Aeon Goddess, the truth will set you free!
The truth shall set you free => Religion => Topic started by: Prometheus on March 14, 2018, 07:47:27 PM
Jobs Worldwide & Bottom prices, cheaper then Amazon & FB
( 17.905.982 jobs/vacatures worldwide)
Beat the recession - crisis, order from country of origin, at bottom prices! Cheaper then from Amazon and from FB ads!
Become Careerjet affiliate
-
THE
BIBLE OF BIBLES;
https://archive.org/details/bibleofbiblesort00grav
CONTAINING
A DESCRIPTION OF TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES, AND AN
EXPOSITION OF TWO THOUSAND BIBLICAL
ERRORS IN SCIENCE, HISTORY, MORALS,
RELIGION, AND GENERAL EVENTS;
ALSO A DELINEATION OF THE CHARACTERS OF
THE PRINCIPAL PERSONAGES OP THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE,
AND
AN EXAMINATION OF THEIR DOCTRINES.
BY
KERSEY GRAVES,
AUTHOR OP “THE WORLD’S SIXTEEN CRUCIFIED SAVIORS,” AND
^ “THE BIOGRAPHY OF SATAN.”
1879.
BY LYDIA M. GRAVES,
ASSISTANT AUTHORESS.
LIST OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
The Leading Positions of this Work.....................9
CHAPTER I.
The Signs of the Times. — The Coming Revolution. — Reason
WILL SOON TRIUMPH.................................11
CHAPTER II.
Apology and Explanation. — Jehovah not our God. — Relation-
ship of the Old and New Testaments..............17
CHAPTER III.
Why this Work was written. — The Moral Truths of the
Bible. — Why resort to Ridicule. — The Principal Design
of this Work. — Don’t read Pernicious Books. — Two Thou-
sand Bible Errors exposed. — All Bibles Useful in their .
Place........................................... 20
/
CHAPTER IY.
Beauties and Benefits of Bibles. —A Higher Plane of Devel-
opment has been Attained. — Bible Writers Honest.—
General Claims of Bibles.............................28
TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES DESCRIBED.
CHAPTER Y.
The Hindoo Bibles. — The Yedas.—The Code of Menu. — Ram-
AYANA.—MAHABARAT. — The PURANS. —ANALOGIES OF THE
Hindoo and Jewish Religions.—Antiquity of India . . 32
CHAPTER VI.
The Egyptian Bible, “The Hermas.” —Analogies of the Egyp-
tian and Jewish Religions. — Antiquity of Egypt
42
4
LIST OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER VII.
PAGE
The Persian Bibles. — The Zenda A vesta. — The Sadder. — Anal-
ogies of the Persian and Jewish Religions. — Antiquity of
Persia.............................................46
CHAPTER VIII.
The Chinese Bibles.—Ta-Heo (Great Learning). — The Chun
Yung ; or, Doctrine of the Mean. — The Book of Mang, or
Mencius. — Shoo King; or, “Book of History.”— Shee
King; or, “Book of Poetry.” — Chun Tsen, “Spring and
Summer.” — Tao-te King ; or, Doctrine of Reason. — Analo-
gies of the Chinese and Jewish Religions. — Antiquity of
China..............................................50
CHAPTER IX.
Seven other Oriental Bibles. — The Soffees’ Bible: The “Mus-
navi.” — The Parsees’ Bible: The “Bour Desch.” — The
Tamalese Bible: The “ Kaliwakam.” — The Scandinavian
Bible: The “Saga;” or, Divine Wisdom.—The Kalmucs’
Bible : The “ Kalio Cham.” —The Athenians’ Bible : “ The
Testament.” — The Cabalists’ Bible: The “ Yohar ; ” or,
Book of Light......................................55
CHAPTER X.
The Mahomedan’s Bible : TnE “Koran.” — The Mormons’ Bible :
“The Book of Mormon.” — Revelations of Joseph Smith.
— The Shakers’ Bible: “The Divine Roll” .... 57
CHAPTER XI.
TnE Jews’ Bible : TnE Old Testament and TnE Mishna . . 61
CHAPTER XII.
TnE Christians’ Bible : Its Character................62
CHAPTER XIII.
General Analogies of Bibles. — Superior Features of TnE
Heathen Bibles..................................65
CHAPTER XIV.
The Infidels’ Bible..................................68
LIST OF CONTENTS.
5
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE ERRORS — OLD-TESTAMENT
DEPARTMENT.
CHAPTER XV.
PAGE
A Hundred and Twenty-three Errors in the Jewish Cosmogony.
— The Scientists’ Story of Creation.............73
CHAPTER XVI.
Numerous Absurdities in the Story of the Deluge . . v„^8tT
c
CHAPTER XVII. ' ~
The Ten Commandments, Moral Defects of ... 96
CHAPTER XVIII.
Ten Foolish Bible Stories : A Talking Serpent and a Talking
Ass. — The Story of Cain. — The Ark of the Covenant.—
Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. — Daniel and Nebuchad-
nezzar. — Sodom and Gomorrah. — The Tower of Babel. —
Stopping the Sun and Moon. — Story of Samson. — Story
of Jonah ......................................100
CHAPTER XIX.
Bible Prophecies not Fulfilled......................121
CHAPTER XX.
Bible Miracles, Erroneous Belief in................124
CHAPTER XXI.
Bible Errors in Facts and Figures...................128
CHAPTER XXII.
Bible Contradictions (232).......................... 134
CHAPTER XXIII.
Obscene Language of the Bible (200 cases)...........145
CHAPTER XXIV.
Circumcision a Heathenish Custom. — Fasting and Feasting in
Various Nations................................149
CHAPTER XXV.
Holy Mountains, Lands, Cities, and Rivers..........151
6
LIST OF CONTENTS.
BIBLE CHARACTERS.
CHAPTER XXVI. page
Jehovah, Character of............................153
CHAPTER XXVII.
The Jews, Character of...........................157
CHAPTER XXVIII.
Moses, Character of..............................160
CHAPTER XXIX.
The Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Character of . 166
CHAPTER XXX.
David: His Numerous Cremes. — Solomon, Character of. — Lot
and his Daughters............................173
CHAPTER XXXI.
The Prophets : Their Moral Defects. — Special Notice of Eli-
jah and Elisha...............................177
CHAPTER XXXII.
Idolatry: Its Nature, Harmlessness, and Origin.—All Chris-
tians either Atheists or Idolaters...........187
BIBLE ERRORS-NEW-TEST AMENT DEPARTMENT.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
Divine Revelation Impossible and Unnecessary .... 212
CHAPTER XXXIV.
Prdieval Innocency of Man not True...............219
CHAPTER XXXV.
Original Sin and Fall of Man not True..............222
CHAPTER XXXVI.
Moral Depravity of Man a Delusion................224
CHAPTER XXXVII.
Free Agency and Moral Accountability Erroneous . . .227
CHAPTER XXXVIII.
Repentance : The Doctrine Erroneous
231
LIST OF CONTENTS.
7
CHAPTER XXXIX.
Forgiveness fob Sin an Erroneous Doctrine
CHAPTER XL.
An Angby God, Evils of the Belief in
CHAPTER XLI.
Atonement fob Sin an Immobal Doctbine .
CHAPTER XLII.
Special Pbovidences an Ebboneous Doctbine
CHAPTER XLIII.
Faith and Belief: Bible Ebbobs bespecting
CHAPTER XLIY.
A Pebsonal God Impossible ....
PAGE
. 236
. 239
. 242
. 246
, 250
253
Note.—In the twelve preceding chapters it is shown that the cardinal doctrines of
Christianity are all wrong.
CHAPTER XLY.
Evil, Natural and Moral, explained
CHAPTER XLYI.
A Rational Yiew of Sin and its Consequences
CHAPTER XLYII.
The Bible sanctions every Species of Crime .
CHAPTER XLYIII.
The Immoral Influence of the Bible
255
261
266
285
CHAPTER XLIX.
The Bible at War with Eighteen Sciences
287
CHAPTER L.
The Bible as a Moral Necessity .
296
CHAPTER LI.
Send no more Bibles to the Heathen
303
CHAPTER LH.
What shall We do to be Saved?
307
CHAPTER Lin.
The Three Christian Plans of Salvation
334
8
LIST OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER LIV. page
The True Religion defined................................352
CHAPTER LY.
‘ All Scripture given by Inspiration of God ” . . . . 356
CHAPTER LYI.
Infidelity in Oriental Nations : India, Rome, Greece, Egypt,
China, Persia, and Arabia...........................368
CHAPTER LYII.
Sects, Schisms, and Skeptics in Christian Countries . . . 378
CHAPTER LYIII.
Modern Christianity one-half Infidelity..................384
CHAPTER LIX.
The Christians* God, Character of........................399
CHAPTER LX.
The One Hundred and Fifty Errors of Jesus Christ . . . 401
CHAPTER LXI.
Character and Erroneous Doctrines of the Apostles . . 407
CHAPTER LXII.
Erroneous Doctrines and Moral Defects of Paul and Peter . 408
CHAPTER LXni.
Idolatrous Veneration for Bibles: Its Evils .... 420
CHAPTER LXIY.
Spiritual or Implied Sense of Bibles : Its Objects . . . 425
CHAPTER LXV.
Wiiat shall we substitute for the Bible?................432
CHAPTER LXVI.
Religious Reconstruction ; or, the Moral Necessity for a
Religious Reform...................................433
Conclusion
437
THE LEADING POSITIONS OE THIS WORK.
We maintain, 1st, That man’s mental faculties are
susceptible of a threefold division and classification, as
follows: First, the intellectual department; second, the
moral and religious department; third, the animal depart-
ment (which includes also the social).
2d, That all Bibles and religions are an outgrowth
from some or all of these faculties, and hence of natural
origin.
3d, That all Bibles and religions which originated prior
to the dawn of civilization in the country which gave them
birth (i.e., prior to the reign of moral and physical science)
are an emanation from the combined action and co-opera-
tion of man’s moral, religious, and animal feelings and pro-
pensities.
4th, That the Christian Bible contains (as shown in this
work) several thousand errors, — moral, religious, histori-
cal, and scientific.
5th, That this fact is easily accounted for by observing
that it originated at a period when the moral and religious
feelings of the nation which produced it co-operated with
the animal propensities instead of an enlightened intellect.
6th, That, although such a Bible and religion may have
been adapted to the minds which originated them, the
higher class of minds of the present age demands a religion
10
THE LEADING POSITIONS OF THIS WORK.
which shall call into exercise the intellect, instead of the
animal propensities.
7th, That, as all the Bibles and religions of the past are
more of an emanation from the animal propensities than
the intellect, they are consequently not suited to this age,
and are for this reason being rapidly abandoned.
8th, That true religion consists in the true exercise of
the moral and religious faculties.
9th, As the Christian Bible is shown in this work to
inculcate bad morals, and to sanction, apparently, every
species of crime prevalent in society in the age in which it
was written, the language of remonstrance is frequently
employed against placing such a book in the hands of the
heathen, or the children of Christian countries; and more
especially against making “ the Bible the fountain of our
laws and the supreme rule of our conduct,” and acknowl-
edging allegiance to its God in the Constitution of the
United States, as recommended by the American Christian
Alliance. Such measures, this work shows by a thousand
facts, would be a deplorable check to the moral and in-
tellectual progress of the world.
10th, If any clergyman or Christian professor shall take
any exceptions to any position laid down in this work,
the author will discuss the matter with him in a friendly
manner in the papers, or through the post-office, or before
a public audience.
Kersey Graves.
Richmond, Indiana.
THE BIBLE OE BIBLES.
CHAPTER I.
TEE SIGNS OE THE TIMES.
We live in the most important age in the history of the world.
No age preceding it was marked with such signal events. No
other era in the history of civilization has been characterized by
such agitation of human thought; such a universal tendency
to investigation ; such a general awakening upon all important
subjects of human inquiry; such a determination to grow in
knowledge, and cultivate the immortal intellect, and mount to
higher plains of development. The world of mind is in com-
motion. All civilized nations are agitated from center to cir-
cumference with the great questions of the age. And what
does all this prove ? Why, that man is a progressive being;
that the tendency of the human mind is onward and upward;
and that it will not always consent to be bound down in igno-
rance and superstition. And, thanks to the genius of the
age, it is the prophecy of the glorious reformation and regene-
ration of society, — an index of a happier era in the history of
the human race. Old institutions are crumbling, and tumbling
to the ground. The iron bands of creeds and dogmas, with
which the people have been, so long bound down, are bursting
asunder, and permitting them to walk upright, and do their own
thinking. In every department of science, in every arena of
human thought and every theater of human action, we see a
progressive spirit, we behold a disposition to lay aside the tra-
il
12
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
ditions and superstitions of the past, and grasp the living facts
of the age. We everywhere see a disposition to abandon the
defective institutions, political and religious, which were gotten
up in the childhood of human experience, and supplant them
with those better adapted to the wants of the age. In a word,
there is everywhere manifested a disposition and determination
to unshackle the human bod}7, and set free the human mind, and
place it with its living aspirations on the road to the temple of
Truth. An evidence of the truth of these statements the reader
can gather by casting his eyes abroad, or by reading the peri-
odicals of the day. At this very time nearly all the orthodox
churches are in a state of commotion. The growing light and
intelligence of the age, penetrating their dark creeds and dog-
mas, are producing a sort of moral effervescence. The question
of “hell” is now the agitating theme of the churches. Pos-
terity will ridicule us, and class us with the unenlightened
heathen, for discussing a question so far behind the times, and
one so childish and so absurd in this intelligent and enlightened
age. To condescend to discuss such a question now must be
hell enough for scientific and intelligent minds. And other
important religious events mark the age. When the Roman-
Catholic Church, through its Ecumenical Council, dragged the
Pope from his lofty throne of usurped power, and robbed him
of his attribute of infallibility, it proclaimed the downfall of the
Pope and the deatli^knell of the Church. Already thousands
of his subjects refuse longer to bow down and kiss the big toe
of his sacred majesty. His scepter has departed, his spiritual
power is gone, his temporal power is waning. And the same
spirit of agitation is operating as a leaven in the Protestant
churches also. All the orthodox churches arc declining and
growing weaker by their members falling off. The Methodist
Church has recently lost more than two hundred of its preachers ;
and the Baptist Church, according to the statement of a recent
number of u The Christian Era,” has lost twenty-two thousand
of its members within a period of five years. The agitation in
the churches is driving thousands from their ranks, while many
who remain are becoming more liberal-minded. The orthodox
Quaker Church has, in many localities, “ run clear off the track.”
THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES.
-
13
It has abandoned its old time-honored peculiarities in dress and
language, once deemed by them sacred, and essential to true god-
liness. The use of 44 thee ” and 44 thou ” is laid aside by many
of its members; and even leading members have given up the
44 shad-bellied coat,” and the round-crowned hat with a brim
broad enough to 44 cover a multitude of sins.” They no longer
wait for 44 the Holy Ghost ” to move them to preach; but, as a
member once remarked, 44 they go it on their own hook, like the
Methodists, hit or miss.” Music, once regarded by many of
them as an emanation from 44 an emissary of the Devil,” is now
admitted into many of their churches. Thus it will be seen they
are making some progress. The light without is benefiting
them more than 44 the light within.” All the orthodox systems
committed a fatal error at the outset in assuming that their
religions' were derived directly from God, and consequently
must be perfect and unalterable, and a finality in moral and
religious progress. Such an assumption will cause the downfall,
sooner or later, of any religious body which persists in propa-
gating the error. Religious institutions, like all other institu-
tions, are subject to the laws of growth and decay. Hence, if
their doctrines and creeds are not improved occasionally to
make them conform to the growing light and intelligence of the
age and the principles of science, they will fall behind the
times, cease to answer the moral and religious wants of the
age, and become a stumbling-block in the path of progress.
Common sense would teach us that the doctrines preached by
the churches two hundred years ago must be as much out of
place now as the wooden shoes and bearskin coats worn by the
early disciples would be for us. Their spiritual food is by no
means adapted to our moral and religious wants. We are under
no more moral and religious obligation whatever to preach the
doctrines of original sin, the fall of man, endless punishment, in-
fant damnation, &c., because our religious forefathers believed in
these doctrines, than we are morally bound to eat beetles, locusts,
and grasshoppers, because our Jewish ancestors feasted on these
nasty vermin, as we learn by reading Lev. xi. Why is it that
in modern times there has arisen great complaint in all the
orthodox churches about the rapid inroads of infidelity into
14
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
their ranks? It is simply because, that while the people are
beginning to assume the liberty to do their own thinking, the
churches refuse to recognize the great principle of universal
progress as applicable to their religion, which would and should
keep their doctrines and precepts improved up to the times.
Instead of adopting this wise policy, they try to compel their
members to be content with the old stale salt junk of by-
gone ages, in the shape of dilapidated, outgrown creeds and
dogmas; but it will not do. It is as difficult to keep great
minds tied down to unprogressive creeds as it would be to keep
grown-up boys and girls in baby-jumpers. Enlightened nations
are as capable of making their own religion as their own
laws ; that is, of making its tenets conform to the natural out-
growth of their religious feelings as they become more ex-
panded and enlightened. And it is a significant historical
fact, that great minds in all religious nations have wholly or
partially outgrown and abandoned the current and popular
religions of the country. It is only moral cowards, or the igno-
rant and uninformed, who throw themselves into the lap of the
Church, and depend upon the priest to pilot them to heaven.
Moses, Jesus Christ, Mahomet, Martin Luther, John Wesley,
Emanuel Swedenborg, George Fox, Elias Hicks, and many
other superior minds, strove hard unconsciously to rise above
the religion in which the}7 were educated; and all succeeded in
making some improvement in its stereotyped doctrines or prac-
tices. The implied assumption of the churches, that their
doctrines and precepts are too perfect to be improved and too
sacred to be investigated, and their Bible too holy to be criti-
cised, is contradicted both by history and science; and this
false assumption lias already driven many of the best minds of
the age from their ranks. Theodore Parker declared that all
the men of great intellects had left the Church in his time,
because, instead of improving their religion to keep it up to the
times, they bolt their doors, and hang curtains over their win-
dows to keep out the light of the age. There could not be one
inch of progress made in any thing in a thousand years with
the principle of non-progression in religion adopted by the
churches ; for, if it will apply to religion, it will apply with still
THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES.
15
greater force to every thing else : and hence it would long ago
have put a dead lock upon all improvement, had it not been
counteracted by outside counter-influences. It is because a
large portion, and the most enlightened portion, of the community
have assumed the liberty and moral independence to think and
act for themselves, that society has made any progress either in
science, morals, or religion. A religion which sedulously
opposes its own improvement can do nothing essential toward
improving any thing else, unless forced into it by outside influ-
ences ; and it can not feel a proper degree of interest in those
improvements essential to the progress of society. On the con-
trary, it must check the growth of every thing it touches with
its palsied hands. Here we can see the reason that no church
in any age of the world has inaugurated any great system of
reform for the improvement of society, but has made war on
nearly every reform set on foot by that class of people which it
has chosen to stigmatize as “ infidels.” Such a religion will
decline and die in the exact ratio of the enlightenment and
nrogress of society.
The Coming Revolution.
That there is a general state of unrest in the public mind, at
the present time, on the subject of religion, must be apparent to
every observing person. Theological questions, long since re-
garded as settled for ever, are being overhauled and discussed
with a freedom and general interest far transcending that known
or practically realized at any previous period. This is premoni-
tive of a speedy religious revolution. That it will come sooner
or later is as certain as that seed-sowing is succeeded by har-
vest. Reforms no longer move with the snail’s pace they did a
century ago. This is an age of steam and electricity ; and every
thing has to move with velocity. We cherish no unkindly feel-
ings toward any church or people ; but we must rejoice that the
strongholds of orthodoxy are being shaken, and error exposed,
and that creeds are loosening their iron grasp upon the immor-
tal mind. Old, long-cherished dogmas, myths, and blinding
superstitions are passing away, to make room for something
better.
16
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Yes, the signs of the times indicate the dawning of a brighter
day upon the world, — a day which shall be illuminated by the
rays of reason and science.
And, if this work shall contribute any thing toward speed-
ing the dawning of that glorious era, we shall feel amply re-
warded for the labor and personal sacrifice required in its pro-
duction.
Reason will soon Triumph.
The march of science and the rapid growth of the reasoning
faculties peculiar to this progressive age are daily revealing the
errors of our popular theology, and exposing their demoralizing
effects in repressing the growth and healthy action of the intel-
lect, and perverting the exercise of the moral faculties. And
this progressive change and improvement must be a source of
great rejoicing to every true-hearted philanthropist, and fur-
nishes a strong incentive to labor with zeal in this field of re-
form. It should be borne in mind, that all the dogmas and doc-
trines of our current religious faith originated at a period before
the sun of science had risen above the moral horizon, and ante-
rior to the birth of moral science, and hence, like other produc-
tions of that age, are heavily laden with error.. But rejoice,
O ye lovers of and laborers for truth and science! the dark
clouds of our gloomy theology are rapidly receding before the
sunlight of our modern civilization, and will soon leave a clear
and cloudless sky! And all will rejoice in having learned and
practically experienced the glorious truth, that true religion
is not incorporated in Bibles, or inscribed on the pages of any
book, and cannot be found therein, but is a natural and sponta-
neous outgrowth of man’s moral and religious nature, and is
u the most beautiful flower of the soul.”
APOLOGY AND EXPLANATION.
17
CHAPTER II.
APOLOGY AND EXPLANATION.
Although books are constantly issuing from the press, and
the country kept literally flooded with new publications, }Tet but
few of them meet the real wants of the age, and many of them
are of no permanent practical benefit to the world. Such a work
as is comprised in “ The Bible of Bibles 99 is a desideratum. It
has been long and loudly called for. It is a moral necessity, and
partially supplies one of the great moral wants of the times. It
is true, hundreds of works have been published embracing criti-
cisms on the Bible, and attempting to expose some of its numer-
ous errors, and portray some of its evil influences upon those
who accept it as a moral guide. Yet it is believed that the
present work embraces the first attempt to arrange together, or
make out any thing like a full list of, the numerous errors of
u the Holy Book.” And yet it falls far short of accomplishing
this end; for, although more than two thousand errors are
brought to notice, a critical research would bring to light sev-
eral thousand more. It will be observed by the reader, that there
has been a constant effort on the part of the author to abridge,
contract, and compress the contents of the volume into the
smallest compass possible to be attained compatible with per-
spicuity. Every chapter, and almost every line, discloses this
policy. In no other way than by the adoption of such an expe-
dient could two thousand biblical errors have been brought to
notice in a single volume. The adoption of the most rigid rules
of abbreviation and compression alone could have accomplished
it; and this policy has been carried out even in making cita-
tions from the Bible. Such superfluous words and phrases have
been dropped as could be spared without impairing the sense or
18
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
real meaning of the text. And yet, with this unceasing effort to
compress and abridge the work, it falls so far short of portray-
ing fulty all the errors and evils which a critical investigation
shows to be the legitimate outgrowth of our Bible religion, that
the author contemplates following it with another work, which
may complete an exposition of nine thousand errors now known
to be comprised in u the Holy Book.” The title will probably
be, “ The Bible in the Light of History, Reason, and Science.”
He intends also to rewrite and republish soon, and probably
enlarge, his u Biography of Satan,” so as to make it entirely a
new work.
I. Jehovah.
The author desires the reader to bear it specially in mind
that his criticisms on the erroneous conceptions and representa-
tions of God, as found in the Christian Bible, appertains in all
cases to that mere imaginary being known as the Jewish Jeho-
vah, and has no reference whatever to the God of the universe,
who must be presumed to be a very different being. The God
of Moses, who is represented as coming down from heaven, and
walking and talking, eating and sleeping, traveling on foot
(and barefoot, so as to make it necessary for Abraham to
wash his feet) ; and who is also represented as eating barley-
cakes and veal with Abraham (Gen. xviii.) ; wrestling all night
with Jacob, and putting his thigh out of place; trying to kill
Moses in a hotel, but failing in the attempt; and as getting van-
quished in a battle with the Canaanites ; and also as frequently
getting mad, cursing and swearing, &c.,—such was the char-
acter of Jehovah, the God of the Jews, — a mere figment of
the imagination. Hence lie is a just subject of criticism.
II. Tiie Relationship of the Old and New Testaments.
Some of the representatives of the Christian faith, when the
shocking immoralities of the Old Testament arc pointed out,
attempt to evade the responsibility by alleging that they do not
live under the old dispensation, but the new, thereby intimat-
ing that they arc not responsible for the errors of the former.
But the following considerations will show that such a defense
is fallacious and entirely untenable : —
APOLOGY AND EXPLANATION.
19
1. It takes both the Old and the New Testaments to consti-
tute “ the Holy Bible,” which they accept as a whole.
2. Both are bound together, and circulated by the million, as
possessing equal credibility and equal authority.
3. Both are quoted alike by clergymen and Christian writers.
4. The New Testament is inseparably connected with the
Old.
5. The prophecies of the Old form the basis of the New.
6. Both are canonized together under the word u holy.”
7. Nearly all the New-Testament writers, including Paul,
indorse the Old Testament, and take no exception to any of
its errors or any of its teachings. For these reasons, to accept
one is to accept the other. Both stand or fall together.
Note.—Christ modified some of Moses’s errors, hut indorsed most of the Old Testa-
ment errors.
20
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER in.
WHY THIS WORE WAS WRITTEN.
There are in this and other Christian countries more than
one hundred thousand clergymen who spend a portion of each
recurring sabbath in presenting the claims, and dilating upon
the beauties and benefits (some real and some imaginaiy), of
the religion of the Christian Bible. They claim that it is the
religion for this age, and a religion that should be adopted by
the whole human race; but they present but one side of the
picture, and but one phase of the argument. A witness before
a jury is required to “ tell the truth, and the whole truth ; ” but
the priesthood dare not do this with respect to the errors and
defects of their religion. They ’would lose their congregations
and their salaries also. But few clergymen possess the moral
courage to turn state’s evidence against their pockets or their
“ bread and butter.” It is a sad reflection that they are hired,
and required to conceal whatever errors ma}' loom up before
their moral vision in the investigation of the principles of their
religion, or the Bible on which it is founded. They are placed
in the position of an attorney who is sworn to be true to his
client at any sacrifice of truth and moral manhood. Whatever
ma}T be their moral convictions with respect to the sinfulness or
evil consequences or demoralizing effects of continuing to
preach the intellectually dwarfing and morally poisoning doc-
trines originated in, and adapted only to, the dark and undevel-
oped ages of the past, when the race was under the dominion
of the animal and blind propensities, yet they must do it. They
must continue to preach these errors, to sustain these evils, and
maintain their false positions, or lose their salaries and their
popular standing in society. It is a vcr}T unfortunate position
WHY THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN.
21
to be placed in; but, self-interest being the ruling principle of
the age, we cannot reasonably expect the clergy will do any
thing toward enlightening the people on the errors and immoral
influences of their religious doctrines, or the substitution of a
better system, until human nature has advanced to a higher
moral plane. On the contrary, we must expect they will con-
tinue to blind the people, pervert the truth, magnify every
imaginable good quality of their religious system ; while, on the
other hand, they will as sedulously attempt to hide every defect
which either they or others may discover in their Bible. This
state of things in the religious world imposes upon the moral
reformer the solemn necessity of employing the most effectual
lever, and of adopting every available moral means, to counter-
act this morally deleterious influence of the clergy, and arrest
the tide of evil which follows in their wake as the legitimate
fruits of a course of conduct dictated by policy instead of prin-
ciple.
