OF MIRACLES. 487 in them. The supernatural is the basis of every system of religion known among men. Every re- ligion,— Christianity, Judaism, Paganism, Moham- medism, down to Fetichisra, — assumes or asserts the reality of miracles. Infidelity, which rejects the reality and credibility of miracles, is not a religious system, but a mere negation. This fact of the al- most universal belief in miracles, gives the lie to the assumption that miracles are incredible. Is it not strange that an intelligent man should assert that miracles are incredible, while all history demon- strates that nearly all mankind have believed in them? It is not strange that an honest man should assert that a thing is incredible — cannot be believed — while he is making an effort to destroy a wide- spread belief in that thing? * Miracles are incred- ible— they cannot be believed,' cries the infidel; while his regret is that a very large portion of man- kind have actually believed, and, notwithstanding all his efforts, continue to believe in the supernatu- ral inspiration of the Scriptures, and the supernatu- ral events recorded in them ! Even if the infidel should assert that miracles are incredible by 2')kilosophiG and educated minds, his assertion would be manifestly false. Jesus of Naz- areth, Paul, John, Isaiah, David, Moses, and others of the Biblical writers, — who had something better than modern education and philosophy, and have given to the world the most sublime literature, mor- ality, and theology ever known among men, — be- lieved in miracles. The greatest poets, historians, philosophers, and statesmen among the ancient hea- 488 MODES OF ACCOUXTING FOR ITS ORIGIN. then believed in miracles. Augustine, Athanasius, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Pascal, Fenelon, Wesley, Hall, Chalmers, Mason, Edwards, and other theo- loo-ical chiefs, — who had the most gifted and best educated minds of their age, — believed in miracles. Bacon, Newton, Locke, Milton, Grotius, and other giants in literature and science, believed in miracles. Indeed, the majority of learned men, and the over- whelming majority of enlightened people that have lived and died during eighteen hundred years, have believed in the very miracles which the infidel wish- es especially to disprove — the supernatural inspira- tion of the Bible, and the supernatural character of Jesus. These miracles are yet believed by a very large number of the educated and enlightened por- tion of mankind now living in this latter half of the nineteenth century. It is not true that educated minds cannot believe in miracles. The assumption that they are incredible is manifestly and glaringly false. The assertion indicates a want either of con- sideration or candor. Nor is this the only instance of infidel persistence in assumptions and assertions to which history, observation, and experience give the lie. Miracles, then, are both possible and cred- ible. God can, by his infinite power, perform mir- acles; and hence they are possible. Since they are ])ossible, they are not altogether incredible. They are shown to be credible, that is, believable, by the fact that they have been believed by nearly all men in all ages. INIiracles are believed; but ought they to be be- lieved? The realiti/ of miracles is the main question. CEEPIBILITY OF MIRACLES. 489 We assert that all men except thorough-going athe- ists, do believe in their reality. Hume, Voltaire, and E,ousseau so believed. Strauss, Renan, the West- minster Reviewers, and the many skeptical writers uho assume with so much assurance and dogmatism the incredibility of miracles, do after all believe in them. We do not assert that they believe in the Christian miracles — the supernatural inspiration of the Scriptures, the supernatural character ot Christ, and his resurrection and ascension. But they believe in other miracles. A miracle is a supernatural event, something above or beyond nature and its laws. (1) The class of writers to whom we now refer have much to say about the laivs of nature. But the existence of the laws of nature implies a supernatural power which established them. There can be no law with- out a lawgiver. A law neither establishes itself nor executes itself. The establishment, then, of what are called Hhe laws of nature^ is something above na- ture; and the intelligent thinker who believes in the laws of nature must believe in supernaturalism, (2) Most people who believe in the existence of God, be- lieve in his superintending Providence. Voltaire often speaks of 'Divine Providence,' even in his attacks on Christianity.