II. The Moral Truths of the Bible.
Some of our readers will doubtless be disposed to ask why we
have not occupied a larger portion of this work in exhibiting the
beauties and benefits of the religion and system of morals set
forth in the^Bible. The answer to the question is fully antici-
pated in the preceding remarks. It is simply because fifty
thousand tongues and pens are almost constantly employed in
this work. They do it and overdo it. This renders it a work of
supererogation on our part; while, on the other hand, we find
the errors and evils of the Bible and. its religion, which they
overlook or neglect to expose, so very numerous, that we can
not exhibit them in a single volume, unless we allow but a lim-
ited space to a repetition of what is done by them every week.
This is our reason for appearing to pursue a one-sided policy.
III. Why Resort to Ridicule?
We hope we shall not be misunderstood or condemned by any
reader for appearing to indulge frequently in a spirit of levity
in attempting to expose the logical and moral absurdities of the
Bible. We have assumed this license more from an appre-
hended moral necessity than from a natural disposition. Ridi-
22
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
cule is now generally acknowledged by moralists to be a most
potent weapon for the demolition of error. Moral and religious
absurdities, according to Cicero, can be arrested and put down
much sooner by “ holding them up to the light of ridicule, than
by any othqr means that can be employed.” Let no one, then,
oppose the use of such means simply because it may disturb a
sensitive feeling in his own mind, derived from a false educa-
tion. A critical investigation of religious history discloses the
important fact, that the conviction established in the popular
mind that it is wrong to indulge in a feeling of levity when
writing or discoursing on religious subjects is the work of the
clergy. Having discovered that many of the narrations of
their Bible, and likewise many of the tenets of their creeds, are
really ridiculous when examined in the light of science, reason,
and sound sense, in order to prevent these ridiculous features
of their systems from being exposed, they taught the people
that ridicule is entirely out of place in matters of religion, and
that such feelings, or language expressive of such feelings,
should be entirely suppressed. And it is principally by the
invention of this expedient, and the establishment of this con-
viction in the public mind, that the clergy have succeeded in
keeping the ridiculous errors of their creeds conceal^ from age
to age. And to continue this policy longer is only to yield to
their interests, and prolong those evils still longer which have
been perpetuated for centuries by the adoption of this expedi-
ent. No other argument or apology is m^cessaiy than this as a
justification of the limited extent to which the language of ridi-
cule has been employed in this work. is an egregious error,
which is the offspring of an erroneous education and habit, to
suppose that ridicule is more out of place on religious subjects
than on other subjects. 0. S. Fowler has fully established this
as a scientific fact on phrenological grounds. We should be
quite sorry to wound the feelings of any sensitive mind b}^ any
language made use of in this work, and hope this explanation
will prevent such results.
Tiie Principal Design of this Work.
As a critical examination of the Christian Bible discloses the
fact that it contains several thousand moral and scientific
WHY THIS WOBK. WAS WHITTEN.
23
errors, and as experience proves the tendency of such errors
is to corrupt the moral feelings and check the intellectual
growth of all who read and believe 44 the Hoty Book,” we have,
since arriving at this conviction, considered it to be our duty
not only to expose these errors, but also to discourage the
habitual reading of the Bible with any other view than to learn
its real character. And more especially do we earnestly advise
parents not to place the Bible in the hands of their children till
they arrive at an age when a more mature judgment can enable
them to discriminate between its truths and its errors. And
we likewise entreat all moralists and philanthropists, and all
lovers of truth and virtue, as they desire the moral growth and
moral reformation of the world, to exert their influence to stop
the shipment of the Christian Bible to foreign lands to be cir-
culated among the uncultured and credulous heathen. Here is
disclosed one of our principal reasons for writing this work.
We wish to make it a voice of remonstrance against placing
any of those morally defective books called Bibles in the hands
of the ignorant and impressible heathen, or the children of
Christian countries, until their minds become sufficiently forti-
fied by age and experience to resist or withstand the demoral-
izing influe*pe of their bad precepts and bad examples as ex-
posed in this work.
Don’t Read Pernicious Books.
The Quaker Church /of which the author was once a mem-
ber) have a clause in^their discipline forbidding their members
to read pernicious books, which are defined by one of the found-
ers of the Church (Wiliitoi Penn) to be 4 4 such books and pub-
lications as contain language which appears to sanction crime or
wrong practices, or teach bad morals.” And hundreds of cases
cited in this work prove that the Christian Bible may be ranked
with works of this character. If the advice of the Hindoo
editor had been complied with many years ago, —to 44 revise all
Bibles, and leave out their bad precepts and examples,” and
change their obscene language, — the Christian Bible might now
be a very useful and instructive book. But we are willing to
leave it to the conscience of every honest reader, who places
24
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
truth and morality above Bibles and creeds, to decide, after
reading this work, whether the Bible, with all its ennobling pre-
cepts, does not contain too strong an admixture of bad morality
to make it a safe or suitable book to be relied on as a guide in
morals and religion. According to Archbishop Tillotson, Bibles
shape the morals and religion of the people in all religious coun-
tries,— they are derived from the examples and precepts of
these u Holy Books.” If this be true, we most solemnly and
seriously put the question to every Bible reader, What must be
the effect upon the morals and religion of Christian countries of
such moral examples as Abraham, Moses, Noah, Isaac, Jacob,
David, Solomon, and nearly all the prophets, with their long
string of crimes, as shown in this work? Let us not be guilty
of the folly of suffering our inherited, stereotyped predilections,
and exalted veneration for u the Holy Book,” to rule our moral
sense, and control our judgment in this matter, but muster the
moral courage to look at the thing in its true light. Let us be
independent moralists and philanthropists, rather than slaves to
Bibles and creeds. “ Every book,” says a writer, “ has a spirit
which it breathes into the minds of its readers ; ” and, if it con-
tains bad morals or bad language, the habitual reading of it will
gradually reconcile the mind to those immoral lessons, and
finally cause them to be looked upon as God-given truths. Such
is the omnipotent force of habit. And we appeal to all Bible
readers to testify if this has not been their experience. All
Christian professors, when they first commenced reading the
Bible, doubtless found many things in It which shocked their
moral sense, did violence to their reasoning faculties, and morti-
fied their love of decorum. But a p'ersevcrance in reading it,
through the force of habit and education, has finally reconciled
tlieir minds to those immoral lessons, and blinded the judgment,
so that they arc not now conscious of their real character and
deleterious influence upon the mind.
Two Thousand Bible Errors.
One of the strongest and most soleuin lessons of human ex-
perience, and proofs of the blinding effect of a false religious
education, may be found in the fact that the two thousand Bible
WHY THIS WORK WAS WRITTEN.
25
errors brought to notice in this work have been overlooked from
age to age by the great mass of Bible readers. So absolutely
and deplorably blinded have they been in some cases, as to lead
them to conclude, like Dr. Cheever of New York, that “ the
Bible does not contain the shadow of a shade of error from
Genesis to Revelation.’’ Such a perversion and stultification
of the reasoning faculties was never excelled in any age or
country. St. Augustine furnishes another striking illustration
of the total wreck of mind and moral principle which an obsti-
nate determination to accept the Bible with all its errors is
capable of effecting. Having found a great many absurdities in
the Bible which he could not reconcile with reason and sense,
and hence discovering he must either give up his Bible or his
reason, he chose the latter alternative, and declared in his
“Book of Sermons” (p. 33), “I believe things in the Bible
because they are absurd. I believe them because they are
impossible ” (as glaring an absurdity as ever issued from human
lips). Such a desperate expedient to save his Bible and creed
from going overboard shows that they had demoralized his
mind, and made a complete wreck of his reason. This is the
writer who declared he found and preached to a nation of people
who had but one eye, and that situated in their foreheads, and
another nation who had no heads, but eyes in their breasts. It
seems a pity that this single-eyed nation became extinct; for
Christ declared, “ If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be
full of light.” Such an embodiment of light might have done
much to enlighten the world. And this St. Augustine is the
writer whom Eusebius pronounces “ the great moral light of
the Christian Church.” And St. Irenseus furnishes another
deplorable example of the prostration or perversion of the moral
faculties by accepting the Bible as a standard for morals when
he justified the crime of incest by pointing to the example of
“righteous Lot” and his daughters. The celebrated Albert
Barnes was made a victim of great mental suffering for many
years by his laborious but ineffectual attempts to reconcile the
Bible with the dictates of reason. Hear what he says about the
matter. We will present the case in his own language : “ These
difficulties (of reconciling the teachings of the Bible to rea-
26
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
son) are probabty felt by every mind that ever reflects on the
subject; and they are unexplained, unmitigated, and unremoved.
I confess, for one, that I feel them, and feel them more sensibly
and powerful^ the more I look at them, and the longer I live.
I do not understand them, and I make no advance toward
understanding them. I do not know that I have a ray of light
upon this subject which I had not when the subject first flashed
across soul. I have read what wise and good men have
written upon the subject; I have looked at their theories and
explanations ; I have endeavored to weigh their arguments, —
for m}^ whole soul pants for light and relief on these questions :
but I get neither; and, in the anguish and distress of my soul, I
confess I get no light whatever. I see not one ray to disclose
to me the reason why sin came into the world, why the earth is
strewn with the, dying and the dead, and why man must suffer
to all eternity. I have never seen a particle of light thrown on
these subjects that has given a moment’s ease to my tortured
mind. ... I trust that other men . . . have not the anguish
of spirit which I have. But I confess, when I look on a world
of sinners and sufferers, upon death-beds and graveyards, and
upon a world of woe filled with hosts to suffer for ever ; and when
I sec m}r friends, my parents, my family, my people, m}T fellow-
citizens — when I look upon a whole race — all involved in this
sin and danger; and when I see the great mass of them wholly
unconcerned ; and when I feel that God only can save them, and
yet he does not do it, — I am struck dumb. It is all dark —
dark — dark to my soul; and I cannot disguise it ” (Practical
Sermons, p. 124). There, reader, you have the candid confes-
sion of an honest-minded, orthodox, and one of the ablest and
most talented writers that ever wielded the pen in defense of the
C'liristian faith. And if such a talented and logical mind could
find no reason, consistency, or moral principle in the dogmas of
orthodoxy, we may readily ask, Who can? Thousands of other
orthodox clergymen have doubtless been perplexed with the same
difficulties, but have not had the honesty to confess it. Those
who do not now perceive them can find the reason by putting
their hands on their own heads. They will find their intellects or
logical brains defective. Moral philosophers now find no diffi-
WHY THIS WOBK WAS WRITTEN.
27
culty in solving any of those problems which so much perplexed
the mind of Mr. Barnes. They are all false and unfounded dog-
mas, except the prevalence of death and disease in the world.
And these casualties are now known to be amongst the wisest
and most useful dispensations of nature. (See chapter headed
Natural and Moral Evil.) And had Mr. Barnes ascended to the
plane of mental and moral science, instead of remaining down in'
tne dark, orthodox, theological cellar, trying to squeeze truth
out of old, dead, dried-up, dusty, theological dogmas, he would
have readily found the solution to all his problems, and would
have rejoiced in thus emerging into the glorious sunlight of
truth.
Bibles Useful in their Place.
We do not question but that Bibles served a useful purpose
for those nations and tribes by whom and for whom they were
written; but as they only represent the imperfect moral and
religious conceptions of that age, and have always been sacredly
guarded from improvement, to make them the rule of action for
any subsequent age would be ter stop all moral and religious
improvement. It is strikingly evident that society can make no
improvement while it follows a Bible which is interdicted from
improvement. It must remain stationary, with respect to reli-
gion and morals, so far as it is tied to an unchangeable book.
Bibles in this way become masters of human thought, and
shackles for the soul, and thus inflict serious evils upon society by
their tendency to stop all moral, and religious progress. Three
thousand or ten thousand years may elapse, and no improve-
ment can be made in the religion or morals of the people
while the Bible from which they emanate is prohibited from
improvement. Thus Bibles inflict a death-like torpor and stag-
nation upon the moral and intellectual progress of society so
far as their precepts are lived up to; that is, so far as the
assumption that there can be no improvement in the teachings
of the Bible is practically observed. It is the source of a pleas-
ing reflection, however, to know that most Bible believers habitu-
ally violate their own principles by trampling this assumption
under foot. Otherwise we would have remained eternally in a
state of barbarism*
28
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER IV. .
THE BEAUTIES AND BENEFITS OF BIBLES.
There is displayed in all Bibles a devout recognition of mora
principles, and a strong manifestation of moral feeling. The
disciples of all Bibles manifest an ardent aspiration for some-
thing higher, something nobler, — a mental struggle to reach a
higher plane. This moral aspiration is displayed in almost
every chapter; and there are in all Bibles veins of beautiful
thought coursing through their pages. All of them contain
moral precepts which are in their nature elevating and enno-
bling, and which, if practically recognized, would have done
much to improve the morals and enhance the happiness of their
disciples ; and all Bibles are valuable as fragments of religious
histoiy, and as indicating the state of religion and morals of the
people who originated them. Their numerous outbursts of
religious feeling indicate the depth of their devotion; while
their many noble moral aphorisms indicate an appreciation of,
and a desire for, a higher moral life than they were able to prac-
tice because of the strength of their animal feelings. This is
especiallj’ true of the Jews, and also of the early Christians.
They had a partial perception of a true moral life, and a desire
at times to practice it; but that desire was counteracted and
held in check by their still stronger animal natures and animal
propensities.
A Higher Plane of Development iias keen Attained.
There can be no question, from the light derived from the
twofold avenues of science and history, but that the great prin-
ciple of universal progress, which is carrying every thing for-
ward to a higher plane and state of perfection, has elevated the
THE BEAUTIES AND BENEFITS GF BIBLES.
29
most advanced nations of the present age beyond and above the
religion and morals prevalent in the world when the Jewish and
Christian Bible was written, which makes it very unsuitable for
the %)resent advanced state of society. An investigation of the
science of anthropology discloses the very significant and impor-
tant fact, that the religious feelings of the founders and early
representatives of the Jewish and Christian religions were under
the control of their animal natures, which accounts for their
frequent use of obscene language, and their frequent indul-
gence in the practice of every species of crime with the full
sanction of the principles of their religion. And they cherished
^the conviction that those things had the divine sanction.
f
Look at the Difference.
-
The moral and religious feelings of the early Jews and Chris-
tians co-operated with their animal propensities; and the latter
held supreme sway over the former: while the moral and reli-
gious feelings of the most advanced minds of the present day
co-operate, not with the animal, but with the intellectual. This
makes a very important and very marked difference, and makes
the semi-animal religion of the past very unsuitable for the pres-
ent age. Please note this point, friendly reader.
Bible Writers Honest.
It may readily be conceded that the writers and compilers of
all Bibles were honest, and that all the errors which those Bibles
embrace, and the crimes which they sanction, were honestly
believed to be right, and in accordance with the will of God.
For all sacred history teaches us, as an important lesson of
human nature, that no errors are too gross, no crimes too enor-
mous, no statements too false or absurd, no contradictions too
glaring, and no stories too preposterous or too ridiculous, to
receive the fullest indorsement of the most honest and pious
minds, and to be even cherished by them as God-given or
divinely revealed truths, when such has been their teaching
ever}7 day of their lives, in connection with the habitual sup-
pression of the voice of reason, and the inherited conviction of
their truth deeply implanted in the mind, derived from a thou-
30
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
sand preceding generations. A strong and unyielding cord of
religious conviction thus grows in the human mind, which no
reason, no philosophy, and no science can ever sever or even
shake. It becomes a moral canker, which no remedy can reach,
or arrest in its progress. It seems to grow into the very heart-
strings. Such is the strength of religious prejudice, such the
weak side of human nature. Three hundred millions of people
believe in the Hindoo religion, one hundred millions in the
Chinese religion, two hundred millions in the Mahomedan reli-
gion, and one hundred and fifty millions in the Christian re-
ligion,— all for the same reasons, because their parents so
believed, and taught them, and their neighbors still believe it;
and surrounding influences have caused them to continue in
their erroneous belief.
After the illuminating rays of the sun of science had to some
extent dispelled the religious errors of our early education,
the case was so plain, that we entered upon the work of trying
to convince others, with sanguine hopes of success. But expe-
rience has established the conviction in our mind, that if ever}7
text of the Christian Bible were a falsehood, and every line of
their creeds an absurdity, there are many devout admirers of
the book who could never be made to see it, because they are
ruled by their religious feelings, and not by their reasoning fac-
ulties ; and hence they will live and die in their moral and
religious errors. But we rejoice in the omnipotent power of
truth, which will finally dispel all error from progressive minds.
General Claims of Bibles.
More than twenty sacred books have been 'found in various
countries, which, if not in all cases denominated Bibles, have
at least been venerated and used as such, and, properly speak-
ing, arc Bibles. Hence we shall call them Bibles. The list in
this chapter comprises nearly all which recent research has
brought to light. A brief synopsis of the character and contents
of each will be presented, so far as a comparative view with the
Christian Bible seems to make it requisite.
All of these Bibles possess some common characteristics: —
1. All of them were claimed to be inspired.
THE BEAUTIES AND BENEFITS OF BIBLES.
31
2. All were claimed to be an embodiment of wisdom and
knowledge far transcending the ordinary attainments of man.
3. All were penned by inspired men, who were shielded from
the possibility of erring while writing them.
4. Each Bible is a finality in religious knowledge.
5. Each one is an authority from which there is no appeal.
6. It is a sin to question or doubt the truth of any of them,
or to suggest the possibility of their containing errors.
7. Some of them were written by God, some by angels, and
others by inspired men.
8. Each one points out the only safe and certain road to
heaven.
9. He who is a disbeliever in any one of these holy books
is an infidel.
10. Each one is to effect the salvation of the whole human
race.
32
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER Y.
TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES DESCRIBED.
The Hindoo Bibles. — I. The Yedas.
The Veda is considered to be the oldest sacred book of the
Hindoos, and is evidently the oldest Bible now extant. There is
avast amount of evidence to prove that it was written long before
the time of Moses, which establishes the fact that it borrowed
nothing from the Jews or Jewish writings. They purport to be
the inspired utterances of very ancient and holy saints and
prophets, known as Rishis, who received them directty from the
mouth of the great God Brahma about nine thousand years ago,
after they had existed in his mind from all eternity. These
“ holy men,” by their devout piety and unreserved devotion to
the cause of God and religion, it was believed, had attained
to true holiness and heavenly' sanctity. The Yedas treat of the
attributes of God, and his dealings with the human race; his
invisibility and spirituality; his unchangeableness, omniscience,
omnipotence, and omnipresence; the nature and binding force
of his laws; the doctrine of future rewards and punishments;
frequent and wonderful display of divine power, called miracles,
&c. It contains, likewise, many noble, lofty, and beautiful
moral precepts. It also treats, to some extent, of astronomy,
medicines, and government. The Ma}T number of u The New-
York Tribune” for 1858 contains a very interesting account
of the recent translation of the Yedas into the English language,
from which we will make a few extracts: u The whole of the
Veda is now being published for the first time by the East-
India Coinpan}', by which the reader will learn that most of the
odious things which have been charged to it are false. They
ore not found therein. They are Christian forgeries; such as
TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES DESCRIBED*
33
the burning of widows on the funeral pile of their husbands, the
marriage of children, the doctrine of caste, &c. None of these
things are taught or countenanced by the Vedas. The man who
believes in the Vedas approximates to a Christian.99 (Mark
this statement, Christian reader!) Mr. Greeley further say s:
6 ‘ The highest authority for the religion of the Brahmins is the
Vedas. The most elaborate arguments have been framed by
its devout believers to establish its divine origin and absolute
authority. They constantly appeal to its authorit}r, and, in
controversj7 with Mahomedan and Christian missionaries ” (Ma-
homedans have missionaries among them, observe), u they
invariably fall back on the Vedas,—referring to it with great
confidence in support of any thing they wish to establish as di-
vine. There is no doctrine of Christianity which has not been
anticipated by the Vedas.” What is that you say, Mr. Gree-
ley? “ They have all the doctrines of Christianity! ” Is that
possible? All the holy and inspired doctrines of Jesus Christ,
the great divine Lawgiver and Savior of the world, found in an
old heathen Bible, written more than two thousand years before
a single line of the doctrines of Christ was penned ! Here is one
of the most astounding announcements ever made to the world.
The reader, perhaps, will suppose that Mr. Greeley was an infi-
del ; but here, again, is something most astonishing: Mr. Gree-
ley was up to this time a sound member of a Christian church,
and withal a truthful writer. Such an announcement ought to
have startled the whole Christian world, and set them to inves-
tigating the matter. But, like the disciples of all the heathen
religions, they are immovably fixed in the errors of their faith,
and turn a deaf ear to all criticism, and all honest inquiry relat-
ing to the truth of its claims. Such is the tenacity of their
inherited convictions of being right, their assumption of infalli-
bility, their aversion and opposition to investigation, that, if
every- line of their Bible was a falsehood, but few of them would
find it out.
There are four works which come under the name of Vedas,
known as the Rig Veda, Yojur Veda, Sama Veda, and Athar-
va Veda. Each of these Bibles is constituted of various books,
probably the work of different writers. Each Veda is accompa-
34
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
nied by psalms or hymns, known as the 66 Sanhita,” and also
by a sort of prose treatise or commentary, called the 44 Brah-
mana,” which possesses a ritualistic or didactic character, — all
of which were believed to be inspired. 44 Never has the theory
of inspiration/’ sajTs Mr. Amberly, 44 been pushed to such ex-
tremes as in the case of the Yedas. They were believed by
some to be the direct creation of Brahma/’ while the hymns
which accompany them were claimed to be the inspired produc-
tions of hol}r men and prophets (Rishis). The Vedas was the
standard authority in all cases ; and any doctrine, opinion, or
statement at variance with the Vedas was to be rejected as
false. 44 And as for a contradiction in the Holy Book/’ says
Mr. Amberly, 44 the thought was not to be entertained for a
moment as possible.” Such a conclusion they ascribed to the
reader’s wrong interpretation of its language. Such was the
extreme veneration in which the book was held, that every text,
word, and even sjdlable, was counted. A Brahmin was not al-
lowed to marry till after he had devoted several years to study-
ing the Holy Book ; And, to attain to complete holiness, the dis-
ciple must commit the Rig Veda to memory, or read it through
on his bended knees. The Vedas represent God as being44 one
and indivisible,” and “merciful to sinners.” And Brahmins
and Budhists, when they pray for sinners or for their enemies,
manifest a spirit of kindness and forgiveness not equalled by
Christians.
The Budhists had many churches and many priests, wiio
taught the people to lead virtuous lives, and to avoid the com-
mission of every species of crime, including the use of intoxi-
cating drinks. And in no other s3Tstem was ever benevolence and
charity, and also chastity, more emphatically enjoined, or more
consistently practiced. The Vedas teach that every good act
has its reward, and every bad act its punishment. Its disciples
are taught that many saviors (Budlias) have appeared on earth
at different periods to suffer and die for the people; the last of
which was Guatama, cotemporary with Christ. lie is an object
of great veneration amongst them, and prayers are often ad-
dressed to him. Many tales are told of his goodness, self-
denial, suffering, and sacrifice for the people, which leads to the
TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES DESCBIBED.
35
conclusion that he was a pure, holy, and unselfish being. He
gave utterance to many noble and morally exalting precepts.
His principal precepts were comprised in six commandments:
1. “ Not to kill any living creature.” 2. u Not to steal.” 3.
“ Not to commit unchastity.” 4. “ Not to lie.” 5. “ Not to
drink intoxicating drinks.” 6. “ Not to lay up treasures upon
earth.” These are a few of his leading precepts, and which he
himself practiced. In the observance of the last precept, he
and his followers have excelled almost every Christian on earth,
as their Bible contains the same precept, but none of them try to
practice it. Hence the Hindoos are in this respect much better
Christians than the Christians themselves. Here it may be
noted that the Hindoos, like the disciples of the Christian faith,
have had various ecclesiastical councils to settle the canon of
their Bible or some controverted doctrinal questions. One of the
most noted of these councils was called under the reign of
King Asoka in the year 246 B.C. It was constituted of seven
hundred “ learned and accomplished priests.” But they could
not stop the progress of infidelity, as they essayed to do. It con-
tinued to increase till another council was called under the reign
of King Kanishka, and another revision of the sacred text took
place. But, as in Christian and Mahomedan countries, it tended
rather to unsettle than to settle the popular faith. Nothing can
arrest the intelligence and growth of progressive minds. Skep-
ticism and infidelity will continue to increase whenever the mind
is unfettered by priestcraft, till the last credal institution is
swept from the face of the earth, and ceases to curse the human
family.
II. The Institutes op Menu.
“ The Code of Menu,” or “ Institutes of Menu,” constitutes
another sacred book of the Hindoos. The Rev. Mr. Allen says
of it: u It is a code of religious and civil laws, and makes a
part of the Hindoo Scriptures.” It is in many respects simi-
lar to the Vedas, and is almost equal to it in age; and, like
the Vedas, it is a standard of faith and a guide for moral action.
Hindoos call it Menu Darma Shastra, u the ordinances of God.”
“As these ordinances, or divine laws,” says Mr. Allen, “pro-
fess to be of divine origin, kings have no authority to change
36
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
them. Their duty was to administer their governments accord-
ing to their teachings.55 All classes of people were required to
live up to them. “ In these respects,55 says Mr. Allen (p.
3G6), u the}" resemble the laws given by Moses, and contained
in the Old Testament.55 These Institutes treat on the subject
of creation, the doctrine of future rewards and punishments,
and also define many of the duties of life.
III. Rama yana.
With respect to age, the Ramayana is generally ranked next
to the Code of Menu, and is equally adored as a holy and in-
spired book, and u maybe classed,55 sa}Ts Mr. Allen, “ with the
Hindoo Scriptures.55 It treats of the war in Heaven, in which
the dragon, or serpent-devil, was cast to the earth. To put an
end to his ravages here, the Savior and incarnate God Chrishna
was sent down. Christ, we are told, u came to destroy the devil
and his works.55 Col. Sherman tells us, in his u Recollections
of an Indian Official,55 that u the people (Hindoos) assured us
this Bible was written, if not b}r the hand of the Deit}r himself,
at least by his inspiration; and, if asked if any absurdity that
may be pointed out in the book be true, they reply with great
na.vete, ‘ Is it not written in the Holy Book? and how could it
be there, and not be true? 5 5 5 — exactly the same defense that is
often set up for the Christian Bible by its educationally warped
admirers. It is believed the great Hindoo prophet, Vyas, wrote
much of this Bible, or “ Inspired Poem,55 as some call it.
IV. Tiie Maiiabarat.
The origin of this sacred book is considered to be very nearly
co-equal with that of the Rama3~ana. It has an appendix, or
epistle, called the u Baglcavat Gita,55 which, on account of its
high tone of spiritually, has attracted much attention in Europe.
The Hindoos believe the Maliabrat is highly inspired, and that
cver3T event noticed in it was recorded before it took place ; thus
making it in the highest degree prophetic. “Its author, the3r
claim,55 sa3’s Mr. Allen, “is no other than the incarnate God
Chrishna, of whose life it treats.55 That profound Oriental
scholar, Mr. Wilkins, thinks this and the other sacred books of
TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES DESCRIBED.
37
India are more than three thousand years old, as is evidenced
by sculptures in solid rocks.
Y. The Purans, or Poe an as.
-
The Hindoo Holy Scriptures, when arranged together in one
book, are known as the Barta Shastra, of which the Poranas
constitute a part. The last-named work treats of the creation
of the world, and its final destruction and future renovation,
the u great day of judgment,5’ Divine Providence, &c. ; also
the ordinances and rules for worship, &c.
VI. Analogies of the Brahmin and Jewish Religion.
Brahminism and Judaism are each old forms of religion.
Each was superseded by a new and improved form of religion.
Each has a story of creation. Jehovah and Brahma both cre-
ated the sun, moon, and stars (so believed by millions).
1. The spirit of both moved upon the face of the waters.
2. The world is spoken in to existence by both Jehovah and
Brahma.
3. The Hindoos had an Adimo and Iva, the Hebrews an Adam
and Eve.
4. In each case every thing is to produce after its kind.
5. Man is in each case the last and crowning work of the
whole creation.
6. Both stories set man as a ruler over subordinate creation.
7. Light in each case was spoken into existence.
8. Jehovah and Brahma each occupied six days in the work
of creation.
9. There is a primitive paradise and state of moral purity in
each story.
10. A tree whose fruit produced immortality is noticed in each
cosmogony.
11. A serpent figures in each, and outwits Brahma and Jeho-
vah.
12. Man in each partakes of the fruit of the tree of knowledge.
13. The doctrine of the fall is found in each account. The
means for man’s restoration is provided in each case.
14. Each sacred legend has a story of a war in heaven.
38
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
15. The soul is the breath of life, or breath of God, in each
cosmogony.
16. Labor is imposed as a curse in each case.
17. A moral code of ten commandments is found in each sys-
tem. Not to kill is the first command in each decalogue. Steal-
ing is interdicted in each decalogue. Adultery is condemned in
each. Bearing false witness is forbidden by each.
18. Both Brahmins and Jews lost their cc Holy Law,” or
u Laws of God.” One had a Hilkiah, and the other a Bishen,
to find the law.
19. Each had an established order of priesthood. The priest-
hood was hereditary in each case: a tribe or family furnished
the priests in each case.
20. Both claimed to be God’s pet and holy, or peculiar,
people ; and both styled other nations barbarians or aliens.
21. Both holy nations were forbidden to marry with others;
and both were too holy to eat with barbarians.
22. Each had a ceremonial law prescribing numerous rites.
The church ceremonies were performed by priests in each.
23. The priests were forbidden to eat meat in both cases.
24. Both Jews and Brahmins worshiped by bloody sacrifices.
Both had their favorite sacred annuals. Animal sacrifices were
by each to arrest public calamities.
25. One interdicted beef, and the other pork, as food.
26. Both prescribed purification after touching dead bodies;
and each religion had a law of purification. Bathing was a
mode of purification in each religion.
27. Each has its “holy” places, times, days, cities, moun-
tains, rivers, &c. India, as well as Judea, was considered a
holy land.
28. Each had its holy ground. Both drew off their shoes on
entering upon hoi}' ground or holy places.
29. Both had their holy days, and the same in most
cases.
30. Mount Mera was no less holy than Mount Sinai or Mount
Iloreb. Jordan was a sacred river in one case, and Ganges
in the other. Jerusalem was a u holy ” city with the Jews, and
Benares with the Hindoos.
TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES DESCBIBED.
39
31. Hofy fasts and feasts were a part of each religion. Both
made a holy feast at full moon.
32. Each had its holy fires.
33. Both had their holy mysteries kept sacredly guarded.
34. Each prepared and kept holy water for ceremonial
purposes.
35. Both anointed themselves with “ holy ointment.”
36. Each claimed to have the only true and “ holy faith.”
37. “Holy temples” were familiar terms to each. Their
temples were constructed in a similar manner. Each had a
“ sanctum sanctorum,” or “holy of holies.” Only the holy
priest of both entered the interior sanctum.
38. Both had their drink-offerings (called turpin by the Hin-
doos) .
39. Both sprinkled their door-posts with blood.
40. One had a scape-goat, and the other a scape-horse.
41. Both taught that the sins of the father were visited upon
the children.
42. Religious pilgrimages were practiced by each.
43. Both acknowledge and teach one supreme God. Inferior
deities, or angels, are believed in by each. God’s omniscience,
omnipotence, and omnipresence are taught in both Bibles.
44. God is represented to be invisible by each. And “God
is a spirit,” and infinitely wise and good, is taught in each.
45. To love God supremely is recommended by each.
46. Both taught that God was a God of power, and assisted
them in their battles.
47. Both taught that a knowledge of God is essential.
48. Silent meditation upon the Lord is recommended by
each.
49. God was to each a refuge in danger and trouble.
50. The government of each was a theocracy, God the
executive.
51. Both religions were constituted largely of external rites.
In each the priest was the expounder of the holy books and laws.
“Patriarchs” was one of the sacred orders of each system.
Holy “prophets” figure conspicuously in each system. Both
priests and people were in each case believed to be inspired.
40
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
52. And each had its witnesses to prove the truth and fulfill-
ment of its prophecies.
53. Both held their Holy Bibles as an inspired guide of right
and wrong.
54. One Bible was from Jehovah, and the other from Brahma.
55. Ezra was inspired to compile the Jewish Bible, and Vyas
the Brahmin.
56. Each religious order had a holy ark containing something
sacred.
57. A story of a deluge is found in the Bible of each.
58. The corruption or wickedness of societ}r caused the flood
in each case.
59. The Brahmins had their patriarch Satyavrata, answering
to Noah.
$ 60. Each was forewarned of the flood.
0 61. Eight persons were saved in each case.
62. In each story a large vessel is prepared. Animals were
saved by pairs in each case. A rainbow is spoken of in each
flood story.
63. For Shem, Ham, and Japhet, the Hindoos have a Sherma,
Charma, and Jyapheta.
64. Charma was condemned to be u a servant of servants,”
» like Ham.
65. Human life was in each traditionally spun out to nearly
a thousand years.
66. One day a thousand years with God, in each system.
% 67. Both have stories of persons ascending to heaven.
68. Budha was cast into the fiery furnace like the three holy
children.
69. Musavod was a giant in strength like Samson.
70. Rhambha was changed to a pillar of stone, like Lot’s
wife to salt.
71. Mahendra was carried through the air like Ilabakkuk.
72. A story of Budha answers to that of Daniel in the lions’
den.
73. Idolatry is discouraged, but occasionally practiced by each.
74. Witchcraft was believed in by each.
75. Here are presented sixty-eight striking analogies.
TWENTY-SEVEN BIBLES DESCRIBED.
41
VII. Antiquity of India.
Having presented a long list of analogies between the Hindoo
and Jewish religions, we will proceed to prove the prior exist-
ance of the Hindoo system, and leave the reader to deduce his
own inferences. “In times coeval with the earliest authentic
records,” says a writer, “the Hindoos calculated eclipses, and
were venerated for their attainments in some of the arts and
sciences.” According to the learned astronomer Baily, their
calculations in astronomy extended back to the remote period
of seventeen hundred years before Moses; and some of the
ancient monuments and inscriptions of India bespeak for its
religion a very remote antiquity. Some of our modern learned
antiquarians have expressed the opinion that the Sanscrit lan-
guage of the Brahmins is the oldest language that can be traced
in the history of the human race. They also state that this lan-
guage was extant before the Jews were known as a nation; and
neither it nor their religion has ever been known to change.
These facts are sufficient to establish the existence of the Brah-
min and Budhist systems of religion long prior to the earliest
records of the Jewish nation.
Note. —Here we desire to call the attention of the reader to the very \
remarkable statement of Col. Dow in his “History of India.’’ He tells
us that “the Hindoos give a very particular account of the origin of the
Jewish religion ” (pref. v.). They say that a pious Hindoo by the name
of Rajah Tura apostatized from the faith, for which he was banished to
the West, where he established a system of religion, which became after-
wards known as the Jewish religion. Tura only needs a change of one
letter to make Tera, the father of Abraham. Let the reader make a note
of this.
42
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER VI.
THE EGYPTIAN BIBLE.
The “Hermas.”
The sacred books, the u Hernias,” or “Books of Hernias,”
were believed by the Eg}q>tians to have been dictated b}T the
God Isis, and inspired by him. In their collected capachy
they constituted the Egyptian Bible, and were believed to con-
tain “the sum total of human and divine wisdom.” Their
great age is undisputed. They treat of the creation of the
world, the attributes of God, and the theogony of the inferior
deities, which answer to angels in the Christian system, as
the}r hold the same office, and are apparently the same kind of
beings. The “ Hermas,” like all other Bibles, recognize but
one supreme God, whom it declares to be just, holy, morally
perfect, invisible, and indivisible, and whom it recommends to
be worshiped in silence. This “Holy Book” contains some
lofty and soul-inspiring moral sentiments and useful precepts.
Analogy of the Egyptian and Jewish Religions.
Modern archaeological researches in Egypt have disclosed a
very striking resemblance between the ancient Egyptian religion
and that found in the Jewish Old Testament, which, with the
evidence of the greater antiquit}7 of the former, has fastened the
conviction upon the mind of every impartial reader of liistoiy,
that the Jewish religion was constructed from materials obtained
in Egypt and India; and this conclusion is corroborated by
the Bible itself, which tells us Moses was skilled in all the
wisdom and learning of Egjqit, and was by birth an Egyptian.
When we compare the doctrines, precepts, laws, and customs of
the two religions, wo find but little difference between them.
THE EGYPTIAN BIBLE.
43
Even to the ten commandments there is a striking resemblance.
The account of the creation and the order of its development
is essentially the same in both. 1. The Egyptians had a
leader filling the place of Moses by the name of Hermes ; and
his writings were held in similar estimation, as they were be-
lieved to be inspired and dictated by Infinite Wisdom. 2. The
Egyptians had a priesthood of wealth and power, and possess-
ing the same sacerdotal caste as those of the Jews. 3. And
the priesthood, Mr. Pritchard tells us (Debate 116), was heredi-
tary, and confined to a certain tribe, as was that of the Jews.
According to Diodorus Siculus, and also Mr. Wilkinson, nearly
all their ceremonies were essentially the same. 4. And their
religious temples were constructed upon the same model, with an
outer court and an inner court,—a, sanctum sanctorum. 5. The
Egyptians had numerous prophets like the Jews. And Herod-
otus says, u The art of predicting future events came from the
Egyptians.” 6. The Egyptians had an ark, or shrine, which
served as an oracle, and was carried about on a pole by a pro-
cession of priests, as the ark of the covenant of the Jews was
by the Levites. The Bev. John Kendrick, in his 6 ‘ Ancient
Egypt,” acknowledged that he believed u the ark of the cov-
enant of the Hebrews was constructed on the model of the
Egyptian shrine.” 7. Kitto, in his “ Cyclopedia,” says the
Egyptian sphinxes explain what is meant by the cherubims of
the Jews. 8. In their selection of animals for sacrifices, we find
the same rules were adopted. Each were controlled by.the singu-
lar fancy of choosing a red heifer. 9. Each had their scape-
animals to carry away their sins, —the Egyptians an ox, and the
Jews a goat. 10. Both practiced circumcision. And we have
the authority of Herodotus for saying the Jews and Phoenicians
borrowed the custom of the Egyptians. 11. Both Jews and
Egyptians took off their shoes when approaching a holy place,
which, with the Egyptians, was in the temple. 12. Both believed
in one supreme, over-ruling God, and many subordinates, known
either as angels or deities, which, in their character and their
offices, were essentially the same. And a hundred other analo-
gies might be pointed out, which indicate the Oriental origin of
Judaism.
r
4 4
TIIE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Antiquity of Egypt.
As a full comparison will show that the religion of ancient
Egypt and that of the Jews were essentially alike, not only in
their general features but in their most minute details, with
respect to most of their doctrines, precepts, and customs, the
question arises, How came this resemblance? It is out of the
question to consider it merely fortuitous : that one grew out of
the other, or both were derived from a common source, we are
compelled to admit. To determine which was the parent sys-
tem we have only to ascertain which possesses the greater an-
ti quity. This question is very easily settled. A large volume
of facts is at our command which tend to prove that the Eg}qp-
tians were in a high state of civilization before the Jews were
known to history. The Bible itself partially recognizes this *
fact hy its frequent allusion to Egypt as a wise and powerful
nation, able at all times to exercise superior swa}T over the Jews,
and whose wise men, or magicians, could compete with not only
the Jews, but their God, in the performance of miracles ; that
is, with the Jews and their God to help them, in achieving the
most astounding feats. They could make any thing that Jeho-
vah could, with the exception of lice. The remote antiquity of
Egypt can be proved by a few facts. The Egyptians have a
carefully preserved list of sixty-one kings, who ruled the empire
between Mcnes and Amasis, with names and ages given, whose
aggregate reign comprises a period of more than seven thousand
years. Herodotus says they computed with great care and accu-
racy. Manetho tells us Mcnes reigned seven thousand seven
hundred years ago, which places him more than seventeen
hundred years before Adam. Engravings on monuments,
and writings on papjTus, confirm the statement of Manetho.
^Ynd then hieroglyphics on the pyramids of Egypt, with names,
dates, and figures which have recently been deciphered, enable
us to trace the antiquity of Egypt back eight thousand years,
when^she is shown to have been in a high state of civilization.*)
Another fact: Layard and Rawlinson, who recently visited Egjqpt
as commissioners or agents of the British Government, state that
fragments of pottery have been recently found by digging in the
Valley of the Nile, which, by counting the successive layers, or
THE EGYPTIAN BIBLE.
45
deposits, made b the annual overflowing of the river, are shown
to be not less than eleven thousand years old. Such facts
amount to demonstration, and can not be set aside. And Mr.
Wilkinson, in his u Manners and Customs of Ancient Egypt,”
adduces another kind of evidence to show the impossibility of
Egypt having obtained her religion from the Jews. £He says,
u The first glimpse we obtain of Egypt shows us a nation far
advanced in the arts and customs and institutions of civilized
life.” (^And this was six or seven thousand years ago; while
the most conclusive evidence can be adduced to show that no
essential change has been made in her religion since the inscrip-
tions were made on the monuments, some of which bear evi-
dence of being eight thousand or nine thousand years old^ If
there has been no essential change in her religion for eight thou-
sand or nine thousand years, it is prima facie evidence that she
did not borrow any of her religious tenets of the Jews. Such
facts settle the question more conclusively than the most elabo-
rate argument could do, '
46
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
CHAPTER VII.
THE PERSIAN BIBLES.
I. The Zenda Ayesta.
The Persians, property speaking, had two Bibles, or Testa-
ments, regarded as inspired and of divine authority,—the
Zenda Avesta and the Sadder, which may be denominated their
Old and New Testaments. With these may be classed other
sacred books of Persia, known as the “ Desatur” (or Revealed
Will of God), the u G. Javidan99 (or Eternal Wisdom), and
the “ Sophi Ibraham 99 (Wisdom of Ibraham). Hyde, in his
Biography of Brittain, eighth chapter, pronounces the G. Javi-
dan older than the writings of Zoroaster, which were penned
600 B.C.
The Zenda Avesta presents a detailed account of creation in
six kappas, or indefinite periods of time; the temptation and
fall of man, and his final restoration; the immortality of the
soul, &c.
II. Persian Bible — The Sadder.
The Sadder depicts u the war in heaven,” in which the great
dragon, or devil, Ahrimancs, is finally slain. This sacred book,
as well as the Zenda Avesta, contains many beautiful precepts.
The Persian sacred writings are all full of prayer and praise to
God. One portion addresses him as Onnvzd, another as Ahura
Mazda. None of their Holy Books countenance or show any
favor cither for idolatry or potytheism. The Persians have
always opposed the making and worship of deific images ; and
they worship but one God, with the above names. One of their
prayers, as a specimen, will show this: uO Ahura Mazda,
thou true and happj’ being! aid us to think and speak of thee,
THE PERSIAN BIBLES.
47
and do only those things which promote the true welfare of
body and soul. I believe in thee as the just and hoty God, thou
living Wise One! Thou art the author of creation, the true
source of light and life. I will praise thee, thou Holy Spirit,
thou glorious God Mazda! Thou givest with a liberal hand
good things to the impious, as well as to the pious.” In that
portion of the Zenda Avesta called the u Yacna,” constituting
seven chapters, it is declared, 66 We worship Ahura Mazda, and
pray for the spread of his religion. We praise Mazda’s reli-
gion, and the pure brotherhood which it established. From the
Holy Spirit Mazda proceeds all good, and he is the source of
perfection and immortality.” Here let it be noted that Cyrus
of Persia was teaching the doctrine of immortality of the soul,
while Moses seems never to have thought of such a thing: he
is silent on the subject. Zenda Avesta means “ The Living
Word of God.” It has also been called by its disciples
u The Revealed Word ;” and Ahura Mazda has been called the
“ God of gods,” as the Jews called Jehovah. Who is to settle
this counter-claim?
Sin, repentance, and forgiveness are all recognized in the
sacred books of the Persians. This is evinced by a devout dis-
ciple, when he says, in prajmr, UI repent, O Lord, of my
wicked deeds in thought and words. Forgive, O Lord: I
repent of my sins.” A writer says, 66 Upon the really fun-
damental duties of man, the Zenda Avesta upholds a high
standard of morality and honesty, and seeks to inculcate the im-
mense importance of leading an upright and virtuous life, — such
a life alone as can be pleasing to God and useful to man.” A
text in this sacred book reads, u You can not be a worshiper of
the one true God and of many gods at the same time ; ” which
is a very explicit avowal of the belief in but one God. This
Persian Bible declares, that one way to advance God’s kingdom
on earth is to confer benefit upon the poor. Its spirit of kind-
ness and sympathetic regard.for suffering extends even to the
brute creation. It forbids cruelty to any class of beings, and
enjoins kindness to all. Its psalms, hymns, and liturgies
breathe forth a spirit of deep piety. A compliance with the
divine law is urged as a means of saving the sinner from future
48
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
punishment. The stern moral fortitude of the great teacher
and moral exemplar Zoroaster, in resisting, like Christ, the
temptations of the Evil One, evinces a high appreciation of true
virtue. As a whole, the sacred books of the Persians, like
those of other nations, contain a considerable amount of golden
truth mixed with much rubbish and superstition.
Analogy of tiie Persian and Jewish Religions.
Doctor Pocoke sa}Ts, “ Many things taught in the sacred
books of the Persians are the same as those taught in the Penta-
teuch of Moses, and other parts of the Bible. They also con-
tain many of the psalms erroneously called by the Jews and
Christians the Psalms of David.” Sir William Jones, in his
“Asiatic Researches,” says, “The primeval religion of Iran
(Persia) is called b}T Newton the oldest, and it ma}T justly be
called the noblest, of all religions.” It teaches “ a firm belief
that one supreme God made the world by his power, and governs
it by his providence. It inculcates a pious fear, love, and adora-
tion for God ; also a due reverence for parents and aged persons,
fraternal affection for the whole human species, and a compas-
sionate tenderness even for the brute creation.” Can as much
as this be said of the Christian religion ? Mr. Goodrich, after
stating that the ancient Hebrews evidently had no idea of
astronomy as a science, says, “The Chaldeans appear to have
made observations on eclipses earlier than the commencement
of written history ” (“ History of All Nations,” p. 25).
The Chaldeans and Persians have a story of creation essen-
tiall}T the same as that of the Jews. It represents Ormuzd as
creating the world through the word in six kappas, or periods of
time. Previous to that period, nothing but chaos, or darkness,
and water had existed. Ormuzd created, first, the heavens and
the earth; second, the firmament; third, the seas and waters;
fourth, the sun, moon, and stars ; fifth, birds, reptiles, quadru-
peds, &c. ; sixth, man. The Persians and Chaldeans have also
a story of a deluge, in which Xisuthra, being warned in a dream,
built an ark, in which he saved himself, his wife and daughter,
and the pilot, and a pair of every species of animals, reptiles,
and birds. After the rain had ceased, he sent out a pigeon,
THE PERSIAN BIBLES.
49
which, finding no resting place, came back to the ark. The
second time, it came with mud in its bill, which was a better evi-
dence that the waters had subsided than the leaf which Noah’s
dove returned with, as that might have been picked up while
floating on the waters. They had a giant in strength (a Gaza)
answering to that of Samson. They had a story of a lofty
tower designed to reach to heaven, but the gods destroyed it,
and confounded the language of the builders. The Persians
had their priests, their prophets, their angels, their twelve patri-
archs, their holy fires, holy water, and rites of purification, like
the Jews ; also their ordinance of water-baptism. Their holy
mountains, holy rivers, and holy waters, their animal sacrifices,
and their sacrament or ceremony of bread and wine, were all similar
to those of the Jews. They had a Soleimon and a Soleimon’s tem-
ple. Their religion was a theocracy, and was violently opposed
to idolatry ; but, unlike the Jewish religion, it taught the doctrine
of the immortality of the soul, and the lofty idea that the human
mind is an emanation from the divine nature. We find the
principal elements of the Christian system also mixed up with
the doctrines and principles above, set forth ; such as two primary
principles of good and evil (Ormuzd and Ahrimanes), termed
by Christians God and the Devil,—two Gods with their two
kingdoms, which were always at war with each other, to mode-
rate which stands Mithra the Mediator, who was born, like
Christ, of an immaculate virgin. For a further elucidation, see
u The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors.”
Antiquity of the Persian Religion.
The historical facts to establish the existence of the Persian
religion long prior to that of the Jews are numerous, cogent,
and unanswerable. ^They have calculations in astrononry which,
scientists admit, must have been made four hundred years an-
terior to the time of Moses. ^According to Berosus, fragments
of their history have been found which extend it back fifteen
thousand years ; and he tells us it is computed with great care.N
50
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER YHI.
CHINESE BIBLES.
Kings and Shoo.
The Chinese have various sacred books, the principal of
which are the Five Kings. They have also four Holy Books,
known as Shoo, and one called Tao-te, though the word
King is a term applied to all their sacred books. Some of these
Holy Bibles are attributed to Confucius, one of them (Ta-heo,
the Great Learning) to his grandson, and others to his dis-
ciples. Some of the sects recognize thirteen Kings, or sacred
books, others only seven, and the principal sect but five.
Some of these Holy Books bear a resemblance to the Christian
Gospels, others to the Epistles ; and one of them bears a con-
siderable resemblance to Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews. They
are believed to be divinely inspired; and all are regarded as
authority in matters of faith, doctrine, and practice. All of
them inculcate virtue, and condemn vice and immorality. I will
present merely a brief exposition of a few of the leading books.
I. Ta-IIeo ; on, Great Learning.
This book forms the basis of the religious sect known as the
Tao-ists. It treats principally of doctrines, but enjoins many
important duties, — such as famity government, the cultivation
of the natural faculties, the acquisition of knowledge, the duty
of being honest and sincere and rectifying the heart, and the
moral obligation of having good rulers and a righteous govern-
ment as means of making all peaceful and happy.
II. The Chung Yung ; or, The Doctrine of the Mean.
This book contains the Golden Rule: “AVhat you do not
like others to do to you, do not so to them.” It recommends a
CHINESE BIBLES.
51
state of harmony in the mental faculties as the path of duty
and the road to happiness and to heaven. It teaches that peo-
ple should follow the dictates of their own consciences, and
cultivate and fulty develop their natures. On the whole, it
admonishes a sj^stem of moral perfection. It declares that
spiritual beings are constantly around us, and we do nothing
without them, though we do not see nor hear them. Pretty
good spiritualism!
III. The Book of Mang, or Mencius.
Mang, or Mencius, the philosopher, lived about two hundred
years after Confucius. This Holy Book of his was not admitted
into the Chinese canon till several centuries after it was
written. Up to that date it was regarded as apocryphal, but
is now held in high veneration as an inspired book. It affirms
the essential goodness of human nature, instead of the Chris-
tian doctrine of u total depravity.” It teaches that all men
are possessed of more or less goodness by nature, but are often
corrupted by bad example and bad governments. It argues the
moral right of the people to choose their own rulers.
IV. Shoo King ; or, Book of History.
This work is constituted of fifty-eight books. It throws
much light on the history of the Chinese Empire, and bears
evidence of having been written in a very remote age, but was
compiled about 500 B.C. It argues that people are not bad
by nature, and that it is the duty of governments, to bless the
good and punish the wicked. Otherwise they need not expect
the blessing of heaven, or the favor of the people. It relates
the case of an emperor who was reformed by reading the Holy
Book.
V. The She King ; or, Book of Poetry.
This book is about as devoid of moral instruction as the
Books of Puth and Esther in the Christian Bible. It is princi-
pally a display of human emotions and social feelings. Yet
almost every Chinese has committed portions of it to memory.
Being gotten up in the style of a poem, it is well calculated to
enlist the feelings of the devout disciple.
52
TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
YI. The Chun Tsen ; ok, Spring and Summer.
This is principally a historical record, and is interpreted as
representing spring and summer. It is held in high estimation
as being the production of the “Great Divine Man,” Confu-
cius ; and it is wonderful with what ingenuity its commentators
and teachers have succeeded in extracting from its dry details
about wars, marriages, deaths, travels, eclipses, battles, &c.,
the most profound lessons in morals. Like the admirers and
expounders of other Holy Books in all ages and countries, they
bestow the most recondite spiritual meanings on texts contain-
ing nothing but nonsense, senseless verbiage, or immoral teach-
ings.
VII. The Tao-te King ; or, Doctrine of Reason.
“ Tao ” means absolute, and “ Te ” means virtue; which in-
dicates that it teaches absolute virtue. Of all sacred books
this is the most philosophical. It seems to constitute both a
revelation and system of philosophy. It displays considerable
wisdom and beauty, but is not free from those gross and repul-
sive elements which characterize the Christian and some other
Bibles. It declares that God created, cherishes, and loves all
the world. It has no angry God, but one enjoining love and
benevolence, and the return of good for evil, upon all the hu-
man race. It declares God made all beings : his essence formed
them, his might preserves them, his providence protects them,
and his power perfects them. It condemns war and weapons
of death: it says that Tao does not employ them, and all good
men abhor them. It also condemns the possession of worldly
wealth as being in opposition to a spiritual life, and as denoting
the absence of good from the soul. Modesty, mercy, benevo-
lence, and contentment arc recommended as the highest of hu-
man virtues. An extensive commentaiy, written b}T a Chinese
saint about 100 B.C., goes with this book to explain it, as all
“divine revelations” have to be revealed over again by the
priests, who seem to assume that Infinite Wisdom is too igno-
rant of human language to dictate a book that can be under-
stood. Must it not be mortifying to him to have his blunders
thus exposed ?
CHINESE BIBLES.
53
Analogy of the Chinese and Jewish Religions.
The Christian historian, Mr. Milne, expressed a fear that he
might be condemned for furnishing proof, that, before Jesus was
born, a morality as pure was inculcated in the celestial empire
(China). As in the Hindoo, Egyptian, and Persian religions,
we find the Jewish and Christian religions here amalgamated
together. The Chinese had a cosmogony, or story of creation,
similar in some respects to those already noticed. These sacred
books speak of a primitive paradise, in which was a tree of
knowledge and a tree of life ; also of a deluge and an ark. Bap-
tism, the cross, and the miter are emblematical rites of their
religion. They also taught the doctrine of the eucharist and the
trinity, and practiced circumcision.
The Chinese have a story or tradition of an incarnate God,
Natigai, who, like Christ, was both creator and mediator. His
system of religious faith taught the doctrine of special provi-
dences, future rewards and punishments, a general judgment-
day, the duty of humility or self-abasement, and the moral and
religious obligation to observe strict temperate habits, and to
devote our whole lives to God, &c.
The Chinese religion inculcates many beautiful and sublime
moral precepts, which we have not space to notice here.