^ Gibbon attributes the suc- cess of Christianity partly to 'the ruling providence of its great Author.'^ Socrates, Plato, Aristotle- Cicero, and the best of the heathen philosophers; acknowledged an over-ruling Providence. Such we understand to be the belief of all intelliarently inconsistent with one another. A book without api)arent inconsistencies and contradictions would not correspond to the works of God. In the world around us there are many apparent discrep- THE TWO TflEORIES, CHRISTIAN AND INFIDEL. 505 ancles. The benevolence of God is manifested in creation and providence. But with the lesson thus taught many things seem utterly inconsistent. One }>art of God's works appears to contradict another. Why did God create barren deserts? Why did God create the mirage, which serves only to lure thirsty travelers, to their own destruction, into the trackless wilderness? AVhy did God create bogs and marshes which breed only filthy reptiles, stench, and deadly diseases? Why are some men born with hereditary diseases and deformities? AVhy does God create idiots and miserable hunchbacks? Why do infants suffer and die? Why do men die at all? Why is this world which God created and rules, so full of wretchedness and misery? If, in answer to these questions, it is said, that men suffer on account of their sins; it may be asked, is it on account of their own sins that some men are born idiots, and others diseased and deformed? Is it on account of their own sins that infants suffer and die? Even if it could be shown that God inflicts punishment for sin by anticipation before its commission, this would not account for the sufferings of idiots and infants. For thousands and thousands of idiots and infants die without becoming accountable for their actions, and without committing any sin. And though hu- man sinfulness may account for the sufferings of adults in general, yet why are there so great ine- qualities in the condition and punishment of men? Why do the guilty often escape, and the innocent often suffer. Why do many selfish, cruel, murder- ous tyrants and oppressors enjoy continued health, 43 506 MODES OF ACCOUNTI^'G FOR ITS ORIGIN. ease, and prosperity; while many honest men and pure and lovely women spend days, months, years, their whole lives, in ceaseless toil and sorrow? In addition to these unanswered and unanswerable questions, we may ask, why did God permit the existence of moral evil? Why did he create a world in which there is so much sin and so much suifer- ing? Why does not God prevent lying, drunken- ness, war, oppression, murder, and other evils? Do you say he cannot? Do you say that if he would make the attempt he would fail? Do you say that if God had tried, he could not have created a world in which there would be no sin and no suffering? The truth is, that in creation and providence there are many things that appear to us short-sighted mortals, to be mistakes. The permission of moral evil appears a dreadful mistake. The subjection of infants to suffering and death seems another dread- ful mistake. The man born without eyes, the man born without hands, that miserable hunchback — the man who, like king Richard, is sent into the world deformed, unfinished, 'scarce half made up, and that so lamely and unfashionably, that the dogs bark at him'^ — seem to be blunders of the Great Artist. How does every theist reason with regard to these matters? He admits that there are mysteries, and apparent discrepancies and mistakes in creation and providence. He admits that there are many things in the world around him which he cannot reconcile with one another, nor with the infinite wisdom, good- * King Richard iii. Act 1, scene 1. THE TWO THEORIES, CHRISTIAN AND INFIDEL. 507 ness, and power of God, and his over-ruling provi- dence. The theist does rfot, however, conclude that' therefore God did not create, and does not rule the world. Nor does he conclude, as did the ancient Grecians and Romans, that God is controlled by fate, against which he struggles in vain. Nor does he adopt the opinion of the ancient Persians, that there are two Gods, — one of light and of goodness, and an- other of darkness and of evil. Notwithstandintr the apparently irreconcilable contradictions and inconsis- tencies in creation and providence, he holds to the belief that they have but one Author, who is ab- solutely free and sovereign. Notwithstanding the many seeming indications of mistake, malev^oleuce, or weakness, he firmly believes that God is infinitely wise, benevolent, and powerful. He admits that in God's works there are mysteries which he cannot understand; apparent contradictions