Antiquity of the Chinese Religion.
f The historical books of China, comprising a hundred and fifty
volumes, and called “ The Great Annals,” and recently trans-
lated by a scientific Frenchman, have a regular chronology, be-
ginning nearly two thousand six hundred years before the period
assigned for the creation of Adam. And they have calculations
in astronomy at that remote period. (The learned men of Eu-
rope have decided that they made the calculation of an eclipse
about seven hundred years before the time of Moses. These
facts are sufficient to prove the existence of their religion long
anterior to the time of Adam.
Concluding Inference.
In addition to the facts and authorities we have cited to show
that the Hindoo, Egyptian, Persian, and Chinese religions were
54
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
all established prior to that of the Jews, there are other facts
which demonstrate the absolute impossibility of any of these
religions obtaining any of their religious elements or doctrines
from the Jews.
1. 'We find both the Jewish and Christian doctrine inter-
woven into each one of those Oriental systems. Hence, if they
borrowed one, they borrowed both. But that is impossible:
for the Christian system is known to be much younger.
2. Those Oriental religions are all conservative in character;
so that there has been scarcely any perceptible change in their
doctrines during the thousands of years of their known exist-
ence. Hence their very nature would preclude them from bor-
rowing any new doctrines.
3. On the contrary, the Jewish mind has been very vacillat-
ing. A disposition to change their religion has been constantly
manifested through their whole history. Such facts tas these
settle the question.
55
-
CHAPTER IX.
I. The Soffees’ Bible — The Musnavi.
The Bible of the Soffees, the 44 Musnavi,” teaches that God
exists everywhere and in every thing; that the soul of man, and
the principle of life throughout all nature, are not from God,
but of God, and constitute a part of his essence ; that nothing
exists essentially but God ; and that 4 6 all nature abounds with
Divine Life.” Mr. Malcom, in his 44 History of the Moguls ”
(p. 269), sa}Ts: 44 The Solfees are incessantly occupied in •
adoring the Almighty, and in a search after truth.” They are
passionately fond of poetry and music (two essential elements
of civilization). Their Bible teaches many beautiful moral les-
sons.
II. The Parsees’ Bible —44 Bohr Desch.”
The Parsees’ Bible is entitled Bour Desch, which means
“Genesis; or, the Beginning of Things.” Its cosmogony is
similar to that of Moses, though more definite, and probably
written at an earlier period. Its Eden, or primitive paradise,
lasted three thousand years before Kipo (the Devil) entered,
plucked the fruit, handed it to the woman, and thus caused her
downfall, and, after her, that of the whole human race.
III. The Tamalese Bible.
We have space for but little more than the titles of other Bi-
bles.
The Tamalese “Holy Book” was known as the u Kali-
walcam,” and contains some excellent moral precepts.
IV. Scandinavian Bible.
Saga, meaning “Wisdom,” is the name of the Scandinavian
44 Inspired Volume,” so called because it was believed to have
emanated from the fountain of divine wisdom.
56
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
t V. The Ivalmucs’ Bible.
Kaliocham, the Kalmucs’ Bible, was believed to contain in
repletion 44 all the wisdom of God and man.”
VI. The Athenian Bible.
The ancient Athenians had what they claimed to be a 44 Holy
and God-derived Book,” called 44 The Testament.” Dinarchus
alludes to it in his speech against Demosthenes. It was read
with deep, solemn awe and devoutness.
VII. The Cabalists* Bible.
Yohar, or 44 Book of Light,” the Bible of the Cabahsts, re-
lates some wonderful cures and miracles performed by that sect.
THE MAHOMEDAN BIBLE.
57
CHAPTER X.
The Mahomed an Bible — The Koran.
The Koran, or Alkoran, is the most modern in its origin of any
in the list, having been penned six hundred years later than the
Christian Bible. It differs from most other Bibles in being the
production of a single author, and, for this reason, possesses
more uniformity of style and fewer contradictions than most
other Bibles. Mahomet did not claim to be its author, and did
not write it, but merely dictated it to his secretary Zaid. Like
the founder of the Christian religion, and nearly all the other‘s
great religions of the world, he was very illiterate. Incarnate
Gods and religious chieftains possess no aspiration to become
scholars, and no taste for science. They were governed by feel-
ing and the impulse of religious enthusiasm, which have no affin-
ity for science. Mahomet, however, did not profess to be a God,
but merely a prophet. The Koran, having originated in a later
and more enlightened age than the Christian Bible, possesses
some superior features, and, of course, is superior to still older
Bibles. It is more consistent in its teachings on the subject of
temperance, as it does not, like the Christian Bible, both sanc-
tion and condemn the use of intoxicating drinks ; but uniformly
forbids the use of it, and even prohibits the manufacture of it.
It also shows more respect for the rights of woman by provid-
ing for her maintenance by dowry. It levies a tax on its dis-
ciples of two and one-fourth per cent for the support of the poor.
It enjoins not. only kindness and respect for enemies, but a care-
ful provision for their wants.
The disciples of the Koran were taught and believed that
the Holy Book was originated in heaven, and had long been
preserved there by its divine author Allah, and, in the fullness
of time, was handed down, chapter at a time, by the angel
58
TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Gabriel to the prophet Mahomet; and his scribe Zaid recorded it.
The leading doctrines of the Koran are : the Unity of the God-
head, and the perfection of his attributes ; the joys of paradise,
and the terrors of hell; the awful fate of unbelievers in the
Koran. The Day of Judgment is held up as a terror to evil-
doers and skeptics, and an encouragement to the faithful. Skep-
tics, or unbelievers in the Koran and the Mahomedan religion,
are repeatedly consigned to the same terrible fate (the fires of
hell) that Christ consigns the unbeliever in the Christian religion,
and the same as that to which the founders of other religions
doom those who reject or disbelieve their pretended revelations.
The Koran abounds in precepts of a high moral tone.
Mahomet holds out the idea that Christ was created like
Adam, and therefore was but a man, though a true servant of
God. This, he asserts, was the view of Christ himself. The
doctrine that God could have a son, or that there could be more •
than one person in the Godhead, was to him profanity, infidelity,
and downright blasphemj7. It is repeatedly denounced in strong
terms in the Koran. All prayer and praises to God are ad-
dressed to him in the singular number. I will cite a few texts
in illustration : *66 Praise be to God, Lord of all worlds, the com-
passionate and merciful King. Thee only do we worship, and
to thee only do we cry for help. Guide us in the right path.”
u The sun is God’s noonday brightness; the moon followeth
him: the day revealeth his glory; and the night enshroudeth
him.” 64 He built the heavens, and spread forth the earth.”
44 And whoso shall fear God, and do good works, no fear shall
come upon them, neither shall they be put to grief. But those
who turn away from him, he will consign to eternal fire.” 44 To
those who believe (the Koran), and do things which are right,
hath God promised forgiveness and a noble recompense.”
II. The Mormons’ Bible— Tiie Book of Mormon; also
44 Tiie Revelations of Joseph Smith.”
This sacred book is claimed to have been found inscribed on
gold plates, situated several feet below the surface of the earth,
in Wayne County, N.Y., in the year 1823, by Joseph Smith, a
pious youth, then only fourteen years of age, who declared he
THE MORMONS’ BIBLE.
59
received information with respect to the existence of the plates
and their locality from an angel of the Lord, with whom he had
had frequent intercourse for several }^ears. The following is a
description of the plates and original records composing the
book, as furnished by Orson Pratt, one of the “Latter-day
Apostles’’ of Jesus Christ: “ The records were engraven on
plates which had the appearance of gold. Each plate was not
far from seven by eight inches in length and width, being not
quite as thick as common tin. They were filled on both sides
with engravings in Egyptian characters, and bound together in
a volume as the leaves of a book, fastened at one edge with
three rings running through the whole. This volume was some-
thing near six inches in thickness, a part of which was sealed.
The characters, or letters, upon the unsealed part were small and
beautifully engraven. The whole book exhibited many marks
of antiquity in its construction, and skill in its engravings.
With the records was found a curious instrument called by the
ancients 4 Urim and Thummim,’ which consisted of two trans-
parent stones, clear as crystal, set in the two rims of a bow.
It was used in ancient times by persons called seers, by means
of which they received revelations of things past or future.”
Mr. Smith finally succeeded, with the aid of a profound lin-
guist in New-York City by the name of Anthon, in translating the
whole work into the English language. Several writers testify
that the ground out of which the records were dug was solid, and
covered with a thick and solid growth of grass, presenting no
appearance of having ever been disturbed. The sect now con-
stitutes about three hundred thousand disciples. The following
testimony to the truth of the story is a voluntary offering by
three witnesses: —
Testimony or Three Witnesses.
Be it known unto all nations, tongues, kindred, and people unto whom this work shall
come, that we, through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have
6een the plates which contain this record, Which is a record of the people of Nephi, and
also of the Lamanites. Men, brethren, and also of the people of Jared. And we also
know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God; for his voice hath de-
clared it unto us: wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also tes-
tify that we have seen engravings which are upon the plates; and they are shown unto us
by the powder of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an
angel of God came down, and that he brought and laid before our eyes, and we beheld
60
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
and saw, the plates and the engravings thereon. And we know it is by the grace of God
and our Lord Jesus Christ that we beheld and bare record that these things are true, and
it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless the voice of the Lord commanded that we should
bear record of it. Wherefore, to be obedient to the commandments of God, we bear tes-
timony of these things. And we know, that if we are faithful in Christ, we shall rid our
garments of the blood of all men, and be found spotless before the judgment-seat of Christ,
and shall dwell with him eternally in heaven. And the honor be to the Father and the
Son and the Holy Ghost, which are one God. Amen.
Oliver Cowdery.
David Whitmer.
Martin Harris.
Mormon Sacred Book, No. 2 — The Book of Doctrines and
Covenants ; or, The Revelations of Joseph Smith.
In addition to the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith originated
and partly composed a Book of Doctrines and Covenants, pur-
porting to be a direct revelation from heaven relative to the
temporal government of their church. It enjoined the support
of the poor, the taxation of members, the establishment of cities
and temples, the education of the people, the emigration of
saints, &c. This book has been venerated by the Mormons as
a “hoty revelation from God,” and hence is, in a strict sense,
a Bible. Its title sufficiently indicates its character. As much
as Christians ridicule the idea of Joseph Smith receiving a reve-
lation from God, it comes to us with exactly the same authority
as the claimcd-to-be revelation of Moses. The evidence in each
case is the same.
III. Tiie Shakers’ Bible.
The Bible of the Shakers is entitled u A Iloty, Sacred, and
Divine Roll from the Lord God of Heaven to the Inhabitants of
the Earth, Revealed in the Society of New Lebanon, Columbiana
County, New York, United States of America.” The testi-
mony of eleven mighty angels is given, who arc said to have
attended the writing of the Roll. A copy of the Iloty Book has
been sent to every king and potentate on earth. Its contents
and style bear some resemblance to the Christian Bible ; and it
contains texts which .appear to have been drawn from that book,
and then altered. It should be borne in mind that the Shakers
also profess to believe in the Christian Bible, with their own
peculiar construction of the book, like other sects.
THE JEWISH BIBLE.
61
CHAPTER XI.
The Jewish Bible.
In a practical sense, there are other books beside the Old
Testament which go to make up the Jewish Bible. The Talmud,
or rather the two Talmuds ; the Jerusalem Talmud (comprising
the Mishna, or Second Law), compiled about 150 B.C. by a
Jewish rabbi; and the Babylonian Talmud, compiled about six
hundred and fifty years later,—are regarded by the Jews as
equally inspired and equally binding in their moral requisitions
as that of the Old Testament. In fact, they compare the
former to wine, and the latter to water, when speaking of their
relative value. Some u tall stories ” are found in these Jewish
revelations, such as these: it tells of a bird so tall that the
water of a river in which it stood came only to its knees, though
the water was so deep that it took an ax, thrown into it, seven
years to reach the bottom; and of an egg of such enormous
dimensions, that, when broken, the white of it glued a whole
town together and a forest of three hundred cedar-trees. These
are but specimens of their miracles. Such is the character of
the Jewish sacred writings, emanating from the same source as
the Old Testament; and consequently of equal authority and
reliability, and equally entitled to our belief.
62
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XII-
The Christians’ Bible.
The Christian Bible, as now accepted by Protestants (for it
must be borne in mind that it has been altered and amended on
various occasions, thus altering the canonical Word of God),
is composed of thirty-nine books in the Old-Testament de-
partment, and twenty-seven in the New; the whole constitut-
ing a multifarious collection of old oracles, obsolete dogmas,
Oriental legends, ancient myths, religious reveries, beautiful
precepts, poetry, heart-touching pathos, wild fancies, preceptive
admonitions, martial exploits, domestic regulations, broken,
disjointed narratives, ritual rules, and spiritual ideas; including
also cosmogony, history, theocracy, theology, annals, romance,
prophecj7, rhapsody, psalmody, mythology, allegory, dreams,
tradition, legislation, ethics, politics, and religion, all jumbled
together without arrangement, division, classification, or order;
committed to writing in various ages and nations and countries,
and hy various writers, extending over a period of several thou-
sand j’cars, including ncarty every form of composition known to
human ingenuity,—gay, grave, tragical, logical, philosophical,
religious, and romantic, — emanating from Gods, angels, men,
and devils; recorded, some of it in mountains, some of it in
caves, some of it on the banks of rivers, some of it in forests, some
of it in deserts, and some of it under the shadow of the Pyramids.
It commenced on Mount Ilorcb, and ended in the isle of Pat-
inos. From such circumstances we arc not surprised to learn
that its chronology is unreliable, chimerical, and incorrect; its
history contradictory and incredible ; its philosophy fallacious ;
its logic unsound ; its cosmogony foolish and absurd ; its astron-
om}’ fragmentary and childish; its religion pagan-derived; its
THE CHRISTIANS' BIBLE.
63
morals defective, sometimes selfish, often extravagant, and in
some cases pernicious. Its government, both temporal and
spiritual, is, to some extent, both barbarous and tyrannical;
while its theocracy is mere brute force. It presents us with
narratives without authorities, facts and figures without dates,
and records without names. We find no order in its arrange-
ment, no system in its subjects or the manner of presenting
them, and no connection in its paragraphs, and often no agree-
ment in its statements, and no sense in its logic. It seems to
teach nearly every thing upon nearly every question of morals
which it touches. It apparently both sanctions and condemns
nearly every species of crime to which it refers, and pours ful-
some laudations upon the heads of some of the most bloody-
minded and licentious men, —such as David, Solomon, &c., —
and holds them up as examples of true practical morality. It is
often dark, ambiguous, and mysterious, as well as contradictory,
not only in its lessons of morality, but in its account of the sim-
plest occurrences, thus rendering it comparatively worthless as
a moral guide ; inasmuch as it is much easier to find out what is
right and what is not without going to the Bible, than it is to
find out what the Bible teaches upon the subject, or what it in-
tends to teach in any given case. With respect to war, slavery,
polygamy, and the use of intoxicating liquors, for example, it
is much easier to determine whether they are right or wrong by
the moral fitness of things than whether they are scriptural or
anti-scriptural; while it,is silent upon many crimes which now
infest society. If we are compelled to determine the character of
some actions without going to the Bible, why not that of all other
moral actions and duties? Edmund Burke says of the Bible,
u It is necessary to sort out what is intended as example, and
what only as narrative ; what is to be understood literally, and
what figuratively, where one precept is to be controlled and mod-
ified by another; what is temporary, and what of perpetual ob-
ligation ; what is appropriate to one state or set of men, and
what is the general duty of men in all ages.” Now, who can not
see that all this must require a quality^ofimind capable of deter-
mining or learning moral principles ancDjaoral duties without
recurrence to the Bible ? And it must require a vast amount of
64
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
time to accomplish this task, all of which is lost, inasmuch as
it is consuming time in making the Bible conform to what you
have already learned of right outside its pages,—time that
might be much better employed. Such are the moral aspects
of the Bible. But it also has its beauties, which we need not
occupy much space in depicting, as we have fifty thousand cler-
gymen in this country who attend faithfully to that matter.
Suffice it to say, that portions of it are characterized by a
high-toned spirituality, other portions by a deep, heart-stirring
pathos. And then we have manifested in other parts the most
devout piety, while the books of the prophets often breathe
forth a spirit of the most elevating poetry. And there is scarcely
a book, or even a chapter, in the whole- Bible, that does not
evince a spirit of religious devotion, and an effort for the right,
though often misdirected. Taken as a whole, the Bible may be
regarded as an exposition of the condition of science, morals,
religion, government, and domestic polity of the era in which it
was written, and suited to the temporal and spiritual wants of the
people of that age, for whom it was written, but not for this age.
When regarded in this light, and as simpty a human production
of the best minds of the age and times in which it was written,
man}" portions of it can be read with interest and instruction.
But when read, as it has been for centuries, as a perfect,
divine composition, designed for all time and as a finality in
faith and practice and moral progress, it becomes a stumbling-
block in the path of progress, an embargo upon free thought,
a fetter upon the soul, a fog of bewilderment to the mind, and
a drag-chain to the moral and intellectual reformation of the
world.
GENEBAL ANALOGIES OF BIBLES.
65
CHAPTER XIII.
General Analogies of Bibles.
From the foregoing brief analysis of the characters of the
Bibles of various nations, it will be observed that they are, in
their main or leading features, essentially alike, including the
Holy Books of Jews, Christians, and pagans ; that they are
alike in their ends and aims and main characteristics; that all
inculcate the same fundamental doctrines; that all impart and
enjoin the observance of intrinsically the same moral lessons,
the same preceptive aphorisms. All teach substantially the
same superstitions, the same kind of miraculous feats performed
by Gods, angels, and men and devils, the same marvelous stories
and achievements over-ruling and over-riding the great laws of
nature, often checking or stopping the ponderous wheels of the
machinery of the universe. The revelations on the pages of
each are claimed to be God-derived, and to have been inspired
through prophets, orators, angels, apostles, or “holy men ; ” or to
have issued directly from the mouth of God, and descended from
his immaculate throne to earth, without the intervention or
employment of a medium. Each puts forth similar notions and
traditions concerning Gods, deities, or angels, genii, demons, or
evil spirits, priests, prophets, patriarchs, prayers, sacrifices,
penances, ceremonies, rituals, Messiahs, redeemers, intercessors,
sin-atoning, crucified Saviors, sons of God, &c. All recog-
nize the doctrine of atonement for sin ; all, or nearly all, approxi-
mate in their modes of propitiating the favor of an offended
Deity by oblations, sacrifices, and offerings of animals, men, or
Gods, or sons of God. Each has its cosmogony ; each proclaims
the doctrine of one supreme God, the doctrine of the immor-
tality of the soul, of post-mortem rewards for “ deeds done in
G6
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
the bod}r,”—endless bliss for the righteous, and punishment for
the wicked. Each attests the truth and divine origin of its
religion by the record of a long array of the most astonishing
miracles, confirmed and ratified b}r the fulfillment of numerous
prophecies. Most of them teach the doctrine of the primeval
innocence and moral elevation of man, and of his fall, and of his
prospective subsequent restoration; and also of the necessity
of a “ change,’’ or “ being born again,” in order to a full recon-
ciliation with God, and a perfect state of righteousness. In a
word, all had essentially the same religious institutions, and the
same ecclesiastical orders of priests, pilgrims, monks, and mis-
sionaries ; the same or similar prayers, liturgies, sermons,
hymns, and sacrificial offerings; similar holy orders of saints,
angels, and martyrs. All had their “holy days,” their “holy
fasts and feasts,” “ holy rivers,” “ hoty mountains,” and
“holy temples,” &c. ; and nearly all preached essentially the
same doctrines relating to a spiritual birth, regeneration, pre-
destination, and a future life, rewards, and punishments, and a
final judgment, &c. All furnish a religion cut and dried (the
great end of all Bible creeds) so as to save the intellectual labor
and mental toil of discovering the rule of right and the road to
duty by an investigation of the great laws of cause and effect,
the nature and constitution of the human mind, and the moral
fitness of things. As a finale to creation, and a final consumma-
tion and triumph of their peculiar faith, each imagines and
portrays a great prospective millennial epoch, at which juncture
the heavens are to be “ rolled together as a scroll; ” the oceans,
seas, lakes, and rivers to take fire, and be reduced to ashes;
“ the New Jerusalem to descend from God out of heaven ; ” and
peace, righteousness, and happiness unalloyed to rule and to
reign thenceforth and for ever. Hence all Bibles and religions
are of divine origin, or none.
Note. — Sir William Jones says the ancient religions borrowed from
each other.
II. Superior Features of IIeatiien Bibles.
There is not one Oriental Bible in all the number but that is
superior in some respects in its teachings to the Christians’ Bible.
GENERAL ANALOGIES OF BIBLES.
67
None of them sanction so explicitly every species of crime;
none of them contain so much obscene language. On the con-
trary, the Chinese Bible, as Mr. Meadows says, “ contains not
one sentence but that may be read with propriety in any drawing-
room in EnglandStrikingly different from that of the
Christian Bible, as shown in Chap. XXIII. The Mahome-
dan Bible is quite superior in its teachings, both with respect to
intemperance and the treatment of women. It forbids both the
use and the traffic in intoxicating drinks, and also the manufac-
ture ; while the Christian Bible, although condemning one, sanc-
tions both (see Chap. LVIII.). With respect to women, it con-
tains some commendable precepts% It not only enjoins husbands
to treat their wives properly, and provide for them, but provides
for their divorce in case this is not done; while the Christian
Bible, by the authority of Christ, allows divorce for no crime,
abuse, cruelty, or inhuman treatment on the part of tyrannical,
wicked, or drunken husbands, but that of fornication (see Matt,
v. 32). The Koran also enjoins a tax of two and a half per cent
on its disciples to support the poor; while the Christian Bible
sa3^s, “Thou shalt not countenance a poor man in his cause ”
(Ex. xxiii. 3), though it is true it contains counter-precepts.
These examples are sufficient to lead to the conclusion that
nothing would be gained to the cause of practical morality by
supplanting any of the Oriental Bibles with the Christian Bible.
68
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XIV.
The Infidels’ Bible.
We find the remarkable admission in the Christian Bible, that
the moral guide adopted by infidels is superior to that book
which Christians have adopted for a guide. Paul, in his Epistle
to the Romans, says, 44 The Gentiles, who have not the Bible,
do by nature the things contained in the Bible.” An astonish-
ing Bible concession, truly! He, however, uses the word 4 4 law ’’
for Bible ; but commentators tell us the law is contained in the
Bible, and some writers make 44 law” and 44 Bible” synony-
mous terms. We therefore give the sense more fully by ren-
dering it 44 Bible ” instead of 44 law.” It is here admitted by
Paul, that the great Bible of Nature, written upon man’s con-
sciousness, and inscribed upon everjr thing around him, which is
the infidels’ Bible and revelation, is superior to any printed
Bible. If man learns by nature the moral lessons taught by the
Bible or moral law (that is, b}T nature’s laws, as learned by ob-
servation and experience, which is the infidel’s sole reliance for
learning the great lessons and duties of life), then this natural
revelation, which Paul commends so highly, is superior to any
written or printed revelation. If, as Paul teaches, the ignorant,
illiterate Gentile can learn by this revelation of nature, or law
of nature, the duties of life, the great truths of salvation, and
the right road to heaven, then it must be greatly superior to the
Christians’ Bible. For it is admitted b}r Christians themselves
(foreign missionaries), that, with all the aid that priests and
commentators can render, there is a considerable portion of
their Bible which the heathen can not learn or be made to under-
stand. But not so, according to Paul, with God’s natural Bible,
and the revelation inscribed on man’s moral nature, and learned
THE INFIDELS’ BIBLE.
69
by the exercise of his common sense, natural judgment, and the
experience of mankind in general. Hence we have a Bible
which is not only easily read and easily understood by even the
unlettered heathen, but a Bible which possesses many advantages
over all printed Bibles, some of which I will mention. In the
first place, it is a Bible always open. It can not be kept closed
under lock and key, as the Christian Bible has been in past
ages. Second, It is a Bible that needs no translation in any
language ; for it is already written in the languages of all the na-
tions of the earth. Third, It is a Bible, thank God! that all,
whether high or low, learned or unlearned, can read and under-
stand. Its glorious truths are easily read ; for they are plainly
and legibly inscribed upon every leaf and page of the soul of
every human being. Fourth, Hence this revelation needs no
priest to expound it, and no church to unravel its mysteries, by
voluminous commentaries. Sixth, No concordance is needed to
enable its readers to find its golden gems, which glitter and
sparkle upon every page. They are what the Quakers call “ the
light within.” Seventh, Neither moths nor mice can destroy
this glorious Bible. Fire can not consume it, nor water wash it
away. It is imperishable and eternal. It is a Bible into which
no errors have ever crept, either by printers, transcribers, or
translators. And (soul-cheering thought!) it is a Bible which
contains all the important doctrines, principles, and precepts
which can be found in any perishable paper-and-ink Bible, and
all the grand truths that God ever vouchsafed to man. They can
all be found in this golden-leaved Bible, this eternal, soul-saving
revelation of God.
Paul refers to this natural Bible, or revelation, again when he
sa}Ts, u Know ye not of yourselves what is right ? ” — that is, by
the Bible planted in }^our own souls, the revelation stereotyped
upon your own moral sense or moral nature. Hence the vir-
tual acknowledgment by Paul (who is Bible authority), that
there is no necessity of running to any printed or paste-
board Bible to learn the truths of the gospel or the duties of
life; for he teaches the important lesson, that we may learn
them in our own inward selves. We can “ know of ourselves
what is right.” And there are other texts which admit that
70
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
God’s first revelation, and his last and only revelation, to the
human race, is far superior to that of any books of human ori-
gin ; and which admit that this glorious revelation can not be found
in the Christian Bible, or any other perishable book, but existed
for ages before any paper-and-ink Bible was ever thought of.
I will quote one other text to prove these statements, and in
further confirmation of the proposition that the Christian Bible
itself admits that the infidels’ Bible, direct from the hand of
God, is greatly superior to it in all the essential features and
principles of a Bible. Paul concedes this when he says, in his
Epistle to the Homans, “ The invisible things of God are clearly
seen and understood by the things that are made, even his eternal
power and Godhead ” (Rom. i. 20). Now, here it is proved,
if any thing can be proved by the Bible, that every thing that
can be learned about God and religion can be found written
upon the tablets of nature, and inscribed upon every thing that
is made. For it is declared, that even the “ invisible things of
God”—that is, the great spiritual truths of the kingdom—can
be seen and learned by the revelations, or lessons, written upon
things “ that are made.” A wonderful admission, truly ! It is
stated, they can not only be seen, but “ dearly seen and under-
stood,” by studying the things u that are made,” and learning
their important lessons. If, then, they can be “ clearly seen
and understood,” there is not the shadow of a doubt left upon
the mind as to their truth or meaning: you are not annoyed
with that perplexity, uncertainty, and painful anxiety about the
meaning of moral lessons they teach, as you are with respect to
hundreds of texts you find in the Christian Bible. This is
a grand revelation and declaration and benefit, truly. And
“even his eternal power and Godhead,” — that is, God’s charac-
ter and attributes, —we are here told, can be learned by reading
and studying this beautiful and easily comprehended Bible,
written by the finger of God upon eveiy leaf and page of nature.
Was there ever a more important, more pleasing, or more beau-
tiful revelation made to the world than this of Paul’s ? And is
it not surprising that Christians have never noticed this most
important admission? It is an important moral lesson that
throws their pen-and-ink Bible into the shade, and shows we
-
THE INFIDELS9 BIBLE.
71
would be better without than with it by substituting God’s
eternal and universal Bible. It will be observed, then, that it is
shown by different texts of the Bible, that the “ Holy Book ”
which came directly from the hands of God is greatly superior
to that which came through the hands of man. And the fact
that it is the only Bible, or revelation, that can now be found in
all countries, and the only Bible that can be read by all nations,
kingdoms, tongues, and people, and that not. one man, woman,
or child in a hundred, take the world over, can read any other
Bible but this, is very nearly prima facie evidence that it is the
only Bible God ever designed for the human race, and that he
never did impart, and never will impart, any other revelation to
the world ; that no other Bible is necessary for the moral, religious,
and spiritual welfare of the race, or to point the road to salvation.
Hence it is the only Bible we would recommend for the reading
of the young. It is the only Bible we are certain they can un-
derstand. It is the only Bible we are certain is free from errors.
It is the only Bible we are certain has never been altered or
mistranslated. It is the only Bible we are certain teaches no
immoral lessons. It is the only Bible which we are certain con-
tains no vulgar or obscene language, calculated to raise a blush
on the cheek of modesty, and outrage every feeling of decorum,
as many of the texts found in the Christian Bible do. It is the
only u Holy Scripture 99 we can be certain was given forth by
divine inspiration, and the only sacred volume or u Holy Word 99
which has the full seal and sanction of Almighty God. Read,
then, and study well, this open and widespread Bible which
infolds the universe. All the Bibles and religions of the past
claim to have been authorized by a direct revelation or inspira-
tion from God. ' But we are satisfied that no such revelation has
ever been given forth to any nation in any age of the world.
For inspiration is now known to be a universal law of the
natural mind; an inborn principle of the human soul, which
all ages and nations, and every’human being, have possessed a
greater or less share of. And the amount of true inspiration
possessed by each individual depends upon his or her moral,
intellectual, and spiritual elevation of the soul or mind into the
higher enjoyment of spiritual bliss where it becomes en rapport
72
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
with all that is lovety, inspiring, and beautiful in God’s uni-
verse ; where it can take cognizance of great moral problems
and spiritual truths; and where it can look through the long
vista of futurity, and behold the events of coming years rolling
up toward the threshold of time. This is true inspiration, and
the spirit of true prophecy. But it is the work of our own
minds, and not of Deit}r, and is not confined to any age, nation,
or religion. It depends upon the culture of the moral and intel-
lectual faculties and the spiritual aspirations of the individual,
and not upon his creed or religious belief.
As for a divine revelation, it can not be found in any book of
human origin. It could not be incorporated into a book, nor
could all the books in the world contain it. It is inscribed all
over the face of nature. We read it upon the outstretched
earth and upon the shining heavens ; we read it upon
“ Every bush and every bower,
Every leaf and every flower.,,
Here, then, we have a Bible with a revelation as broad as the
universe. Its lids are the heavens above, and the earth beneath.
Its golden-leaf pages are spread out at our feet; its lessons of
wisdom, its truths of salvation, and its soul-inspiring beauties,
are inscribed upon the soul, and written all over the face of
nature. Read and study it, O man! and become u wise unto
salvation.”
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE EBBOBS.
73
CHAPTER XV.
-
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE ERRORS. OLD TESTAMENT
DEPARTMENT.
A HUNDRED AND TWENTY-THREE ERRORS IN THE STORY OP
CREATION.
As the Old Testament possesses no order, no arrangement,
and no distinct system of either morals or religion, and no
regular connection in its history, we have to treat it in the same
unsystematic order in which we find it, and to expose many
foolish errors and stories which seem almost beneath the dignity
of any respectable writer to notice. But, as they constitute a
large portion of the Old Testament, we have got to deal with
them or nothing. And, although trifling in themselves, they
have done much mischief. Hence we deem it of greater im-
portance to expose their evil influence than to trace them to
their heathen origin, as we originally designed doing.
1. The first text in the Bible is evidently an error. “ In the
beginning God created the heavens and the earth ” (Gen. 1).
No geologist or philosopher at the present day believes in
either a creation or a creator. The assumption involves two
impossibilities. First, a creation could not take place with-
out something to create from: nihilo nihil fit” — “ Out of
nothing nothing can come.” Second, to account for the ori-
gin of the earth, sun, moon, and stars, by assuming the exist-
ence of a creator, is throwing no light on the subject. We have
made no progress towards solving the problem; for we are
equally puzzled to account for the origin of the creator himself.
It is as easy to assume that matter always existed as to assume
that the creator always existed. Hence there would be no crea-
74:
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
tion possible, and none needed. This is now regarded as a set-
tled scientific problem.
2. It is a scientific error to assert that matter had a
beginning, as the Bible assumes. Many scientific facts have
been developed to establish the conclusion that all beings and
objects on earth were eliminated from its elements, and all the
planets we can recognize were an outgrowth from some other
worlds. The proposition is not only susceptible of much proof
(which I have not space here to present), but is very beautiful
and satisfactory. It u composes our reason to peace.’9 All we
lack of comprehending it is the capacity to grasp eternity and
infinity, which finite mortals cannot do.
3. If God u created the heavens ” (Gen. i. 1), and heaven
is his “dwelling-place” (see 1 Kings viii. 30), then where
did he dwell before the heavens were made? Here is a very
puzzling question, and involves an absurdity equal to that
of the Tonga-Islanders, who teach that the first goose was
hatched from an egg, and that the same goose laid the egg.
An idea equally ludicrous is involved in the assumption that God
created the heavens and the earth about six thousand years ago ;
so that, previous to that era, there was nothing on which he could
stand, sit, or lie, but must have been suspended in mid-air from
all etcrnitj".
4. If nothing existed prior to six thousand years ago, then
there was nothing for God to do, and nothing for him to
do it with. Hence he must have spent an eternity in idleness,
a solitary monarch without a kingdom.
5. As we are told God created the light (Gen. i. 3), the
conclusion is forced upon us, that, prior to that period, he
had spent an eternity in darkness. And it has been -discov-
ered that all beings originating in a state of darkness, or living
in that condition, were formed without eyes, as is proved by
blind fishes being found in dark caves. Hence the thought is
suggested, that God, prior to the era of creation (six thousand
years ago), was perfectly blind.
0. “God saw the light that it was good” (Gen. i. 4).
Hence we must infer that God had just got his eyes open, and
that lie had never before discovered that light is good. Of
course it was good to be delivered from eternal darkness.
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE EBBOBS.
75
7. “ And God divided the light from the darkness ” (Gen.
i. 4). Hence, previous to that period, they must have been
mixed together. Philosophy teaches that light and darkness
never can be separated, any more than heat and cold, as one
is only a different degree of the other.
8. “ And God called the light Day, and the darkness he
called Night’’ (Gen. i. 5). And to whom did he call them?
as no living being was in existence until several days after-
wards. Hence there was no need of calling them any thing;
and, as we are told Adam named every thing, he could as easily
have found names for these as for other things.
9. The Bible teaches us that day and night were created
three days before the sun. Every school-boy now knows that
it is the revolution of the earth upon its axis that causes day
and night; and, but for the existence of the sun, there could be
no day and night. If Moses’ God was so ignorant, he had
better never have wakened out of his eternity of darkness.
10. The Bible teaches that the earth came into exist-
ence three days before the sun; but science teaches us that
the earth is a child or offshoot of the sun. Hence it could
be equally true to say a son was born three days before his
father.
11. “And the earth was without form, and void” (Gen.
i. 2) ; but philosophy teaches that nothing can exist with-
out form, or when void. The declaration brings to mind the
Scotchman’s definition of “nothing,” — “a footless stocking
without a leg.” We have an idea of a thing which does not
exist.
12. “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of
the waters” (Gen. i. 2). Here we are taught that the
original state of the earth was that of water. But geology
teaches its original constituents was fire or fusion; that water
did not exist, and could not exist, in it, or on it, for millions of
ages. Professor Agassiz says our earth was once in a state of
igneous fusion, without water, without rain, and even without an
atmosphere (“Geological Sketches,” i. 2). And even the pious,
God-fearing Hugh Miller says that “ the solid earth was at one
time, from center to circumference, a mass of molten matter ”
76
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
(“ Lectures on Geology,” 256). Here we have geology against
theology.
13. God spent a day making a firmament, by which he
“ divided the waters from the waters.’’ If it had then stated
that he spent a day in making moonshine, or one day in
making breath for Adam, it would have been as sensible; for
the firmament is as truly a part of the earth (being eliminated
from it) as our breath is a part of our bodies.
14. “Divided the waters from the waters.” Here is dis-
closed a belief which prevailed in various Oriental and heathen
nations, that the earth exists between two large lakes, or
sheets of water; and that the firmament is a solid floor, which
holds the water up, and prevents it from falling, and inun-
dating the earth ; and, being supplied with doors and windows,
when God wants it to rain he opens the windows (the Bible
says “ the windows of heaven were opened,” see Gen. vii. 11)^
He pours it down by opening the windows, and stops it by
shutting them up. “The windows of heaven were stopped ”
(Gen. viii. 2). How fully is the heathen tradition disclosed
here!
15. We are told that God gathered “the waters under
heaven together unto one place” (Gen. i. 9). How ignorant
he must have been of geography ! He evidently had not studied
the science, or had not traveled much, or he would have known
the waters under heaven never have been “gathered together
unto one place,” but exist in many places, as the two hundred
large lakes prove.
1G. The Bible tells us, that, when God created the vegeta-
ble kingdom, he ordered each species of vegetation to “bring
forth after its kind” (Gen. i. 11). Can we suppose that
apple-trees would have borne budges, or mullein-stalks pro-
duced pumpkins, or any thing foreign to their nature, if the
command had not been given for each to bring forth after its
kind?
17. According to the Bible, the vegetable kingdom was
created before the animal; but the learned geologist Hitch-
cock, although a Christian by profession, in his “Elements of
Geology” says, “An examination of the rocks shows us that
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE EBBOBS.
77
animals were created as early as vegetables ” (and he might
have said much earlier). And yet the Bible says vegetables
were created on the third day, and animals on the fifth (see
Gen. i.).
18. The Bible represents vegetables as coming into existence
before the sun; but philosophy teaches that they could neither
germinate nor grow without the warming and vivifying influence
of the sun.
19. The Bible tells us that 44 God made two great lights,
the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule
the night; and God set them in the firmament to give light
to the earth” (Gen. i. 16, 17). That is, he made two round
balls, and then stuck them into a hole scooped out of the
firmament for the purpose. This seems to be the idea. Here
is disclosed the most egregious ignorance of astronomy. Think
of that stupendous solar luminary, as much larger than this
P3Tgmy planet as a man is larger than a mouse, being hung up or
stuck up above us for our sole accommodation ! How sublimely
ridiculous!
20. The Bible represents the great world-builder, the almighty
architect, as spending five days in plodding and toiling at this
little mole-hill of ours before he got it finished up to his notion,
and then made such a bad job of it that he repented for
having undertaken it.
21. But when he came to make the countless worlds, the
vast suns, and systems of suns, which roll their massive
forms in every direction around the earth, these were all
made in a few hours. 44 And he made the stars also.” This
text tells the whole story of the origin of the boundless planet-
ary system, comprising millions of worlds larger than our plan-
et. What superlative ignorance of astronomy Moses’ God
manifests !
22. Moses is awarded great credit by Bible believers for
opposing polytheism, and teaching the existence of but one
God: but it would have been more to his credit if he had
stuck to a belief in a plurality of Gods; for it would take a
million of such Gods as his imagination has created a thousand
years to make such a universe as astronomers have brought to
fight since he wrote.
78
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
23. The language, “Let us make man in our own image”
(Gen. i. 26), seems to imply that there was an association of
gods,—a company of ahnighty mechanics, who had formed
a copartnership to do up a big job.
24. If man was made in the image of God, why was he
cursed for eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge in order
to be like God ?
25. According to the Bible, God became so tired in the
business of world-making that he had to take a rest of a whole
day (and perhaps took a nap also) when the job was com-
pleted ; but geology and philosophy both teach that creation
never was begun, and never will be finished, but is going on
all the time. Hence new species of animals and vegetables are
constantly coming into existence.
2G. The Bible represents the entire universe as being created
less than six thousand years ago; but science teaches us
that it has been in existence for millions of years.
27. A large volume of scientific facts has been accumu-
lated by scientists, showing that even our earth, one of the
youngest of the planets, is at least several hundred thousand
years old. Look at a few of the facts which go to prove it.
The coral reefs of Florida are estimated by Professor Agassiz
to be one hundred and thirty-five thousand years old. Charles
Lyell estimates the delta of the Mississippi Valley to be
at least one hundred thousand years old. Four growths of
cypress-trees far below the surface of the ground, and situated
one above another, have been discovered near New Orleans,
whose successive growths must have occupied a period of at
least one hundred and fifty thousand 3’ears. So much for the
agreement of geology and Bible chronology.
28. But wc are told that a day in the Bible means a
thousand years. Then, as the sabbath day constitutes one
of the days spoken of in the Bible, and was provided as a
day of* rest, Christians and Bible believers should rest a thou-
sand years at a time; and, as God rested a whole day (a thou-
sand years), he must have been as tired of resting as lie was of
world-making. Why do the figures u 4004 B.C.” stand at the
top of the first page of the Bible, if a thousand years mean one
day?
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE ERRORS.
79
29. The Bible teaches that whales, fishes, and birds were
made on the same day; but geology assures us that fishes
came into existence long before fowls.
30. The Bible teaches that beasts and creeping things
were all made on the fifth day of creation; but geology tells
us that reptiles and creeping things crawled upon the earth mil-
lions of years before beasts came into existence.
31. The Bible represents man as coming into existence
about six thousand years ago; but human bones have recently
been discovered in the vicinity of New Orleans which Dr.
Dowler estimates to be at least fifty thousand years old.
32. A deity who becomes so tired and physically exhausted
with six days’ labor as to be compelled to stop and rest,
physiology teaches would be liable to physical disease; and,
if physically diseased, it might terminate in death, and thus
leave the world without a God (Godless).
33. The Bible tells us “ the Lord God formed man of
the dust of the ground” (Gen. ii. 7) ; but philosophy teaches
that dust possesses no vital properties, and that it would
have been less difficult to make man of a stone or a stump,
owing to their possessing more adhesive properties. One
writer suggests that the negro must have been made of coal-
dust.
34. According to the Bible, a serious blunder was made
by Jehovah in the work of creation, by exhausting all the
materials in the process of world-making and man-making, so
that nothing was left to make a “ helpmeet” for Adam; and
this blunder caused the necessity of robbing Adam of one of
his ribs.
35. But common sense teaches us that a small crooked
bone but a few ounces in weight could not furnish half the
material necessary to constitute a woman. The Parsees, with
a little more show of sense, tell us that the rib was used mere-
ly as a back-bone, around which the woman was constructed;
which revives in memory Erin’s mode of making cannon, which
consisted in “ taking a round hole, and pouring melted metal
around it.” The Tonga-Islanders have a tradition about as
sensible as that of Moses with respect to the origin of the first
80
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
woman. Their God made the first man with three legs, and
amputated one of them to make a “helpmeet for him.” This
is an improvement, as a leg can be better spared when there are
three than a rib : it also possesses more material than a rib.
36. The Bible teaches that man was created upright, but
fell. If it means physically, it can be easily accounted for,
and must be ascribed to his* creator; for depriving him of one
of his ribs would leave him in an unbalanced condition, so that
he would be liable to fall.
37. The Bible imparts to us the strange intelligence that
“the Lord God brought all the beasts and birds to Adam
to see what he would call them” (Gen. ii. 19). What an
idea for Omniscience or Infinite Wisdom to engage in the
business of chasing bears, lions, tigers, elephants, and hy-
enas, and all manner of beasts great and small, and all manner
of birds, also hissing, crawling, biting reptiles, and every liv-
ing thing which he had created, and taking them to Adam “ to
see what he would call them” ! Not having sufficient intelli-
gence to find names for them himself (pardon the thought), his
curiosit}’ was no doubt aroused to see what an ignorant being of
his own creation, who had not sufficient intelligence to clothe
himself, would call the innumerable host of beasts, birds, &c.,
before any language was known, or even a single letter was in-
vented to spell names with. (We are very far from desiring to
wound the feelings or encroach upon the reverence that any
man or woman may cherish for “a God of infinite love, wis-
dom, and goodness ; ” but let it be kept constantly in mind we
are not presenting the history of such a being here, but the
mere imaginary God of Moses and the Bible.)
-
38. As the Bible teaches that Adam named all the beasts,
animals, and birds, it must have occupied a great number
of years for the Lord God of Moses to have caught and
taken the several hundred thousand species to Adam to receive
names in all the three thousand languages, and then convey
them back to their respective climates.
39. The question naturally arises, "Why should Adam give
them names I)}’ sajing, “This is a horse, that is an ass,
the animal yonder shall be called a hippopotamus,” &c.,
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE ERRORS.
81
when there was nobody present to hear it and be benefited by
it ? And nobody could have remembered half the names had
they been present. Here we wish to call the attention of the
reader specially to the fact that all the thoughts and language
Tre have so far cited as being either that of God or Moses
sounds like the utterance of ignorant children, and unworthy
the dignity of an intelligent and sensible man, much less that of
a God.
40. The Bible teaches that u God made man in his own
image/’ The reverse statement would have been true, “Man
made God in his own image;” for this is true of all nations
who believe in a God.
41. Here let it be noted the Bible contains two contradictory
accounts of creation; one found in the first chapter of Gen-
esis, the other in the second. In the first, animals are created
before man ; in the second, after man.
42. The first chapter of Genesis says, “ Let the earth bring
forth plants” (Gen. i. 11) : the second says, “ God created
every plant . . . before it was in the earth” (Gen. ii. 9).
A contradiction; and neither statement is true, there being
no creation.
43. The first chapter has the earth created several days
before the firmament, or heaven: the second chapter has it
created on the same day (Gen. ii. 4).
44. The first represents fowls as originating in the water
(Gen. i. 20) : the second has them created out of the water.
45. After the first chapter says “ God created man in his
own image” (Gen. i. 27), the second says “there was not
a man to till the ground ” (Gen. ii. 4).
46. The first chapter represents man and woman as being
created at the same time (Gen. i. 27) : the second represents
the woman as being created after the man.
47. The first implies that man has dominion over the whole
earth: the second restricts his dominion to a garden. Which •
is the inspired story of creation?
48. The Mexicans claim that the first man and woman
were created in their country. The Hindoos aver that the
original progenitors of the race (Adimo and Iva) first made
82
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
their appearance amongst them. The Chinese claim a similar
honor. The Persians contend that God landed the first human
pair in the land of Iran. And, finally, the Jews affirm that
Jehovah created the first pair in Eden.
J
The Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life.
Moses tells us God planted two trees in Eden, one of which
he called “ the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” This
tree bore fruit which nobody was allowed to taste (Gen. ii. 9).
49. Why the tree was planted, or why its fruit was forbidden
to be used, are problems which the Bible does not solve, and
which set reason at defiance.
50. And then it looks like a senseless act to create a tree
for the purpose of bearing fruit (as we can conceive of no
other purpose for which it could have been created)*, and then
decree that it should all go to waste.
51. It was worse still to create human beings with an appe-
tite for this fruit, and place it in their sight, and then forbid
them to taste it on penalty of death. Nothing could be more
opposed to our ideas of reason and justice.
52. Did God create beings in his own image, and then treat
them' as if he wished to tantalize them and render them
unhappy?
53. It would seem that he created man for no other purpose
than to tease and torment him, and quarrel with him.
54. Common sense would suggest it to be the act of an
ignoramus or a tyrant to implant in man the desire to eat fruit
which he did not allow him to eat.
55. And would it not be unjust to punish Adam and Eve for
doing what he himself had implanted in them the desire to
do?
5G. God must have known they would eat the fruit, if he
were omniscient.
57. If he were not omniscient, he was not a God in a
supreme or divine sense.
58. God must have had the power without the will to prevent
the act of disobedience, which would make him an unjust and
unmerciful tyrant.
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE ERBOBS.
83
59. Or else the will without the power, which would make
him a weak and frail being, and not a God.
(For a full elucidation of these points, see chapter sixty-nine.)
We will notice a few other points.
60. As God declared eating the fruit would make Adam
“ like one of us,” that is, Godlike (and all men are enjoined to
become Godlike), was not Adam, therefore, justified in eating
the fruit in order to become Godlike ?
61. In chapter sixty-nine it is shown, that, as Adam and
Eve got their eyes open by eating the inhibited fruit, the act
of disobedience turned out to be a great blessing, inasmuch as
it saved the earth from being filled with a race of blind human
beings.
62. And, as this blessing was obtained through the agency
of the serpent-devil, we must admit “ the father of lies” was
a great benefactor of the human race, as shown in chapter
sixty-nine.
63. As Adam could not very well exercise “ dominion over
every living thing that moveth upon the earth” (Gen. i. 26)
while shut up in a little eight-by-ten garden, we can observe
here another practical benefit of the act of disobedience which
drove him from the garden.
64. Is it not a strange piece of moral incongruity to set
Adam to tilling the soil in the garden as a blessing, and then
doom him to till it outside as a curse? (Gen. iii. 23.) He first
embarked in the business as a blessing, and then as a curse.
How the same act could be both a blessing and a curse is a
u m}Tstery of godliness ” which swamps us.
65. The Jews tell us the original tempter was a serpent
(Gen. iii. 1) ; the Mexicans say it was a demon; the Hindoos
call him a snake; the Greeks declare it was a dragon;
Josephus supposes it was an ape ; some of the East-India sects
speak of him as a fish; but the Persian revelations make it
a lizard. Which is right ?
66. The Mosaic or Hebrew cosmogony represents the ser-
pent as dealing out the fruit to the genus homo; while the
Mexicans, the Egyptians, and the Persians set the serpent or
“ evil genius ” to guarding the tree to protect the fruit. Which
is right ?
84
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
67. When God Jehovah announced to the trinity of Gods,
“Behold, the man has become as one of us to know good
and evil” (Gen. iii. 22), exactly as the serpent had predicted,
instead of dying as Jehovah had predicted, does it not prove
that the serpent was the best and most reliable prophet ?
G8. As Adam and Eve could know nothing of the nature
of right and wrong until they attained that knowledge by eating
the fruit, does not this fact prove it to be a justifiable if not a
righteous act?
G9. How could Adam and Eve know that any act was
sinful before an act of any kind had been committed by which
they could learn the character or consequences of human con-
duct?
69. Is it not a logical conclusion, that, if God created
every tiling, he can control every thing, and hence, strictly
speaking, is alone responsible for the right performance of
every thing ?
70. The Christian Bible tells us the first pair of human
beings sewed fig-leaves together for clothing; but the Chinese
revelation say palm-leaves. Which is right? Who can tell?
71. As it is declared the voice of God was heard “walking
in the garden’’ (Gen. iii. 8), we beg leave to ask, what kind
of a thing is a “walking voice ” ?
72. We also beg leave to ask, who took charge of “the
house of many mansions” while Jehovah was down among
the bushes hunting and hallooing for Adam ?
72. And who took charge of creation, and kept the machinery
of the universe running during the thousand 3Tears’ rest of
God Almighty, if the one day he rested means a thousand
years ?
73. Was it necessary for an omnipresent God to come down
from heaven to find Adam when he hid among the bushes?
And what would have been the result if he had not been
found ?
74. Must wc not conclude that the command to “multiply
and replenish the earth” was rather superfluous, inasmuch
as nations who never heard of the command perform the duty
faithfully?
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE ERBOBS.
85
75. If the River Gihon, one of the four rivers of Paradise,
“ encompassed the whole land of Ethiopia’’ (Gen. ii. 13),
which is in Africa, how did it manage to cross the Red Sea, so
as to get into Eden, which is in Asia?
111. As Bishop Colenso shows the territory lying between
the four rivers in Eden, as mentioned in Gen. ii. comprised an
area of several hundred miles, we would suggest that father
Adam, while in Eden, had rather a large garden to cultivate.
112. How could fig-leaves be sewed together for clothing
before needles were invented? (see Gen. iii. 7.)
113. How did Eve see the tree as stated in Genesis (“ she
saw the tree ”) before she ate the fruit which caused her eyes
to be opened ?
114. Is it not calculated to destroy all ideas of justice in the
minds of man and woman to believe that God cursed and
ruined the happiness of the whole human race merely for one
simple act prompted by a being destitute of moral perception or
moral accountability ?
115. And what should we think of a being who would suffer
a grand scheme, on which is predicated the happiness of his
innumerable family for untold ages, to be defeated by the wily
machinations of a brainless creature of his own creation ?
116. Why should Adam hide from God because he was
naked, when, if God made him, he must have become accus-
tomed to seeing him in that condition?
117. If God in the morning pronounced every thing good,
and in the evening every thing bad, does it not imply not only
a serious blunder in the job, but a serious mistake in his
views either in the morning or in the evening?
118. As we are told u the Lord God made clothing for Adam
out of goat-skins,” the question naturally arises, Who caught
and killed the animals, and dressed the skins? Does it not
imply that God was both a butcher and a tanner? Rather
plebeian employment for a God.
119. And the statement that u the Lord God planted a
garden eastward in Eden” (Gen. ii. 8) seems to imply that
he was a horticulturist also.
120. It is pretty hard to believe that Adam could sleep
86
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
while God Almighty (Moses’ God) was digging amongst his
ribs, as stated in Gen. ii. 21.
121. How could Adam know what the word u die ” meant
before there had been any deaths in the world, when the Lord
told him he should die if he ate the forbidden fruit?
122. As Eve was pronounced “ the mother of all living”
when there were no human beings in existence but she and
Adam, the inference seems to be that she was the mother of
herself, her husband, and all the animal tribes.
128. u In the image of God created he them” (Adam and
Eve, see Gen. i. 27). If Adam and Eve were both created in
the image of God, it would seem to follow that he was consti-
tuted of two genders, male and female.
In concluding this section, we ask the reader to think of an
infinitely wise God being defeated in his grand scheme of crea-
tion or salvation by a crawling serpent, and a frightful hell
and all its horrors originating from this act. How sublimely
ridiculous is the thought!
II. The Scientists’ Account of Creation.
1. Millions of years ago the sun in its revolution threw off, as
it had done on previous occasions, a sort of fire-mist, or nebu-
lous scintillations, which floated and rolled through space for
countless ages, gradual^ accumulating from the atmosphere in
its revolution, thus swelling in size until it became a conglomera-
tion of gas; and, continuing to grow and progress, it ripened
into a ficiy, liquid mass possessing the most intense heat.
2. After innumerable ages this fieiy liquid mass began to
cool, and finally formed a crust upon its surface.
3. As its interior elements began to evolve or emanate from
its bosom, it formed a dense, hcav}T, murk}7 atmosphere, almost
as heav}' as water, in which no living thing could have breathed
or lived for a moment.
4. This atmosphere contained moisture, which in the course
of time became condensed into globules forming drops, which
descended to the earth in the shape of rain.
5. This rain, descending to the earth, cooled its surface, and
eventually filled its vast cavities with water, and thus formed
TWO THOUSAND BIBLE ERRORS.
87
lakes, seas, and oceans. The boiling, heaving mass in the
bowels of the earth made it very irregular in shape.
6. As soon as the surface of the earth became sufficiently
cool, small swellings began to appear upon its surface, present-
ing the appearance of blisters, or boils. These outgrowths
finally began to exhibit vegetable life ; but for a long period of
time they presented the appearance of rocks or stones.
7. In the mean time the washings from the surface of the
earth were deposited in the seas and oceans, and, sinking to the
bottom, in the course of time formed rocks.
8. These rocks, as they hardened, gave off an element of life,
which in the course of time supplied the waters with various
forms of animal or finny life, and thus originated mollusks,
fishes, &c.
9. As the surface of the earth cooled and grew thicker, the
elements of life diffused through the liquid mass finally made
their appearance on the surface in t^e character of the lowest
forms of vegetable life, such as mosses, lichens, ferns, &c.
10. As the surface of the earth thickened, and consequently
accumulated the elements of vitality, it gave forth higher and
still higher forms of vegetable life, till finally the most matured
forms of matter began to exhibit animal life.
11. The first species was the zoophite, a compound of vege-
table and animal life, but possessing scarcely an}^ of the func-
tions of animal life except those of absorption and respiration,
and these functions were but slightty manifested.
12. Succeeding the zoophite came the mollusks and various
hard-shelled animal forms, which at first clung to the rocks, then
fed on seaweeds and other vegetable substances, absorbing also
from the atmosphere.
’ 13. In this way various species of animals and birds and rep-
tiles sprang up, ran their course, and then perished, to give
place to higher forms.
14. And finalty, when all the elements of life 'became suffi-
ciently matured, they formed a combination, and turned loose
upon the earth the animal man, who at first was nearly as ugly,
clumsy, and awkward as a baboon, possessed of but little more
sense or intelligence.
88
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
15. Each one of these changes and outgrowths of the new
forms of vegetable and animal life constituted an epoch of in-
numerable ages, thus showing the age of our planet to be beyond
computation. We submit to the reader whether this is not a
more rational, beautiful, and satisfactory solution of the great
problem of mineral, vegetable, animal, and human existence,
than the jumbled-up medley presented by Moses.
ABSURDITIES IN TEE ARK AND FLOOD STORY. 89
CHAPTER XVI. 1°
ABSURDITIES IN THE ARK AND FLOOD STORY.
If there were no other errors or absurdities in the Bible, our
faith in it would diminish at every step in the investigation
of the ark and flood story as related in the sixth chapter of
Genesis. The avowed purpose of the flood, the means employed,
and their failure to accomplish the end desired, are all at war
with our reason and our moral sense.
-
1. The first question that naturally arises in considering
this story is, Why should so many millions of innocent beings
— men, women, children, animals, birds, &c. —perish as a pen-
alty for the sins of a few thousand people ?
2. The reason given for this wholesale destruction was
the wickedness and moral depravity of the human race. But is
it true that the whole human race was in that state at that
period? According to Manetho and Herodotus, Egypt was in a
state of high civilization and moral culture at the time; and,
according to Dr. Hulde, China was also far advanced in the
arts of civilization and in morality. Col. Dow and other
writers represent India as being in a similar condition. There
could, therefore, be no justice in drowning all these nations in
order to punish a few thousand rambling Jews : it was too much
like 44 burning the barn to destroy the rats.”
3. An enlightened moralist of the present day would decide
that it was a species of injustice to destroy all the land animals,
and let the fishes and aquatic* animals live. It looks like par-
tiality.
4. But God, having discovered that he made a signal fail-
ure in the work of creation, acknowledged that it 44 grieved
him at his heart,” and that he 4 4 repented” having undertaken
90
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
it. However, he issued a proclamation, stating that “ the end
of all flesh is come: every thing that is in the earth shall die.”
5. “I, even I, do bring a flood of water upon the earth
to destroy all flesh ” (Gen. xi. 6). The language seems to im-
ply that somebody else had undertaken, or was about to under-
take, the business.
6. But “ Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord,” and
was placed at the head of this grand scheme; being, as was
assumed, although a drunkard, the most righteous man that
could be found.
7. The Lord instructed him to build an ark five hundred
and fifty feet long, twenty feet wide, and fifty-five feet high,
— about the size of an eastern warehouse. Think of put-
ting into this two of every species of animal, and seven of every
species of clean beast, and fowls of the air! — there being one
hundred and fifty thousand, or, as some make it, five hundred
thousand species of animal, one hundred and twelve thousand
kinds of bird, and fifty thousand species of insect.
8. And God ordered to be taken into this ark food suffi-
cient to supply these millions of mouths. This alone would
have required forty such vessels.
9. As it was declared that God destroyed every living thing
from the face of the earth, it would have been necessary to
have food enough stored awajr to last several years, until the
earth could have time to be replenished with a new crop of grass
and vegetables to serve as food for the granivorous and her-
bivorous species, and animals for the carnivorous tribes. The
weight of such a cargo would have been sufficient to sink the
whole British navy!
10. Consider for a moment what amount of food would
be required for each species of animal. The four elephants
(two of each species) would consume a ton of ha}T in two
days, making more than one hundred and fifty tons in twelve
months. The fourteen rhinoceroses would consume one thou-
sand and fifty tons. And then the horses, cattle, sheep, goats,
asses, zebras, antelopes, and other mammalia, would require at
least two thousand tons more; making in the aggregate three
thousand two hundred tons. This alone would have filled every
inch of the vessel.
ABSURDITIES IN THE ARK AND FLOOD STORY. 91
11. The seven hundred and eighty-four thousand birds
(one hundred and twelve thousand species) would require
grain, which would make it necessary to store several thousand
bushels.
12. The three thousand flesh-eating animals, including lions
(one lion could eat fifteen pounds a day), cats, dogs, jackals,
hyenas, skunks, weasels, crocodiles, snakes, eagles, hawks,
buzzards, &c., would require about forty wagon-loads to be
slaughtered and fed to them each day; for all would require
fresh meat but the buzzards.
13. And otters, minks, gulls, kingfishers, spoonbills, storks,
&c., would require fish for food, which must either be pre-
served in tanks for the purpose, or one hundred and fifty
persons would have to be employed all the time in catching
them ; and there were only four men to do this and perform all
the other labor, — sufficient for five thousand hands.
14. There were nine hundred species of fly-catchers,—
those that feed on flies, beetles, and other insects. We are
not informed whether flies were included in the registered list
or not; but the}^ would., of course, be imdudent enough to take
up their quarters in the vessel without invitation.
15. About two hundred and fifty birds known as bee-catch-
ers would have to be supplied with this kind of insect: this
would be, to say the least, rather stinging business.
16. Many cans of cockroaches must have been saved to feed
the birds-of-paradise.
17. There are several kinds of ant-eaters also, which would
have required much time to be spent in searching for ants in the
cracks of the vessel, or in collecting them off the water.
18. The four hundred and forty-two monkeys would require
fresh fruit; and it is not probable anybody had the forethought
to can it for them.
19. Sixty-five species of animal feed on insects; and it
would have been necessary for several persons to spend most
of their time in crawling after millipeds, fleas, wood-lice, &c.
20. There would have been work for fifty boys in providing
leaves and flowers (if there were any possibility that they could
be obtained while merged in twenty-seven feet of water) for
the animals that feed on these things. ^
92
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
21. Besides food, fresh water must have been stored up
for most of these animals, as they could not have endured
the salty water of the briny deep.
22. Noah and his family must have studied ornithology and
natural history many years to know what kind of food to save
for the various kinds of birds and animals.
23. Naturalists estimate that there are fourteen different
climates, each with animals adapted only to the temperature
and natural growth of that locality. How, then, could they all
endure the change of being removed to the vicinity of Mount
Ararat ? Animals from the frigid zones must have felt like fish
out of water in the warm climate of Armenia.
24. And think of the immense labor required to obtain this
innumerable collection of animals ! In the first place, either
Noah or his God must make a trip to the polar regions to
obtain the white bear, the reindeer, the polar dog, &c.
25. And then the Rocky Mountains must be scaled to find
and catch the grizzly bear. Some time and labor must have
been required to obtain the rattlesnakes, copperheads, vipers,
cobras, snapping-turtles, &c., of the torrid zone.
26. And a great deal of strategy must have been employed
to catch the fox, the deer, the antelope, the gazelle, the chim-
panzee, of the temperate zone; also the eagle, hawk, buzzard,
&c.
27. To do all this hunting and catching, and conveying to
the ark, of the million and a half birds and animals, would
have required a larger number of persons than Napoleon or
Xerxes ever commanded; for, as the whole thing is related as
a natural occurrence, we can not assume that they made the
journo}’ of their own accord.
28. The Bible commentator Scott supposes that angels were
employed to aid in this business of storing away the animals
in the ark ; but it is certainly derogatory to that elevated order
of beings to suppose they would stoop to such groveling work
as bug-hunting, skunk-catching, snake-snaring, &c.
29. And how could this immense multitude of respiring
and perspiring animals live and breathe in a vessel with but
one little twenty-two-inch window, and that in the third
ABSURDITIES IN THE ARK AND FLOOD STORY. 93
sto^, and shut up most of the time to keep the rain out, espe-
cially if some giraffe had been disposed to monopolize it when
it was open by thrusting his head out ? How could they be
kept thus for a whole year without breeding pestilence and
death ?
30. All animals require light; and total darkness must have
reigned in the two lower stories, and only a partial light sup-
plied the third story, —just what could come through a twenty-
two-inch window.
31. The. chorus of voices in the ark — consisting of bellow-
ing, baying, howling, screaming, hissing, neighing, snorting,
roaring, chattering, buzzing, &c. — suggests that deafness
would have been a blessing to the human-beings present.
32. We are told that “fifteen cubits upward did the water
prevail, and the mountains were covered.” Fifteen cubits
(tweffiy-seven feet) would not cover nine-tenths of the build-
ings now on the earth. Ararat is seventeen thousand feet,
and Everest twenty-nine thousand feet high.
33. Several scientists have shown by actual experiment that
the atmosphere could not contain the fourteen-hundredth part
of the water that is represented to have fallen in the time of
the flood.
34. Who or what conducted the ark to Ararat when the
waters subsided ? In the Brahminical flood story a fish is said
to have performed this feat, and dragged it to Mt. Hinavat;
but Noah and Moses are silent on this point.
35. The peak of Ararat is perpetually covered with snow and
ice ; hence it must have been rather difficult and dangerous for
the biped and quadruped cargo to descend from it.
36. And what was there to prevent the nine hundred car-
nivorous animals from devouring the sheep, hogs, poultry, rab-
bits, minks, hedgehogs, &c., as they tumbled pell-mell down the
mountain together.
37. The same catastrophe must have ensued from the act
of turning them loose upon the earth together, with nothing to
subsist upon but the flesh and blood of each other.
38. Many Oriental nations have traditions of a flood, and
some of them of several floods. Xisuthrus of Chaldea built a
94
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
ship, in which he saved himself and family during a mighty flood
which overflowed the world ; also Fohi of China, Menu of the
Brahmins, Satravarata of India, and Deucalion of Greece.
Hence it appears there were several families saved besides that
of Noah’s. Eg}"pt and India have stories of two floods occur-
ring at different periods,— one ninety-five hundred years ago.
All these stories are evidently older than that recorded in the
Christian Bible.
39. Geologists and archaeologists have collected a whole vol-
ume of evidence, which shows that such a deluge could never
have taken place as is embodied in the traditions of several
nations. The fresh water of the lakes, and the salt water of the
seas and oceans, would have been so mixed as never again to
be separated as they are now. Egyptian monuments and sculp-
ture can be traced to a much earlier period than that assigned
for Noah’s flood.
40. Lepsius has traced the existence of several races or tribes
of negroes up to a period within forty-eight years of Noah’s
flood ; this would seem to indicate that some of Noah’s family
were negroes, and must have “multiplied and replenished”
very rapidly to start several races in fort}r-eight years.
41. The dynasties of Egyptian kings can be traced back
several thousand years beyond Noah’s time.
42. It is true Jesus Christ and the apostles indorsed the
truth of the flood story (Matt. xxiv. 37) ; but that is evidence
against their intelligence, instead of being a proof of the truth
of the story.
43. And the assumed divine author of the flood admitted it
was an utter failure, —that it entirely failed to accomplish the
end intended; for it was declared but a few centuries after,
that “the imagination of man’s heart is evil, and only evil,
continually,” which is an evidence that the wicked folks were
not all drowned by the world’s inundation.
44. With respect to the many difficulties and impossibilities
I have enumerated as lying in the way of carrying out this
experiment of the flood, it is sometimes argued in defense,
that, as the whole thing was in the hands of God, such
obstacles would not be a straw in his way. But such persons
ABSUBDITIES IN THE ABK AND FLOOD STOBY. 95
have failed to notice that it is nowhere stated or implied that
it was to be accomplished by miracles. A miracle could have
destroj^ed all the wicked inhabitants of the earth in a moment,
without any flood or other means.
45. With regard to its being only a partial deluge, as argued
by some Bible defenders, we will say that it is only necessary
to examine the language of the Bible to settle this matter. It
is declared over and over again, that the whole earth was cov-
ered with water, and every living thing destroyed. If it had
been only a partial deluge, all that would have been necessary
for Noah to do to save himself and family would have been to
migrate to some dry country; and the doomed sinners might
have saved themselves in this way.
46. I will note here that the rainbow was for more than a
thousand years looked upon both as evidence that there had
been a universal deluge, and also that there never would be
another. Jt is only at a recent period that the study of philoso-
phy has disclosed the fact that the rambow is caused by the
reflection and refraction of the rays of light upon the falling
rain, and the error thus exploded.
47. One thing in connection with this flood story is not clear-
ly explained in the Bible: Methuselah’s time was not out till
ten months after the flood began, according to Bible chronology.
Where was he during this ten months ?
96
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
CHAPTER XVII.
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, MORAL DEFECTS OF.
These commandments have always been regarded by Bible
believers as being a remarkable display of infinite wisdom, and
as being morally perfect beyond criticism; and consequently
they have passed from age to age without examination, when a
little investigation would have shown any logical mind that they
contain palpable errors both in logic and morals.
First commandment: “ Thou shalt have no other Gods be-
fore me ” (Exod. xx. 3) ; that is, as commentators have in-
terpreted it, u Thou shalt prefer no Gods to me.” And why
not? What harm can it do? Supposing the people prefer a
golden calf, as the Jews did under the leadership of Aaron,
in the name of reason how can it injure either God or man?
if not, where is the objection? The feeling of devotion is the
same in all cases, whatever may be the object worshiped.
Hence the worshiper is as much benefited by worshiping one
object as another. On the other hand, it would be a slander
upon infinite wisdom to suppose he can desire the homage, adora-
tion, and flattery of poor ignorant mortals, and desire them
to crouch at his feet. It would make a mere coxcomb of him
to suppose he can be pleased with such adulation, or that he
desires such homage. We worship no such God.
Second commandment. The second commandment prohibits
our making “ the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above,
the earth beneath, or the waters under the earth ” (Exod. xx. 4).
Let us look, in the first place, at the effect of this prohibition,
and then at the character of the act. It effectually cuts off the
use of photographs, portraits, and pictures,—illustrations of
every description; for all these are likenesses of something.
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.
97
Hence thousands of cases of the violation of this command-
ment take place every day in all Christian or civilized countries.
Books are issued every day containing likenesses of something
in the heavens above or the earth beneath ; especially are school-
books illustrated with the likenesses of all kinds of living beings,
and often with inanimate objects, by which children learn. The
second commandment is utterly disregarded and trampled under
foot by all Christendom.
Third commandment. This commandment prohibits our
bowing down to and worshiping any other God but Jehovah,
because641, the Lord thy God, ama jealous God5 ’ (Exod. xx.5).
As for 66 jealousy,” it will make any being hateful and despised,
according to William Penn. But why not worship other Gods
(that is, beings supposed to represent or resemble God) ? Can
any serious evil result from such an act, either to God or his
worshipers? If so, what is it? Let us assume, for the sake
of the argument, that the heathen who bow down to images of
wood and stone suppose them to be the veritable living and true
God (which, however, is not true), yet it would be the very
climax of folly to suppose that an infinite being, of such infinite
perfection that it places him at an infinite distance beyond hu-
man flattery, can take the slightest offense at such an act. It
is childish to entertain such a thought. A thousand times more
sensible is the doctrine of the Hindoos’ Vedas, which makes God
(Brahma) say, 6 6 Those who worship other Gods worship me,
because I hear them, and correct their mistake.” We will illus-
trate : —
A rebel soldier (son of a doctor) was wounded near his father’s
house, in Kentucky, during the war, in which he immediately
sought refuge. As he entered the hall (it being evening twi-
light) , he observed some person at the farther end whom he
supposed to be his father, and exclaimed, 66 Father, I am
wounded! Canyon aid me?” His father, being in a room
above, overheard him, and responded, 66 Yes, sir.” Had he had
the vanity of Jehovah, he should have replied, 66 jSTo, sir: you
mistook the servant in the hall for me: therefore I will not
assist you, but punish you, and kill you.” Kemember, Jeho-
vah is represented as killing the worshipers of other Gods
98
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
(Deut. xiii. 6). If an illiterate heathen in like manner should,
in his ignorance, call upon idols or mere imaginary beings for
aid, would not his heavenly Father, “in the room above’’ or
the heaven above, hear him and reply, “You are mistaken; I
am here, not there; but no difference, the mistake is not im-
portant : your intention was good, and your motives honest;
therefore I will grant your request ” ? This would be sensible.
But Jehovah is represented as saying, “If thy brother or son
or daughter, or even the wife of thy bosom, shall say, let us
go and serve other Gods, thou shalt not pity nor spare, but
kill them ” (Deut. xiii. 6). Here is the most shocking cruelty,
combined with supreme nonsense. We are commanded to kill
wives, sons, and daughters, if they entertain a different view of
God from ours, no matter how honest they may be ; and there
is no question but that all worshipers are honest. They can not
be otherwise. And yet there is no sin more frequently or more
fearfully denounced in the Christian Bible than that of worship-
ing other Gods. Who can not see that it all grew out of the
bitter sectarian bigotry of the Jews, which engendered feelings
of animosity toward all nations who refused to subscribe to their
creed? This has been the fault of all creed worshipers. As
“ no man hath seen God at any time ” (John i. 18), it must be a
matter of imagination with every human being as to what is the
form, size, and character of God. And therefore it can make
no difference what God, or what kind of God, we call upon in
our prayers. We would be equally heard and answered, if there
were a God answering prayer. The third commandment, there-
fore, is devoid of sound sense.
Fourth commandment: “Thou shalt not take the name of
the Lord thy God in vain ” (Exod. xx. 7). The word “ vain ” is
defined to mean “ worthless, fruitless ; ” that is, attended wdth
no good results. And we can not conceive that it can be any
more sinful to take the name of God in vain than that of a
human being, or of any other object. It is not rational to sup-
pose God, wiiile superintending the movements of eighty-five
millions of worlds, pays any attention to the manner in which
the inhabitants of this little planet use his name, or that he
cares any tiling about it. And then how is it possible for us
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.
99
to know when we are using his name in vain, and when we are
not?
Fifth commandment: “ Remember the sabbath day to keep
it hol}\” This commandment is universally laid aside by all
Christendom. Nobody keeps the sabbath but the Jews. And
as God himself does not keep the sabbath, but lets all nature
run and work (her laws operate the same on that da}" as on all
other days of the week), we can not believe the sabbath was
instituted by him.
Sixth commandment: “ Honor thy father and mother’ ’ (Exod.
xx. 12). Pretty good ; but the reason assigned for it is devoid
of sense, — “ That thy days may be long upon the earth.’’ We
have never learned that long-lived persons have been more duti-
ful to parents than others.
Seventh commandment: “ Thou shalt not kill” (Exod. xx.
13). If the word “ not ” were left out, we would concede this
commandment has been faithfully obeyed. His “ holy people ”
were killing nearly all the time ; and their successors (the Chris-
tians) have inundated the earth with blood by a constant viola-
tion of this command. What good, therefore, we would ask,
has resulted from this commandment?
Tenth commandment. The tenth commandment forbids us
to covet our neighbor’s house, wife, or servant, or any of his
property (covet, “ to desire earnestly ”). We can not conceive
how there can be any moral turpitude in the act of desiring to
possess any of our neighbor’s property, or even his wife, if no
improper means are used to obtain them. The command was
doubtless issued to keep the poor man from aping the rich, and
to make him content with his own lot and condition.
The above will be understood to be the true exposition of
“the holy commandments of the Lord,” “the ten glorious
laws of God,” when people become accustomed to use their
reason in matters of religion.
100
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XVIII.
FOOLISH BIBLE STOEIES.
I. Talking Serpents and Talking Asses.—Gen. in.,
Num. xxii.
The laws of nature appear to have possessed but little force,
permanency, or reliability in the da}rs of Moses, as they were
often brought to a dead halt, and set aside on the most trivial
occasions, according to Bible history; and nothing could be
learned of the character, habits, or natural powers of animals
by their form or physical conformation, if they possessed, as
represented, minds and reasoning powers supposed to be pe-
culiar to the human species. Hence the study of natural history
must have been useless. When naturalists at the present day
find animals without the organs of speech, they assume they do
not possess the ability to talk and reason. But the absence of
the vocal organs in the days of Moses appears to have furnished
no criterion, and interposed no obstacle to becoming a fluent
speaker and an able reasoner, as is illustrated in the case of a
serpent and an ass talking and arguing like a law}~er. Hence
natural history could have possessed no attraction, as nothing
certain could have been learned by studying it.
1. It is a singular reflection that the Christian plan of salva-
tion is based on a serpent, and with about as little show of sense
as the Hottentot tradition of the earth resting on the heads of
four turtles.
2. The idea of God creating a serpent to thwart and defeat
his plans and designs, or permitting him to do it, is absolutely
ridiculous.
3. If God knew, when he created the serpent, that his machi-
nations would bring u death and sin and all our woe ” into the
world, the act would prove him to be an unprincipled being.
FOOLISH BIBLE STORIES.
101
4. And, if he did not know it, he must have been ignorant
and short-sighted, and not fit to be a God.
5. It would imply that he made a wonderful mistake in creat-
ing a being that “turned right round,” and made war on his
own kingdom, crippled it, and defeated its success.
6. To assume that God could be outwitted by a serpent is to
place him lower in the scale of intelligence than a snake.
7. It would seem that the serpent was superior to Jehovah
either in knowledge or veracity; for his statement relative to
the effect of eating the fruit proved to be true, while that of
Jehovah proved to be false (Gen. iii. 3).
8. And, as we have shown in chapter liii, he was a greater
friend and benefactor to the human race than Jehovah, as a
number of benefits and blessings were conferred upon Adam
and Eve and their posterity by yielding to his advice instead of
obeying the mandates of Jehovah.
9. It would doubtless be a source of gratification to natural-
ists of the present age to learn what species o'f snake that was
which possessed such a remarkable intellect and reasoning facul-
ties and powers of speech; and also whether Hebrew was its
vernacular.
10. Why is it that ladies of the present day possess none of
the nerveless intrepidity and moral courage of old mother Eve,
who could stand and listen to a serpent talking without any
signs of fainting, and with a perfect nonchalance, when our
modern ladies would probably scream or run if a snake they
should meet should assume the liberty to address them even in
the most polite manner ? Mother Eve must have been familiar
with oddities.
11. If serpents and asses could talk in the days of Moses,
why not now ? Why have the}’ lost the power of speech ?
12. The species of serpents and asses which furnished such
distinguished reasoners and orators should have been preserved,
both as natural curiosities and on account of their practical/
benefits. It would be a source of instruction as well as amuse-
ment for a traveler, while journeying astride the back of an
ass, to be able to enter into a friendly chitchat and exchange
views with him, especially if the ass should be well posted on
the topics of the day.
102
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
13. It seems singular that the heathen prophet Balaam should
be able to enlighten infinite wisdom when he called on him for
information concerning Balak, King of Moab, or that he should
have been better posted in the matter.
14. The circumstance of Jehovah advising Balaam to go at
the call of Balak to curse Israel, then becoming very angry at
him because he did go, and employing an ass to intercept his
journe}-, evinces him to have been a fickle-minded and change-
able being. (Num. xxii. 20, 22.)
15. It appears that, with all of Balaam’s superior intelli-
gence, he was inferior in spiritual discernment to that of his ass,
as she could see the spirit standing in the road when he could
not.
16. It has been contemptuously suggested as a slur on spirit-
ualism, that perhaps the ass was a spiritual medium. But the
fact that asses (of the biped species) can now be found endowed
with the power of speech, renders the conclusion more rational
that the ass talked without the aid of a spirit.
Such are some of the ridiculous features of these ridiculous
stories. The expedient of disposing of these foolish stories as
allegories, as some have attempted, will not avail any thing:
for such figures are too low and groveling to be employed even
as metaphors ; and there is no hint in the Bible that they are to
be understood in an allegorical or metaphorical sense
II. Tiie Story of Cain, Absurdities of.
1. Did not Eve dishonor God when, at the birth of Cain, she
said, UI have got a man from the Lord” (Gen. iv. 1), inas-
much as he turned out to be a murderer ?
2. Did not God know that Cain would become a murderer?
If he did not, he is not an omniscient God.
3. And, if he did know it, would it not make him accountable
for the murder?
4. Why did God set a mark on Cain that u whosoever should
find him should not slay him” (Gen. iv. 15), when there was
no “ whosoever ” in existence but his father and mother? And
it can not be supposed they would have to hunt to find him,
or that they would kill him when found.
FOOLISH BIBLE STORIES.
103
5. And how could u whosoever ” know what the mark meant?
6. Where did or where could Cain have gone when he u fled
from the presence of the Lord” (Gen. iv. 16), as David says
he is present ever}wrhere, even in hell?
7. How could Cain find a wife in the land of Nod (see Gen.
iv. 17), wken he himself had killed the whole human race ex-
cepting his father and mother ? There were then no women to
make wives of.
8. Why did Cain build a city (see Gen. iv. 17), when there
was nobod}7 to inhabit it?
9. As there were workers of iron and brass ” in this city,
does it not furnish evidence that there was a race of people who
had attained a high state of civilization before Adam was
made ?
10. And as brass is not an ore, but a compound of copper
and zinc, does it not furnish evidence that the mining business
and the mechanic arts were carried on long before Adam’s
time?
11. If Cain did find a wife in the land of Nod, is it not evi-
dence that some ribs had been converted into women before
Adam’s time?
12. Where did Cain find carpenters and masons to build his
city, if his father and mother constituted the whole human race ?
13. Did not Jehovah know, when he accepted Abel’s offering
and rejected Cain’s, that he was sowing the seeds of discord
that would lead to murder ?
14. And did he not set a bad example by showing partiality,
as there is no reason assigned for preferring Abel’s offering?
15. Had not Cain just ground for believing that his offering
of herbs would be accepted, inasmuch as Jehovah had ordered
Adam to use herbs for food ?
16. Must we conclude that Jehovah had a carnivorous appe-
tite, which caused him to prefer animals to vegetables for sac-
rifices ?
17. What sense was there in dooming Cain to be a vagabond
among men, when there was but one man in the world, and that
his father ?
104
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
III. The Ark of the Covenant, Absurdities of. — 1 Sam.
CHAP. VI.
We find no case in any history of superstition reaching a
more exalted climax than that illustrated in the historj' of the
Jewish ark of the covenant. It appears that up to the time of
Solomon the Jews had no temple for their God to dwell in, but
for some time previous hauled him about in a box, about four
feet long by thirty inches deep, known as the “ ark of the cov-
enant.’ ’ Let it not be supposed that we misrepresent in saying
that Jehovah was supposed to dwell in this box; for it is ex-
plicitly stated that he dwelt between the cherubims, which consti-
tuted a part of the accoutrements of the ark. (See 1 Sam. iv.
4.) One of the most singular and ridiculous features connected
with this story is, that Jehovah, in giving instructions for the
construction of the ark, told the people they must offer, among
other curious things, badger-skins, goat’s hair, and red ram’s
skins (i.e., ram’s skins dj^ed red). What use God Almighty
could have had for the hides and hair of these dead animals is
hard to conjecture. Could superstition descend lower than this?