which he can- not reconcile; and apparent mistakes which he can- not explain. Yet he maintains that notwithstanding these, all God's wo-rks are righteous and perfect. He believes that were his mental powers and his knowl- edge much enlarged, he would be able to explain many apparent contradictions and mistakes in crea- tion and providence; and that infinite wisdom can explain them all. So the Christian may admit that there are mysteries in the Bible which he cannot solve; apparent contradictions which he cannot rec- oncile; and apparent mistakes which he cannot ex- plain ; and yet maintain that God is its author. He, too, may say, that had he much enlarged powers and knowledge, he might understand and explain many 608 MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOR ITS ORIGIN. of tlie mysteries, and apparent inconsistencies and in- ' accuracies at which the Skeptic stumbles. These alleged inconsistencies and inaccuracies no more disprove the supernatural inspiration of the Biblical writers than do the mysteries and apparent contradic- tions and mistakes in creation and providence dis- prove the existence of God, or that he created and rules the world. Notwithstanding these mysteries and apparent contradictions and mistakes, it is easier to believe in the existence of God and his over-ruling providence, than to believe that the world was made by chance. So, however formid- able the objection against the supernatural inspira- tion of the Scriptures drawn from their seeming discrepancies and mistakes may appear, it is easier to believe that an increase of knowledge would en- able us to explain them, and show that they are only apparent, than to believe that the book — with its transcendent literary, political, moral, and theo- logical excellence — was originated by the unaided intellect of uneducated and narrow-minded Jews. Whatever difficulties the Christian may have to meet in maintaining the supernatural origin of the Bible, they arc not so great as those the infidel has to meet in maintaining that it is merely a human, Jewish production; or the theist in maintaining God's creation and government of the world. But beside this, the apparent inaccuracies and mistakes in the Bible constitute an analogy between it and the works of God. Were it free from them, we could hardly believe that it and nature had the same Author. But in both there are mysteries, alleged THE TWO THEORIES, CHRISTIAN AND INFIDEL. 509 and apparent contradictions and mistakes, and this similarity is presumptive evidence that He who made the world is the Author of the Bible. Had modern skeptics been the fabricators of it, they would have avoided all apparent discrepancies and contra- dictions; and thus it would have been made unlike the works of God, and should have betrayed its hu- man origin. If the writers of the Bible were not di- vinely inspired, they had deeper insight into nature and providence than modern skeptics with all their philosophy and learning. (3) Another consideration strengthening the argu- ment drawn from the general excellence of the Scrip- tures is, that they furnish us all the knowledge we possess on many points of the greatest interest and im- portance. If we have any knowledge at all of the origin of man, his primitive state, his condition and progress during at least the first twenty-five centu- ries, the causes of his present moral and physical con- dition, or his final destiny, it is from the Scriptures; and if they be not what they purport to be — the pro- duct of a superhuman intelligence — we must aban- don any belief we now have on these and on other subjects of vital import, and be content to remain in blank ignorance concerning them. For in regard to the creation of the world, the origin of man, his primitive condition, and many other questions histor- ical, moral, and cosmical, the only knowledge we have or can have must be superhuman. Hence, in regard to these momentous questions, we must re- main in profound ignorance, if the writers of the Bible had no supernatural knowledge. 