As minute a description is given of the whole affair by Jehovah
and Moses as if there were some sense in it. The box was
hauled about b}T two cows; and it was enjoined that those se-
lected by the Philistines should be cows that had never been
worked or harnessed, and that their calves should be shut up
and left at home. This is descending to a “ bill of particulars.”
The calves must have suffered, as their dams were driven far
awaj-, and then slaughtered. What became of the calves is not
stated ; but we arc told that the cows kept up a continual bel-
lowing, or “ lowing.” Perhaps this was designed as a kind of
base or tenor for the music which accompanied them; and this
accounts for the calves being left at home. It is curious to
observe that the cows were not yoked to the cart on which the
ark was drawn, but tied to it, — probably by their tails. The
Jews did not seem to possess sufficient mechanical skill or
genius to invent an ox-yoke. Another singular part of this
singular story is, that the Philistines constructed six golden
mice to accompany the ark ; and yet we are told that the Jews
FOOLISH BIBLE STOBIES.
105
were not allowed to hare images of any thing (Ex. xx. 4). The
most serious consideration connected with this affair was the vast
destruction of human life. In the first place the Philistines, in a
battle with the Lord’s people, slew thirty thousand of them, and
captured this box, as we must presume, with the Lord in it. It
seems strange that, when Jehovah had fought so many success-
ful battles, he would allow himself to be captured. It was some
time, too, before he was recovered from the Philistines. When
this was effected, as the ark was being conveyed back under the
superintendence of David, with a company of thirty thousand
people, while passing over some rough ground, the cart jostled,
and the ark came near being thrown off, with the Lord Jehovah
in it, who would probably have been considerably bruised by
the fall. But a very clever man b}r the name of Uzzah clapped
his hand upon the cart to prevent this awful catastrophe ; and,
although probably actuated by the best and most pious motives,
he was immediately killed for it. This part of the stoiy has a
bad moral. On another occasion, on the arrival of the ark at
Bethshemesh, because one or two persons attempted to gratify
a very natural curiosity by looking into the ark, Jehovah became
so much enraged that he killed fifty thousand of the people of
Bethshemesh. Here is another of the many cases in which
thousands of innocent people were punished for the sin of one
man or a few persons. How can any good grow out of the
relation of such unjust, unprincipled, and superstitious doings
recorded in a book designed for the moral instruction and sal-
vation of the world? We are told that at every place to which
this box was carried, while in the hands of the Philistines, it
caused death and destruction, or some other serious calamity.
At Ashdod it produced disease and destruction among the people
to an alarming extent; and similar results followed while the
ark was at Ekron. Assuming that there is any truth in the
stoiy, the thought is here suggested that the box might have
been'affected with some malarious disease. While at Dagon it
caused the God of that place to fall down in the night from his
resting-place; on the second night he lost both his hands.
Who that is acquainted with Jewish history can not see that this
circumstance is related to show that the God of the Jews was
106
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
superior to other Gods, as he excelled them in working miracles
in Egjqpfc and other places? That it was a borrowed tradition
is quite evident from the fact that the Hindoos and Egyptians
had practiced similar rites and customs anterior to that period.
The Hindoo ark was carried on a pole by four priests ; and,
wherever it touched ground, it wrought miracles in the shape of
deaths and births, or the outgushing of springs of water. The
Egyptian ark was constructed of gold, which probably made
the box more valuable than the God within. All such wooden
or metal Gods were supposed to operate as a talisman, or pro-
tection against evil. When will the believers in divine revela-
tion and divine prodigies learn that all such superstitious customs
and inventions were the work of men, and not of God?
IV. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, Absurdities.—Num.
chap. XVI.
These three leading men of Israel, growing tired of the tyran-
nical usurpations of Moses, concocted a mutiny, in which they
succeeded in enlisting some two hundred and fifty persons.
When Moses learned what was on foot, this 4 4 meek man”
became very angry, and reported the case to Jehovah, and re-
quested him not to accept their offering when they came to make
their usual oblations.' The Lord took Moses’ advice, and not
only refused their offering, but split the ground open where they
stood, so that they fell in, and were seen no more. And, when
their two hundred and fifty followers saw this, the}’ fled, fearing
they might share the same fate. But that expedient did not
save them: 44 a fire came out from the Lord,” and consumed the
whole number. It must have been a fearful fire to consume so
many while they were running. The fire came from the Lord ;
but where the Lord was at the time we are not informed, —
whether sitting on his throne in heaven, or standing beside the
altar, as he frequentl}’ did. Hence we can not tell whether the
fire came from heaven, as it did on some other occasions, or
from below. It must have been a very aggravated case of
rebellion; for God and Moses both got angry at once, which
was something rather unusual. It was customary, when Jeho-
vah got angry and made severe threats of what he would do,
FOOLISH BIBLE STORIES.
107
for Moses to interfere, and intercede for his people, and try to
cool him down; and, by the power of his logic and eloquence, he
mostly succeeded in convincing him that he was wrong, and got
him to desist from carrying his threats into execution. But, on
this occasion, Moses, being angry ’ let him take his own
course. But the most unjust and u^^orciful act in the whole
transaction was that of Jehovah sending a plague, and destroy-
ing fourteen thousand more, merety because they mourned for
their destroyed friends, and ventured to complain of the course
he and Moses were pursuing. It was certainly cruel to destroy
them for so slight an offense. It appears that, by Aaron’s
standing 44 between the dead and the living, the plague was
stayed.” But for this timely interference of Jehovah’s high
priest, there is no knowing when or where the plague would have
stopped. Now, is it not something near akin to blasphemy to
charge such nonsense — ay, worse than nonsense, cruelty, injus-
tice, and malignity — to the just God of the universe?
V. The Story of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar.
We shall not attempt to present an exposition of all the
absurdities which abound in the Book of Daniel, but will merely
notice a few of its most incredible statements. The most
amusing chapter in the history of Daniel is his interpretation
of the dreams of King Nebuchadnezzar. It appears that on
one occasion the king had forgotten his dream, which made it
ostensibly necessary for Daniel, before interpreting it, to repro-
duce it. But who can not see it was not necessary for him to
do either to save his reputation and his life, both of which it
appears were at stake? If he were possessed of an active,
fertile imagination, he could invent both, and palm them off on
to the king as the original, who would be perfectly unable to
detect the trick, as he knew nothing about either. It is stated
that one of the dreams consigned the king to the fate of eating'
grass like an ox for three years. • In all such incredible stories
which abound in the Christians’ Bible, we find glaring absurdities,
which a little reflection would reveal to the reader if he would
allow himself to think. There is a palpable absurdity in this
story which shows that the conversion of the king into an ox
108
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
as a punishment could not have achieved that end. If he were
converted into an ox, his reason was gone, and he was uncon-
scious of his condition ; and hence it was no punishment at all.
Or, if he still retained his reason, he had nothing to do but to walk
away, and find food mo> '"** ^enial to his appetite than grass.
And thus the story defeats itself. It is stated his hair became
like eagles’ feathers, and his nails like the claws of a bird
(Dan. iv. 38), — a very singular-looking ox surely. It would have
been more appropriate to call such a being an eagle or a dragon.
Such is the careless and disjointed manner in which all Bible
stories are told, as if related by mere ignorant children. The
most conclusive u knock-down argument ’ ’ to the . truth of this
stor}T is found in the fact that no allusion to this astounding
miracle can be found by any of the historians of that or any
other nation. Had the king been transformed into an ox, the
history of his own nation (the Persians) would abound in allu-
sions to the marvelous fact. Its silence on it settles the ques-
tion.
We will occupy sufficient space to allude to one incident in
the stoiy of u the three holy children,” which we find related in
the Book of Daniel. It is stated that a being who looked u like
the Son of God ” was seen by the king walking in the furnace.
To be sure ! We are quite curious to know how he found out
how the Son of God looks. How long had he lived in heaven
with him so as to become familiar with his countenance ? What
silly nonsense!
VI. Sodom and Gomorrah.
Story of Sodom and Gomorrah. We are seemingly required
by this story to believe that God keeps a manufactory of brim-
stone in heaven; for we are told that u the Lord rained upon
Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of
heaven” (Gen. xix.). If we credit this stoiy, we may infer
that the Lord keeps a supply of the article on hand, perhaps to
be let down occasionally to replenish the bottomless pit.
The science of chemistry has demonstrated within the present
century that the air is composed of nitrogen and ox}’gen; and
it has also demonstrated that oxj’gcn gas and sulphur or brim-
FOOLISH BIBLE STORIES.
109
stone, when brought into contact, are, with a moderate amount
of heat, dissolved, united, and converted into oil of vitriol.
Hence, if fire and brimstone rained from heaven in that climate,
it is scientifically and chemically certain that the people were
pelted with a shower of the oil of vitriol.
One square mile of the earth’s surface in that locality would
be supplied with about thirteen thousand million pounds of oxygen.
The requisite amount of brimstone to convert this into oil of
vitriol would be about ten thousand million pounds, making in
the whole twenty-three thousand millions of pounds.
This would have been sufficient to spoil all the Sunday gar-
ments of the people, but could not have burned them up; for
cold oil will not burn, and the fire and brimstone would have
been converted into oil long before they reached the earth, and
become too cool for the heat to injure any thing.
We are told that several cities were destroyed by this divine
judgment. And pray how many cities could exist in a hot and
arid desert, where there was not a drop of water that a human
being could drink?
VII. Tower of Babel.
Of all the stories ever recorded in any book, disclosing on the
part of the writer a profound ignorance of the sciences, — em-
bracing, at least, astronomy, geography, and philosophy, —that
of the Tower of Babel was probably never excelled. A brief
enumeration of some of its absurdities will disclose this fact.
1. We are told (in chap. xi. of Genesis), that, after God had
discovered by some means that 44 the children of men ’ ’ were
building a cityT and a tower to reach to heaven, he 44 came down
to see the city and the tower” (Gen. xi. 6). The statement
that he 44 came down ” implies that he was a local being, and
not the omnipotent and omnipresent God.
2. If he were not already present, and had to travel and
descend in order to be present, we should like to know what
mode of travel he adopted. It appears from the story that, if
he came down, he must have returned almost immediately, and
descended a second time; for, after this, he is represented as
saying,44 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their lan-
guage” (Gen. xi. 7).
110
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
3. Who was this Uus?” The use of this plural pronoun
u us ” implies that there were several Gods on hand.
4. And, if he came down, who did he leave in his place?
Must we assume there is a trinity of Gods ? But it would be
superlative nonsense to assume that the three Gods could be one
(as Christians claim) if one of them could leave the kingdom.
5. How did the writer know that he or they talked in this
manner, as he could not have been present in person to hear it?
6. In this same chapter the u inspired writer ” tells us, “ The
whole earth was of one language and one speech ” (Gen. xi. 1).
In the preceding chapter there is a long list of different tongues,
or languages, and nations ; and it is declared they were “ divided
in their lands, everyone after his tongue, families, and nations.”
How contradictory!
7. What a childish and ludicrous notion the writer entertained
with respect to heaven when he cherished the belief that a tower
could be erected to reach it!
8. According to St. Jerome the Tower of Babel was twenty
thousand feet high. A Jewish writer says it was eighty thousand.
In the first case it would be nearly four miles in height; in the
other, over fifteen miles, —nearly three times the height of the
highest mountain on the globe ! No method has ever yet been
discovered for elevating building materials to such a height.
9. Taking St. Jerome as authority, the hod-carriers, in ascend-
ing and descending, would have to perform a journey of more
than seven miles each trip.
10. As the air becomes rarefied in proportion to its distance
from the earth, the lungs of the workmen would have collapsed,
and their blood have congealed, before they climbed half-way to
the top. They could not have breathed at such a height.
11. As the earth is constantly revolving on its axis, the crazy
tower-builders would only be in the direction of the point at
which they aimed once in twenty-four hours, and then moving
with a speed one hundred and forty times greater than that of a
cannon-ball. It would require dexterous springing to leap into
the door of heaven as they passed it.
12. And as the earth, in its orbit, moves at the rate of sixty-
eight thousand miles an hour, it would soon cany them millions
of miles beyond any point they might be aiming to reach.
FOOLISH BIBLE STORIES.
Ill
13. After all, we can not see any possible objection Jehovah
or any other God could have had to such an enterprise.
14. If the Babelites had succeeded in climbing into heaven,
what of it? Was Omnipotence afraid they would dispossess
him of his throne, and seize the reins of government? If not,
what could have been the objection?
15. And then it would not have taken the “ heavenly host ”
fifteen minutes to tumble them out, as they did Michael and the
dragon.
16. The truth is, the imaginary God of the Jews was a sus-
picious, cowardly, and jealous being. He was constantly getting
into hot water. He appeared to live in perpetual fear day and
night that some other God, or some of his own creatures,
would encroach upon his rights. In this case he seemed to be
alarmed for fear those ignorant, deluded tower-builders and wild
fanatics would succeed in reaching the heavenly home, perhaps
bind him, and cast him out of his own kingdom. What super-
lative nonsense is the whole story! And yet millions believe it
to be divinely inspired, and many thousands of dollars have
been spent in printing it, and circulating it over the world.
VHI. Stopping the Sun and Moon,—Absurdities of the
Story.
Of all the stories that ever taxed the brain or credulity of a
| man of science, that of Joshua stopping the sun and moon
I stands pre-eminent. Think of bringing to a stand-still that
magnificent and immense luminary which constitutes the center
of a solar system of one hundred and thirty worlds, all of which
move in harmony with it. Such a catastrophe would have
broken one hundred and thirty planets loose from their orbits,
and dashed them together in utter confusion, and would thus
have broken up our solar system. The shock produced upon
this earth would have thrown every thing on its surface off into
I boundless space.
For a puny man, on a little planet like this, to command the
| mighty sun, which is fourteen hundred thousand times as large
] as the earth, to stop in its grand career, would be comparable
j to an ant saying to a mountain, u Get out of my way.”
112
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
And, when we look at the cruel and wicked purpose for which
this stupendous miracle is said to have been wrought, we are
shocked at the demoralizing effect such lessons must have upon
the millions who look upon it as the work of a just and right-
eous God.
It savors too much of blasphemy to assume that a God of
infinite justice would perform an act attended with such direful
consequences, merely to allow the little, bloody-minded Joshua
more time to blow out the brains and tear out the hearts of his
enemies, guilty of no crime but that of believing in a different
religious creed. Farewell to reason, justice, and morality, if
we must subscribe to such moral lessons as this !
And why did he have the moon stopped at midday, when it
could not be seen, and was, perhaps, on the opposite side of the
globe? Egypt, India, Greece, and Mexico all have traditions
of the sun stopping, but, in most cases, have too much sense
to stop the moon. Fohi of China had the sun stopped eight
hundred and fifty years before Joshua, the son of Nun, ever
saw the sun. Bacchus and other God-men of Egypt had it
stopped four times. While in Greece Phaethon was set after it
to hurry it up, and increase its speed. A “ poor rule that will
not work both ways !55 The Chinese annals state that the sun
stopped ten days during the reign of the Emperor Yom.
Argoon of India stopped it several days for his own accommo-
dation.
But, unfortunately for the cause of religion, or rather religious
superstition, no man of science, in any of these countries, has
as much as noticed these world-astounding phenomena ; and no
writer, but one religious fanatic in each case, has spoken of
them,—a circumstance of itself sufficient to render them ut-
terly incredible.
IX. Tiie Story of Samson,—Its Absurdities.
Were the story of Samson found in airy other book than the
Christian Bible, it would be looked upon by Bible believers as
one of those wild and incredible legends of heathen nytyhology
with which all the holy books of that age abound. But it is
accepted as true because found in the Bible; and the Bible is
FOOLISH BIBLE STOBIES.
113
considered to be true, partly because it tells such marvelous
stories. It is assumed that they prove each other. Perhaps it
is upon the presumption that “it is a poor rule that will not
work both ways.”
1. We are told (Judg. chap, xiii.) that an angel appeared to
the wife of Manoah, and promised her a son; and Manoah
seemed to be as well pleased about the matter as his wife, and
seemed to care but little whether the father was a man or an
angel or a God, and we are left in the dark as to which it
was.
2. It is rather a notable circumstance that the Jewish God and
his angels seemed to have a great deal to do in trying to accom-
modate and aid old women in becoming mothers, as in the
case of Abraham’s wife and ManoalTs wife, also Elizabeth
and Mary in the New Testament, and other cases.
3. The man or angel or God, whichever it was (for he is
called by each name), that appeared to Mrs. Manoah, advised
her to abstain from strong drink, and to eat no unclean thing.
Very good advice to be observed at any time ; but it seems to
imply that she was in the habit of using such pernicious
articles.
4. And, when her child was born, he was called Samson, and
was remarkable for his great strength, which is said to lie in
his hair. The mighty denizens of the forest interposed no
obstacle to his march; and houses were but playthings, to be
tossed in the air like balls. He is reported to have seized a
lion and slain him when yet a boy, without a weapon of any
kind. It would have been well if this mighty hero had been
present when Jehovah had a battle with the Canaanites (Judg. i.
19) , as he would not probably have been defeated so easily
because they had chariots of iron. Those vehicles of iron
would have been mere straws for Samson. If their respective
histories be true, he excelled Jehovah, both with regard to
strength and courage, in a severe contest.
5. It is stated that, a short time after this young bachelor-
hero had slain the king of the forest, as he was returning home
from a visit to his lady-love, he observed that a swarm of bees
had taken possession of the carcass, and filled it with honey.
114
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Those bees must have been very much less fastidious in their
tastes and habits than the bees of modern times ; for the latter
shun a carcass as instinctively as death.
6. Another remarkable circumstance connected with this case
is, that the long-haired bachelor thrust his hands through the
bees, and tore out the honey, regardless of their stinging mode
of defending their rights. His skin must have been as remark-
able for toughness as his muscles for strength.
7. One of the most cruel, ungodly, and fiendish acts of this
young hero was that of murdering thirty men to get their gar-
ments, as a recompense to those thirt}^ persons who solved his
riddle; thus massacring thirty innocent persons in order to
strip them of their garments, — an unprovoked and wanton
murder. And yet it is declared, u the spirit of God was with
him.” What shocking ideas of Deity !
8. Samson was evidently a u free-lover,” as he had inter-
course with a number of women of doubtful character.
9. His next great feat consisted in chasing and catching three
hundred foxes, and tying their tails together, and making a fire-
brand of them. It must have been a good time to raise poultry
after so many foxes had disappeared, but certainly not before
that event, if foxes were so numerous.
10. It seems strange that these “ tail-bearers ” of fire did
not take to the woods, instead of running through all the fields
in the country, and setting them on fire.
11. The next feat was the breaking of two strong cords,
with which his arms had been bound by three thousand men.
(See Judg. xv. 4). It is difficult to conceive how three thou-
sand men could get to him to tie them, as it is intimated they
did. His mode of being revenged after he had snapped the
cords was to seize the jaw-bone of an ass, and sla}r a thousand
men ; and, after he had killed these thousand men with the
bone, there was enough of it left to contain a considerable
amount of water. It is related that the Lord clave a hollow in
it, and there came out of it water to quench Samson’s thirst.
12. Asses seem to figure quite conspicuously in Bible history.
Sometimes they talk and reason like a Cicero, as in the case of
Balaam; and they serve other important ends in the histories
FOOLISH BIBLE STOBIES.
115
of Abram and Job (who had a thousand) and Samson, and
also that of Jesus Christ, who is represented as riding two at
once. In the hands of Samson the jaw-bone of an ass was
more destructive than a twenty-four pound cannon, besides fur-
nishing him with water sufficient to supply his thirst.
13. Another feat of this young Hercules was that of carrying
away the gate and gate-posts of the city of Gaza, in which the
keepers had shut him up while lodging with a harlot. Most of
his female companions seem to have been licentious characters ;
and yet 4 4 the Lord favored him ’ ’ !
14. It is said 44 the spirit of the Lord moved Samson”
(Judg. xiii. 25). It would seem that the spirit of the Devil
did also ; for he had a terrible propensity for lying. He lied even
to his own wife three or four times. He once deceived her by
telling her that his strength could be overcome by tying him
with green withes ; and yet he snapped them like cobwebs. He
then virtually confessed to her that he had lied, but told her
that new ropes would accomplish the thing ; and yet he was no
sooner bound with them, than he freed his limbs as easily as a
Mon would crawl out of a fish-net. The next experiment in lying
and tying appertained to his hair. He told his sweet Delilah,
that, if she would weave his seven locks of hair into the web
in the loom, he would be as weak as another man ; but he walked
off with the web and the whole accouterments hanging to his
head, as easily as a wolf would with a steel trap dangling to his
foot. TThy did not the hair pull out by the roots? He then
told her the truth, as was assumed, but which was evidently the
biggest falsehood he had uttered, —that his strength lay in his
hair, and that his strength would depart if his hair were to be
shorn off. But if there were any physical strength incorporated
in the hair, so that it would flow into the brain and down into
the muscles when wanted to be used, men would not frequent
barber-shops, as they now do, but let it grow ten feet long if
necessary.
15. The last great act in this drama of physical prowess
was that of overthrowing a house with three thousand people on
the roof. (Modern architecture don’t often produce a roof
large enough or strong enough to sustain three thousand people.
116
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
This feat would require more strength than to conquer the
battalion armed with chariots of iron!
16. And in all this unholy* and wicked business of lying,
cheating, and murdering, u the Lord was with him.” This is a
slanderous imputation upon Divine Perfection and Holiness.
17. No good that we can discover, but much evil, was accom-
plished hy the practical life of this extraordinary man. He
was ostensibly raised up to redeem Israel; and jret, immediately
after his death, the Philistines gained a complete victory over
the Israelites, and took prisoner the ark of the Lord, and re-
duced them to a worse condition than the}T were, in before.
18. We can not escape the conviction that such stories have a
demoralizing effect upon those who read them, and believe they
have the divine approval.
19. For seeming to treat the subject in a spirit of ridicule, I
will cite a Christian writer as authority, who says, “He who
treats absurdities with seriousness lowers his own dignity and
manhood.”
20. Such stories as the foregoing can certainly do nothing
toward improving the morals of the heathen by placing the
book containing it in their hands.
X. Story of Jonah, — Its Absurdities.
The history of Jonah is so much like numerous stories we
find in heathen mythology that we are disposed to class it
with them. Its absurdities are numerous, a few of which we
will point out: —
1. It represents Jonah as claiming to be a Hebrew; but as
it sa}’s nothing about the Jews or Hebrews, and treats entirely
of the heathen or Gentiles, that is probabty its source, and it
was perhaps intended as a fable.
2. The ship he boarded, when making his escape, was a
heathen vessel, which implies that he had some affinity for that*
class of people.
3. It seems ver}T singular, that if Jonah did not believe Jeho-
vah to be a mere local personal deity, rather than the Infinite
and Omnipresent God, he should entertain the thought of
running away fiom him or escaping from his presence by flight.
FOOLISH BIBLE STOBIES.
117
4. The heathen who had charge of the vessel were evidently
possessed of more humanity and more mercy than either Jeho-
vah or the leading ijaen of Israel, who seem to have made it a
point to kill nearly all the heathen they could lay their hands
on; as did Abram, Moses, Joshua, &c. For it is stated, that
after they had cast lots to find who was the cause of the storm
which overtook the ship, and in this way discovered it was
Jonah, they strove with all their might to get the vessel to the
shore, rather than resort to the desperate expedient of throwing
Jonah overboard. This bespeaks for these heathen a feeling of
mercy and humanity.
5. We learn by the language these heathen used in their
prayer to stop the storm, “We beseech thee, O Lord,” &c.,
that they believed in one supreme God. Where, then, is the
truth of the claim of the Jews that they alone believed in one
God, or the unity of the Godhead? In this way their own
Bible often proves this claim was false; that the nations they
had intercourse with believed in one supreme and overruling
God.
6. It is stated, that after Jonah was thrown overboard, and
was swallowed by a fish, he prayed to the Lord. How was
this discovered? Did he pray loud enough to be heard through
the sides of the whale ? or did the fish open its mouth for his
accommodation ?
7. As for the prayer, it appears to have been made up of
scraps selected from the Psalms of David without much con-
nection, or relevancy to the case.
8. It is stated that the Lord spake to the fish, and it vomited
Jonah upon the dry land. It must have been a very singular
fish to understand Hebrew or any human language.
9. In another respect the whale must have been a peculiar
one, or of peculiar construction. The throat of an ordinary
whale is about the diameter of a man’s arm. It must therefore
have been very much stretched to swallow Jonah, or Jonah
must have been very much compressed and elongated.
10. The gourd that sheltered Jonah must also have been of a
peculiar species to have a vine that could grow several yards in
one night, and stand erect so as to hold the gourd in a position
118
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
to shelter the prophet; and the gourd would have to be as large
as a cart or locomotive, or it would soon cease to afford him
shade.
11. Jonah seems to have been a very proud and selfish man,
with but little of the feeling of mercy, as he preferred that the
whole nation of Ninevites should be destroyed rather than that
his prediction should not be fulfilled, for he became very angry
when he found the Lord was going to spare them.
12. The reason the Lord assigns for sparing Nineveh is a
very sensible one, —because “ there are more than threescore
thousand persons that can not discern between their right and
their left hand.” This is certainly very good reasoning; but
why did he not think of this when millions of innocent persons
perished in the act of drowning the whole human race, except-
ing four men and four women, or when Sodom and Gomorrah
were swallowed up, or when seventy thousand were killed for a
sin committed b}r David, or in the numerous cases in which a
war of extermination was carried on against whole nations,
with the order to slay men, women, and children, and u leave
nothing alive that breathes 99 ? Why such partiality? But this
is one of the two thousand Bible inconsistencies.
13. This is a very poor stor}', with a very bad moral. It
indicates fickleness, short-sightedness, and partiality on the part
of Jehovah ; and selfishness and bad temper on the part of his
prophet.
14. There are other absurdities in this story which we will
bring to view by a few brief questions.
15. Why did Jehovah care any thing about the salvation or
welfare of Nineveh, a heathen city, when usually, instead of
laboring to save the heathen, he was plotting their destruction?
1G. What put the thought into the heads of the mariners, that
the storm was caused by the misconduct of some person on board ?
Can we suppose they ever knew of such a case? If the miscon-
duct of human beings could produce storms or a disturbance of
the elements, the world would be cursed by a perpetual hurri-
cane.
17. We are told the sailors cast lots to ascertain who was the
cause of the storm. Rather a strange way of investigating the
cause of natural events.
FOOLISH BIBLE STOBIES.
119
18. Is it not strange that Jehovah would bring on a violent
storm on Jonah’s account, and continue it for hours, and let him
• sleep during the time ; and still stranger that Jonah was so in-
different that he could sleep in such a storm?
19. Jonah must have been the most considerate and merciful
sinner ever reported in history to propose himself that he should
be thrown overboard as a means of allaying the storm, and sav-
ing a set of gambling heathen. What a wonderful freak of
mercy and justice ! But it seems to have been all exhausted on
the mariners, so that he had none left for the poor Ninevites ;
for he became very angry when he found Jehovah was not
going to destroy them, the innocent and guilty and all together.
This was inconsistent, to say the least.
20. What must have been the astonishment of the crew of the
hundreds of ships sailing on the same sea to observe a sudden
storm to arise and stop without any natural cause ! And when
they afterwards learned that the whole thing was brought about
by the misconduct of one man in one of the vessels, perhaps
hundreds of miles distant, they must have abandoned all idea
of ever looking again for natural causes for storms after that
occurrence. How repressing such events would be to the
growth and cultivation of the intellect, and the study of the
natural sciences!