43* 510 MODES OF ACCOUNTING FOR ITS ORIGIN. (4) Another consideration bearing upon the ques- tion of supernatural inspiration is this, that though in literature, science, and politics, in regard to which the Bible does not claim to be a complete revelation, the human race have progressed and are progressing, — yet in morality and theology, in regard to which it claims to be a full revelation, no progress has been made since the canon of Scripture was closed. In regard to God, his nature, attributes, and provi- dence; and in regard to man, his origin, present con- dition and duties, and future destiny, — the human race, after about sixty centuries of observation, in- vestigation, and experience, possess not one truth that is not contained in the Bible. Nor can even the wisest, best, and most gifted of men state any moral or theological truth that is not already stated in that grand compendium of moral and theoh»gical knowledge. After eighteen hundred years of inves- tigation and improvement, the human race, — even the most profound thinkers in morals and theology, — are compelled to leave moral and theological sci- ence where they were left by the Jewish authors. These two facts — the fact that the Bible, su far as it claims to be both perfect and infallible, (that is, in reference to all moral and theological subjects,) is a finality to all mankind, containing all the truth at- tainable by the most gifted minds; and that in liter- ature, science, and politics, (in reierence to which it does not claim to teach a complete system, though infallible as far as it goes,) the human race have pro- gressed and are progressing — tliese two facts taken together are accounted for by the supernatural iuspi- THE TWO THEORIES, CHRISTIAN AND INFIDEL. 611 ration of the Bible writers, and are accounted for in no other way. These considerations strengthen the argument drawn from the excellence of the Scriptures to prove their divine authorship; and render still less credi- ble the theory of their human, Jewish origin. To the infidel assumption, then, that miracles are incredi- ble, if not impossible, we answer— that the Bible ITSELF IS A MIRACLE ; as is shown by its theologi- cal, moral, political, and literary excellence. THE END. PUBLICATIONS OF WM. S. KENTOUL, Bookseller & Publisher: 121 North dth Street^ Fhiladelphia. (Just Published.) The Bible a Miracle ; or, The Word of God its own Witness: The supernatural inspiration of the Scriptures sliown from their literaiy, theological, moral, and political excellence. By Rev. David Mac Dill. This is a book of 524 pages post-octavo; price $2. It will be mailed by the Publisher post-paid to any P. 0. address, on receipt of its price. (Write for it direct to the publisher at once, if your bookseller does not keep it on hand, and you will have it by the return mail.) (J5^" Prices reduced to suit the times.) W. S. R. also published the following excellent and stand- ard books: suited for Ministers a?id all evangelical Christians: Rentoul's Library of Standard Bible Expositions. — The design is, to republish in this country a series of Religious works of the first class, consisting of Expository Discourses on separate Books of the Bible. These will be found invaluable to Ministers as aids for pulpit preparation ; and will form the best quality of Sabbath-day reading for all evangelical Christians. None will be issued but standard works of approved excellence. The following are already published, and are of uniform octavo size : — I. Wardlaw's (Ralph D. D.) Expository Lectures ON the whole Book of Ecclesiastes : 432 pages. — " It is like the sword of Goliath, 'there is none like it.'" — Price $2, cloth ; $2.75 in Library Sheep ; and $3 in half Turkey Morocco. II. Stuart's (Rev. A. Moody) Exposition of the whole of the Soxg of Solomon: 544 pages.— Rev. Dr. Paxtoii of New York writes to the Publisher: — 'I am glad to hear that you are about to republish Rev. A. Moody Stuart's Commen- tary upon The Song of Solomon. I have been familiar with this work for a number of years and esteem it very highly. I have five or six other commentaries upon " The Song" in my library, but for all the practical purposes of the ministry I find this to be the best.' — Price $2.50 cloth; $3.25 in Library Sheep; and $3.50 in half Turkey Morocco. III. Lawson's (George, D. D.) Expositions of the whole Books of Ruth and Esther ; with Three Sermons on the Duties of Parents, and a Memoir of the Author: 450 pages. — "There is a peculiar charm in the writings of that sage-like, apostolic man, Prof Lawson; in them most im- portant, original, pregnant thoughts are continually occur- ring." Prof. John Brown, of Edinburgh. — Price $2, cloth ; $2.75 in Library Sheep.; and $3, in half Turkey Morocco. The Whole Works of Ralph Erskine, the famous Scotch divine and one of the founders of the Secession church of Scotland (allowed to be the prince of evangelical preachers of his time). — This is a beautiful new edition in 7 vols, octavo. Price much reduced: viz. bound in cloth $14 net; in Library sheep, $21; and in one-half Turkey Morocco $25. (This would be an invaluable gift to your Pastor. ) The Dying Command of Christ ; or, The Duty of Be- lievers to celebrate weekly the Sacrament of the Lord's Sup- per. By the Author of 'God is Love,' &c. &c. The first American printed from the London Edition. — Price 75ct3. J8^* N. B. A free copy of this book will be sent to any one ordering the above three Bible Expositions at once. Egypt's Princes; or, Mission-work on the Nile: by Rev. G. Lansing, D.D., American Missionary in Egypt. — Price re- duced to $1.25. — This is a most entertaining, lively, and in- 3 structive book by a living Missionary in Egypt: (suitable for S. School Teachers libraries.) Autobiography and Keminiscences of Rev. John- Graham, formerly Pastor of the (formerly Seceder and now the) United Presbyterian Church of Bovina, N. Y : with Six of his Sermons; 216 pages 12mo. — Contains in an Appendix some interesting letters to the author, from Rev. Dr. Mc Crie the celebrated Church Historian, and other eminent Ministers of Scotland, touching on some important doctrinal points of difference between the Original Seceders and Cameronians (Covenanters). — Price $1.00, cloth. The Psalms of David in Metre, (Scotch version un- altered) WITH Music adapted to each Psalm or portion of a Psalm; by W. W. Keys. Price 80cts. plain, and 85cts. gilt lettered ; and $9. and 9.50 per dozen. The Psalms of David in Metre (Rouse's or the Scot- tish version unaltered); an excellent edition for pews and amilies. 24mo. sheep, with a full Index of the first line of every verse, also a Table, showing the Subjects of each Psalm. —Price 40cts single copy: ($30 per hundred; $15 for fifty; or $7.50 for 25 copies, net, when sent by express). A Catechism on the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. By Rev. G. Campbell, Pastor of West 44th Street United Presbyterian Church, New York. — Price 15cts. single copy; seven copies $1.00; fifteen copies $2.00. S^^Any of these books will be sent by mail post-paid by the Publisher on receipt of its price, if your bookseller does not keep it on hand. You are advised to remit by a P. 0. Money order or by registered letter; and if your order amounts to $2 or more, you may deduct the charge from the amount. W. S. R. will republish on 1st February 1872, Gib on the Covenants. The View of the Covenant of Works and of the Covenant of Grace, by Rev. Adam Gib, Minister of the Secession church, of Edinburgh, Scotland, — an eminent theologian and scholar, and a burning and shining light in his day, — has long been recognised as a standard book of exact and orthodox theolo- gy. It is a book of the most instructive character; presenting in an original and striking light many important Scriptural points and views respecting the constitution of the Covenant of Works under which man was originally placed, and also respecting the new Covenant of Grace under the Gospel. Mr. Gib's theology is that of the early Secession church of Scot- land— allowed by all orthodox Presbyterians to be solidly bottomed on the holy Scriptures, and also to be an admirable assertion and vindication of the evangelical Doctrines of the Eeformation. The book is equally suited for Ministers and private Christians. Of this book the historian McKerrow says — " As it was the last, so it may be regarded as the most useful of his publica- tions." In the Preface Mr. Gib says — " I will leave it be- hind me as a summary (especially in the Second Part) of that gospel which I have been preaching ; and as a testimony for truth, against the present flood of errors; iu opposition likewise to many misapprehensions which generally prevail ; desirous and hopeful that I may be useful by it after having finished my course." — This book has been long out of print. So valuable and useful a book ought not to be lost to the church and the world. It is now proposed to republish it in a handsome 12mo. vol- ume by subscription. This new edition will contain a sketch of the Author's life. — The subscription price will be $1.50 per copy, bound in cloth, (or $2 if wished bound in Morocco leather,) payable in advance. The book will be delivered to subscribers, or sent to them by mail postpaid, without further charge, when ready — which will be in February next. As only a limited number of copies will be printed, and as this valuable book will not likely be obtainable again during this generation, those who desire to obtain it should secure copies by sending their names and Post office addresses, with the number of copies desired, and icith the amount of the subscrip- tion, to the Publisher at once, else they may be disappointed. Date Due Pr t 3 '4;> 1 i ^ / o -' r i /d^S" hl. 10^ : 1.1 ',-7.H. /'*v. lb c 12 3