21. How could Jonah remain three days in the whale’s
stomach without being digested, as fish have astonishing
digestive powers? And, if he were not digested, both he and
the fish must have been extremely hungry at the end of the three
days’ fast.
22. As a fish large enough to swallow Jonah could not swim
through the shoal-water to reach the land, it becomes an inter-
esting query to know how it got Jonah on to u the dr}" land.”
It must have required the use of a powerful emetic to inspire
the fish with force sufficient to throw him fifty or a hundred feet.
23. Is it not strange that Jonah’s message to the Ninevites
should have had such a marvelous effect upon the whole city,
when it was evidently delivered in a language that none of them
understood ?
24. We are told the king issued orders for everybody,
120
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
including men, women and children, and beasts, to stop eating
and drinking, and to be covered with sackcloth. What sin
can we suppose the beasts had committed that they must be
doomed to starve, and be covered with sackcloth as an emblem
of repentance ? It must have required an enormous amount of
sackcloth to cover two millions of people, and probably as many
domestic animals. Where it all came from, the Lord Jehovah
only knows. And it seems singular that all of the animals
should stand quietly while such an uncouth covering was thrown
upon them.
25. It is also difficult to comprehend why a nation of people,
who probably never heard of Jehovah before, should all repent in
sackcloth and ashes. It is the most effective missionary work
we have ever read of. In modern times it requires two hundred
missionaries a whole centmy to make half that many converts.
26. But the most conclusive argument against the truth of the
stor}T is found in the fact that it is falsified by the testimony of
histoiy. According to her history by Diodorus, Nineveh was
destroyed by Arbaces sixteen years before Jonah’s time.
27. I have noticed this senseless storey at some length, because
Christian writers have invested it with great importance, and be-
cause it is indorsed by nearly all the New-Testament writers.
Even Christ himself indorses it, and compares Jonah’s case to
his. Their extreme ignorance is evinced by the foregoing expo-
sition.
28. Several similar stories are found in heathen mythology, a
few of which we will briefly sketch here. The Hindoo sacred
book, the Purans, states that Chrishna was swallowed by a croco-
dile, and, after remaining three da}rs in its stomach, was thrown
upon dry land, much to his relief and also to that of the crocodile.
A Grecian demi-God (Hercules), according to Gales, was
swallowed by a dog, and remained in his stomach three days.
But the stoiy entitled to the premium is one preserved in the
legends of some of the Eastern islanders. A man, for some
misdemeanor on a voyage across the Indus, was thrown over-
board, and swallowed by a shark ; but, as the fish still followed
the vessel, it was finally caught, and search made for the man,
when, to the surprise of the whole crew, he was found sitting
BIBLE PROPHECIES NOT FULFILLED.
121
bolt upright, pla3Ting the tune of “ Old Hundred ” on a fiddle he
had in his possession when he went down the throat of the sea-
monster. This was rather a pleasant way of putting in the
time. Jonah, it appears, was not so fortunate as to have a fiddle
in his possession while in the stomach of the whale. The fore-
going ten stories, from that of the serpent to Jonah, have been
for hundreds of years printed by the thousand, struck off in
almost every known human language, and sent off by ship-loads
to almost every nation on the globe, to be placed in the hands of
the heathen as being productions of Infinite Wisdom, the inspira-
tions of an All-ioise God, and calculated to enlighten them and
improve their morals. What sublime nonsense ! what egregious
folly ! And what a deplorable and sorrowful mistake has been
thus committed by the blinded disciples of the Christian faith!
CHAPTER XIX.
BIBLE PROPHECIES NOT FULFILLED.
Having devoted a chapter to this subject in “The World’s
Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” we shall treat the subject but briefly
in this work. The Old Testament has been thoroughly searched
for prophecies, and more than a hundred texts selected, by vari-
ous Christian writers, and assumed to be prophetic of some
future event. But a critical and impartial investigation of the
subject will show that not one of them is, strictly speaking, a
prophecy ; but most of them refer to events either in the past, or
events naturally suggested by the circumstances under which
the writer was placed. And in many cases the text has no
reference whatever to the event which Bible commentators
assume they refer to. In treating the subject briefly, we will
show, —
1. That if one-fourth of the texts from Genesis to Revela-
tion were prophecies, and it could be shown that every one of
them has been fulfilled to the letter, it would not prove that there
was any divine inspiration or divine aid in the matter; because
122
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
many facts show that prophecy, or the power to discover future
events, is a natural, and not a supernatural, gift.
2. Many cases are reported in history of the prediction of
future events by pagan or heathen seers, and also by persons
not claiming to be inspired nor even religious. I will cite a few
cases: Josephine, wife of Napoleon, relates that she had all
the important events of her future life pointed out to her by an
ignorant, illiterate fortune-teller, long before they occurred;
such as her marriage, her unhapp}r life, and the death of her
husband, — all of which was fulfilled to the letter. An astrologer
predicted the great fire in London. Rousseau foretold the
French Revolution. Cicero made a remarkable prophecy, which
was realized in the discovery of America and the history of
George Washington by consulting the Sibylline oracles. These,
and many other cases that might be cited, furnish satisfactory
evidence that the capacity for foretelling the occurrence of
future events is a natural and inherent power of the human
mind, and hence can do nothing toward proving the divine
origin of any religion, or the divine illumination of any prophet.
Therefore any further argument in the case would be superflu-
ous. We will only briefly review a few of the Jewish prophe-
cies (or texts assuming to be prophecies) to show that the Jew-
ish nation occupied a lower moral plane, and possessed less of
the gift of prophec}r, than some of the contemporary heathen na-
tions. Hence Christian writers are wrong in assuming that the
Jews alone possessed this power, while they possessed it in a
less degree than some of the Oriental prophets. Prophecies
(assumed to be) relating to Babylon, relating to Damascus, re-
lating to Tyre, relating to the dispersion of the Jews, relating
to the advent of Christ, &c., have been quoted time and again
by Christian writers and clergj’men, and dwelt upon at great
length in attempts to show their fulfillment, in order to deduce
therefrom the argument and conclusion that the Jewish nation
wore divinely commissioned to furnish the world with a true sys-
tem of religion and morals. But we are prepared to show that
every one of these prophecies so called has utterly failed of
any fulfillment in the sense that writers and preachers assume.
As it would require a large work to treat this subject fully, we
BIBLE PROPHECIES HOT FULFILLED.
123
shall only briefly refer to one or two cases as samples of the
whole. As Babjdon and Tyre are the most frequently referred
to, and are regarded as the strongest cases, our attention will be
confined to them. Relative to Babylon, Isaiah says, “ It shall
not be dwelt in from generation to generation ; neither shall the
Arabian pitch his tent there” (Isa. xiii. 19) : but he says,
“ It shall be inhabited by wild beasts of the desert and satyrs
and dragons,” —not one of which predictions has ever been real-
ized. It is still inhabited, though its name has been changed to
Hillah, which has now a population of about nine thousand.
So far from the u Arabian not pitching his tent there,” it is the
very thing they have done, and are now doing daily. Mr. Lay-
ard, who recently visited the place, says, in his work (“Nineveh
and Babylon”), “The Arab settlement showed the activity of a
hive of bees.” What a singular rebuff to Isaiah’s prophecy,
and also to that of Jeremiah, who says it should become a “ per-
petual desolation ” (xxv. 12), and that it should not be dwelt in
by man nor the son of man! (Jer. 1. 40.) Isaiah declared,
“ Her days shall not be prolonged ” (Isa. xiii). And thus the
prophecies have all failed which refer to Babylon. Speaking of
Tyre, Ezekiel says, it should be taken by Nebuchadnezzar, and
trodden down by his chariots and horses ; and 6 6 thou shalt be
built no more, and thou shalt never be found again.” And yet
Tyre never was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, nor by any
power; and, although it has suffered like other Eastern cities, it is
still a flourishing city with a population of about five thousand.
St. Jerome spoke of it in the fourth century as being “the most
noble and beautiful city in Phoenicia.” And this was more than
a thousand years after Ezekiel’s maledictions were pronounced
against it, which declared it should be destroyed, and never be
rebuilt. True, it has been partially destroyed several times, —
and what ancient city has not? —but it has been rebuilt as often.
We have, then, before us two illustrative cases of the failures of
Jewish prophecies pronounced against neighboring cities and
kingdoms, probably prompted by a spirit of envy and animosity
because they had either overruled the Jewish nation, and sub-
jected it to their power, or outstripped it in temporal prosperity.
The Jewish prophets were continually fulminating their thunders
124
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
and curses upon those powers and principalities which had over-
powered them, and held them in subjection. This was very
natural; and occasionally an unpropitious prediction may have
been realized. But it is a remarkable fact, that more than forty
disastrous events, which the Jewish prophets declared the Lord
would inflict upon Eg}^pt (the nation they so much contemned
and envied because it held them in slavery for four hundred
years), have never been realized in the history or experience of
that nation. Some of these cases are noticed in “ The World’s
Sixteen Crucified Saviors,’’ as also the prophecies and failures
in regard to Damascus and other cities, to which the reader is
referred for a further elucidation of this subject.
CHAPTER XX.
MIRACLES, ERRONEOUS BELIEF IN.
Having treated the subject of miracles at some length in
“The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” we shall give it but
a brief notice in this work, and will comprehend the whole thing
in a few points.
1. The histor}r of miraculous achievements by Gods and men
form a very large chapter in the “ inspired writings ” of nearly
all the ancient religious sj'stems which have flourished in the
world ; and to notice all these cases would require volumes enough
to make a library.
2. Almost the only evidence we have in any case of the actual
performance of a miracle is the report of the writer who re-
lates it.
3. St. Chrysostom declares that “miracles are not designed
for men of sense, but on!}" for sluggish minds.” It will be un-
derstood, therefore, that what we write here on the subject will
not be designed for persons of sense, but only for the ignorant
and superstitious.
4. Many things in the past which were set down as miracles
are now known to be the result of natural causes ; such as the
ERRONEOUS BELIEF IN MIRACLES.
125
rainbow, most cases of sickness, and, in fact, nearly every phe-
nomenon of nature. And, as every age develops new light on
natural causes, it has made the list of miracles not alread}7 ex-
plained so small, that we may reasonably conclude that they
will all yet be explained and understood in this light, excepting
those fabricated without any basis of truth.
5. As God appears to have regulated every thing in the be-
ginning by fixed laws, if he should break one of those laws by
the performance of a miracle, it would throw every thing into
chaos and confusion, and prove that he is not a God of order
and stability.
6. If God, as we are told, made every thing perfect, then the
performance of a miracle must make them imperfect, or prove
that they have always been imperfect.
7. The performance of a miracle would prove that God is an
imperfect being in not having every thing regulated by the laws
of nature.
8. If the performance of miracles can authenticate the truth
of one religion, then it must prove the truth of all religions ; for
all report miracles of some kind, and furnish, in most cases, the
same kind of evidence that these miracles were performed.
9. There is not a miracle related in either the Old or New
Testament that has not a parallel reported in the Bibles or
sacred writings of the Orientals; such as curing the halt and
blind, raising the dead, crossing streams in a miraculous man-
ner, &c. Many cases are reported of the Hindoo Savior and
Son of God, Chrishna, raising dead persons who had been
drowned, murdered, or died a natural death. According to
Tacitus, Vespasian performed a number of miraculous cures;
such as curing the lame, restoring sight to the blind, &c., just
as is related of Jesus. According to Josephus, Alexander with
his army passed through the Sea of Pamphylia in the same mir-
aculous manner that Moses did through the Red Sea. As
Alexander’s army was engaged in the work of human butchery,
we may assume that, if God could have had an}’ thing to do with
it, he would have embraced the opportunity to drown them, and
wash them all away.
10. Jewish Miracles.—The Jewish Talmud speaks of birds
126
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
so large that the}7, darkened the sun, and shut out the light of
the sun from the earth. Probably they supposed, like Moses,
that nearly all the earth was located between Dan and Beersheba.
Another kind of bird was’so tall, that, when walking in a river
seventy feet deep, the water onty reached its knees. This is a
tall story; but it should be remembered that it is related by the
same people who tell us about sticks being converted into ser-
pents, water into blood, dust into lice, &c., and a man (Sam-
son) overturning a house with several thousand people in it, &c.
Hence all these as stories are equalty reliable or unreliable.
11. Mahomeclan Miracles.—Mahomedans bear off the palm
in miraculous prodigies. For instance, a cock is spoken of
so large that the distance between its feet and head was five
hundred da}V journey. What a pit}" Barnum could not obtain
it! Another example: an angel so large that the distance
between his eyes was seventy thousand days’ journey. The
head of this tall ghost must have been among the planets. The
earth would have been too small to furnish him with a seat; and
the attempt to use it for that purpose would probably have
thrown it out of its orbit.
12. Christian Miracles. — The early Christians seem to have
had the whole miracle-making machinery of heaven under their
control. Their miracles were prodigious and numerous. They
claimed they could cast out devils, call the dead from their
graves, and make ghosts walk about either end up. We are
told that when a Mr. Huntingdon was reduced to great poverty
and suffering, and prayed for dime assistance, fishes came
out of the water to him, and larks and leather breeches from
heaven, to serve as food and clothing. It is difficult to conceive
how leather breeches came to be stored in heaven. With these
few specimens, selected at random, we will stop. They are too
large even to excite our marvelousness. The most ignorant
and superstitious nations have always had the longest creeds
• and the tallest miracles.
VS. We have stated that the only evidence of the perform-
ance of any miracle in most cases is the simple narration of it
by the writer who records it. The Roman Catholics, however,
claim to have the testimon}T of thousands of reliable witnesses
to attest to the performance of some extraordinary miracles
ERRONEOUS BELIEF IN MIRACLES.
-
127
which they have reported the history of; such as a picture
of the Virgin Mary, hanging on the walls of the church,
opening and shutting its eyes daily for six or seven months,
which they declare was witnessed by sixty thousand people, in-
cluding Pope, cardinals, bishops, &c.,—leading men of the
Church.
14. There is as much evidence that Esculapius raised Hypo-
litus from the dead (as related by the Roman historian Pausa-
nias), as that Elijah or Christ raised the dead; as much evidence
that the serpent’s egg inclosed in gold (as related by Pliny in his
“ Arguinum Ovum”) swam up stream when thrown into the
river, as that Elisha raised an ax to the surface of the water by
casting a stick into it (2 Kings vi. 6) ; as much evidence that
Mahomet opened a fountain of water in the end of his little fin-
ger, as that Samson found a spring of water in the jaw-bone of
an ass ; as much evidence that Mahomet’s camel tallied to him,
as that Balaam’s ass was endowed with human speech; and as
much evidence that Esculapius cured the blind with spittle, as
that Christ performed such cures. All stand upon a level; all
lack the proof.
15. Ilere let it be noted that many of the miracles recorded
in the ^Christian Bible are susceptible of an explanation upon
natural principles ; such as the shadow going back on the dial
of Ahaz, as the phenomenon has been witnessed in some of the
Eastern countries of the shadows appearing to recede, when
the sun is near the solstice, once in the forenoon and once in the
afternoon. The story of the devils entering the hogs may be
explained by assuming the devils *to have been frogs ; for they
are described as being like frogs. (See Rev. xvi. 13.)
The resurrection of Lazarus may be explained by assuming
him to have been in a state of coma, or trance ; for Christ once
declared, u This sickness is not unto death, ” but u he sleepeth”
(John xi). The bloody sweat of Christ, and his transfigura-
tion, can also be explained on natural principles; also Paul’s
conversion, and his miraculous cures with a handkerchief. Dr.
Xewton, the great healer, has cured hundreds of cases in a sim-
ilar manner. And the time will come when all real occurrences,
now called miracles, will be accounted for, and understood as
the operation of natural causes.
128
TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XXI.
ERRORS OF THE BIBLE IN FACTS AND FIGURES,
A spiritual or metaphorical interpretation, if allowable in
any case, can not avail any thing towards either removing,
explaining, or mitigating, in the least degree, the numerous
palpable Bible errors represented by figures. u Figures never
lie” and admit of no construction. The almost innumerable
errors, therefore, of this character which abound in the Bible
utterty and for ever prostrate it as a work possessing any
authority, reliability, or credibility in matters of history, science,
or even theolog}r. Bible Tvriters, when they have occasion to
refer to numbers which they are interested in making appear
veiy large, seem to make almost a lawless use of figures. I
will present some examples, stated in brief language, com-
mencing with the Pentateuch. The author of these five books,
in speaking of the genealogy, population, armies, &c., of his
own tribe, makes use of figures which are not only incredible,
but utterty impossible. The number of valiant fighting men,
for example, among the Israelites, is frequently stated to be
about six hundred thousand, and never less. (See Exod. xii.
and xxxviii. ; Num. xxvi., &c.) This number, as Bishop
Colenso demonstrates, reaches far beyond the utmost limits of
truth. If the regular arm}' had been six hundred thousand,
then the whole population (women and children included) could
not have been less than two millions, — a number which many
facts, cited by the Bible writer himself, demonstrate to be im-
possible. I would ask, in the first place, how Moses could
address all this immense congregation at once, as he is often
represented as doing. (See Ex. xxiv. 3; Lev. xxiv. 15;
Xuin. xiv. 7, &c.) Joshua makes cc all the congregation ” to
ERRORS OF TEE BIBLE.
129
include women and children. But how could Moses address
this vast multitude of people, some of whom must have been at
least ten miles distant, unless he used a speaking-trumpet or a
telephone, neither of which, however, had then come to light?
The writer of Deuteronomy says,46 Moses spake unto all Israel ”
(Deut. i. 1). But not one in a hundred could have heard it:
therefore it was very nearly 46 labor lost.” And Joshua says
Moses wrote out his commandments, and he read them 44 before
all the congregation of Israel” (Josh. viii. 35). But it would
have required a voice as loud as thunder to make “all” of
them hear. And it should be borne in mind that the people
on these occasions were assembled in the tabernacle, — as we
infer from many texts, — a building one hundred and eight yards
square, and capable of holding about five thousand people,
which would be just one to four thousand of the congregation;
so there were five thousand people inside, and one million nine
hundred and ninety-five thousand outside. These last, we are
told, occupied the outer court, which was just eighteen feet wide.
This would .place the most distant hearers twenty miles off.
How comforting the thought, that, when Moses called them to
the temple to worship (see Josh. viii. 35), the}" could get within
twenty miles of him and 4 4 the tabernacle of the Lord? ’ ! The
Lord had built a tabernacle for them to worship in, but only one
or two in six thousand could get inside of it. This small num-
ber only could enjoy seeing and hearing Moses and the Lord.
The rest — one million nine hundred and ninety-five thousand —
were outside, waiting for admission. Bishop Colenso estimates
the size of the camp of Israel at about twelve miles square.
This camp was situated in a desert of Sinai for at least a year;
and the business of keeping this camp in order, waiting upon
the people, and removing also, the remains of the daily sacrifice
of two hundred thousand oxen, sheep, &c., devolved upon three
priests,—Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar. It would be quite an
improvement of the sacerdotal order if the priests of to-day
could be subjected occasionally to some such healthy exercise ;
but the}" have managed to get the rule reversed. They now
have the people to wait upon them. But those three priests of
tbe Israelites must have achieved a herculean task to wait each
180
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
one upon three hundred and thirty-three thousand people daily,
and, after preparing their food outside the camp, travel twelve
miles to supply each one of this vast multitude with food and
water. If they carried provision for only one person at a time,
they would have had to perform this journey of twelve miles
five thousand five hundred times an hour, which would have
required them to be rather fleet on foot. And, besides the
labor of carrying away ever}" day, to the distance of six or seven
miles, five hundred cart-loads of the offal of the dead animals,
there would be at least one pound of victuals to be carried to
each person, making, in the aggregate, five thousand five hun-
dred pounds. They must have enjoyed good health, if abun-
dant exercise would produce it. They could not have been
much troubled with dyspepsia or liver-complaint, as many of
that order are nowadays.
1. We are told that Moses gave notice to the children of
Israel at midnight, that they must take their departure from
Egypt the next morning for the promised land (Exod. xii.) ;
but, if they constituted the immense number represented, they
would have made a column two hundred miles long, arranging
them five abreast, so it would have taken several days for all to
get started. How, then, could they all start the next morning ?
And how did they keep their two millions of sheep and cattle
alive for several days while passing over a sandy desert too
poor to produce dog-fennel? And it is strange how the whole
tribe of Israelites, if two millions in number, could live forty
years in a wild, barren desert, and keep their immense flocks
and herds alive.
2. The number of first-born male children over a month old,
on a certain occasion, is set down at twenty-two thousand two
hundred and ninety-three, which would make about eighty-eight
children for each mother. This was 44 replenishing 99 rapidly.
But their little tents, like the tabernacle of the Lord, would not
accommodate one-fourth of that number. This would necessi-
tate the mothers to leave most of their children 44 out in the
cold.”
The number of the children of Israel that went down to
Egypt, according to Exod. i. 5, was seventy souls; and they
ZEROES OF THE BIBLE.
131
remained there during four generations, represented by Levi,
Kokatk, Amram, and Moses, making a period (as marginal
notes state) of two hundred and fifteen years; though Exod.
xii. 40, gives it at four hundred and thirty years. But this is
another case of incredible exaggeration. Four generations of
ordinary length, in that age, would not exceed the marginal
calculation of two hundred and fifteen years ; and for those
seventy souls to increase to two millions in that short period of
time, of four generations, would have required each mother to
have had twelve or fifteen children at a birth.
3. Dan, in the first generation, had but one son (Gen. xlvi.
23) ; yet in the fourth generation he had increased to sixty-two
thousand seven hundred, or, according to Num. xxvi. 43, to
sixty-four thousand, which would have required each son and
grandson to have had about eighty children apiece. This would
have been u multiplying and replenishing ” on a rapid scale.
4. Aaron and his two sons had to make all the offerings, and
on an altar only nine feet square; and an offering had to be
made at the birth of every child, which would require about
five hundred sacrifices daily; and then there were thirteen cities
where these offerings had to be made, and only three priests to
doit. (See Lev. i. 11.) And, besides, the priests had to
eat a large portion of the burnt offerings (see Num. xviii. 10) ;
and, as these offerings consisted of five hundred lambs and
pigeons, it would subject them to the task of eating enormous
quantities daily.
5. At the second passover, an offering had to be made for
every family (Exod. xii.), which would require the slaughter
of about one hundred and fifty thousand lambs. The three
priests had to sprinkle the blood of these lambs ; and it had to
be done in about two hours (1 Chron. xxx. 35). The lambs
had to be sacrificed at the rate of about one thousand two hun-
dred and fifty a minute, and each priest had to sprinkle the
blood of more than four hundred lambs per minute with their
own hands, which would make the affair rather a bloody busi-
ness, if it were not wholly impossible, and therefore an incredible
story.
6. If we could credit the statements of u the inspired writer ”
132
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
of the book of Numbers (see chap. Xxxi.), we should have to
believe twelve thousand Israelites, in a war with the Midianites,
after selecting out thirty-two thousand young damsels, killed
forty-eight thousand men, eighty thousand women, and twenty
thousand boys; burned all their cities, and captured all their
stock, amounting to eight hundred and eight thousand, and all
this without the loss of a single man. Each Israelite would
have had to conquer seventy-five resisting enemies, including
men, women, children, and stock. It is a story too incredible
for serious reflection. We are told that the clothing of the
Israelites lasted forty years “ without waxing old” (see Deut.
xxix. 5), —another story too incredible to be entertained for a
moment.
7. In Deuteronomy the priests are always called sons of Levi,
or u Levites ; ” but, in the other books of the Pentateuch, they
are always called “ the sons of Aaron,” which is an evidence
they were not written by the same hand. Contradictions. Ac-
cording to Exod. xviii. 25, Moses appointed judges over Israel
before the giving forth of the law; but (Deut. i. 6) we are
told that the appointment took place after the law was issued at
Sinai.
8. According to Deuteronom}", chap, x., u the Lord separated
the tribe of Levi ” after the death of Aaron ; but, according to
Numbers, chap, iii., the separation took place before his death.
9. According to Exodus, God instituted the sabbath because
he rested on that da}T; but, according to Deuteronomy, it was
because he brought the Israelites out of Eg}Tpt “ b}T a stretched-
out arm.” In Deuteronomy, chap, xiv., every creeping thing
that flieth is declared to be unclean, and is forbidden to be eaten;
but in Leviticus, chap, xi., every creeping thing, including four
kinds of locusts, is allowed, and is prescribed as a part of tlieir
food.
10. In Exodus, chap, vi., God is represented as sa}ing, “By
my name Jehovah was I not known to them ” (the patriarchs).
But he was mistaken ; for that name occurs frequentty in Gen-
esis. In 1 Sam. chap, viii., we are told the name of Samuel’s
first-born was Joel; and the name of his second, Abiah : but in
Chronicles, vi. 2«s., we are told the name of Samuel’s eldest son
was Vaslini. Which is right?
ERRORS OF THE BIBLE.
133
11. Bad Bible Morals.—Persons mutilated by accident, or
otherwise in helpless condition, were excluded from the congre-
gation of the Lord; while the guilty culprits who caused this
mutilation were allowed free access to the holy sanctuary. (See
Ley. xxi.) IVe consider this bad morality. Innocent base-
born children were also excluded from the temple, while the
guilty parents were allowed free admission.
12. By the law of Moses and the will of God, as is claimed,
parents were required to stone rebellious children to death;
and yet the parents were often the cause of this rebellious dis-
position, and tenfold more guilty than the children, having cor-
rupted them by bad influences. (See Deut. xxi.) This is a
specimen of Bible justice and Bible morality.
13. The Jews not Civilized. —The Lord’s chosen people pos-
sessed so little of the element of civilization, they had to go to
the King of Tyre to hire artisans and skilled workmen to build
their temple. (See 2 Chron. ii. 3, and 1 Kings v. 6.)
14. It is stated that it took one hundred and fifty-three thou-
sand men seven years to build Solomon’s temple, — and heathen
at that. (See 2 Chron. ii. 17,18.) Strange, indeed, when it was
only a hundred and ten feet long, thirty-six feet wide, and fifty-
five feet high ! (1 Kings vi. 2.) Some of our modern churches
are much larger buildings, and generally erected in less than a
year by less than a dozen workmen. It is certainly very dam-
aging to the exalted pretensions of u the Lord’s peculiar
people” that they possessed minds and intelligence so far
below the heathen, that no workmen could be found amongst
them, and they had consequently to go to these same heathen
to hire workmen to build the Lord’s house. Such facts sink
the reputation both of them and their God.
134
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XXII.
-
BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS — TWO HUNDRED AND
SEVENTY-SEVEN.
It is difficult to conceive how any real benefit or any reliable
instruction can be derived from a book which contains state-
ments with respect to doctrines or matters of fact that are con-
tradicted on the next page, or in some other portion of the book ;
because it not only confuses the mind of the reader, but renders
it impossible for him to know, as he reads a statement in one
chapter of the book, that it is not contradicted and nullified in
some other chapter, until he has sacrificed sufficient time to
commit the whole book to memory: and but few persons have
ever achieved that herculean task. Hence it must be an unrelia-
ble book as an authority. We know it has been stated by man}7
admirers of the 4 4 Holy Book ’ ’ that it contains no conflicting
statements when properly understood. But who is to decide
when it is properly understood? Here, again, is a conflict of
ideas. All words have certain specific meanings attached to
them by common consent. And certainly an}7 man of good
sense would not attempt to attach any other meaning*to them,
without stating the fact and clearly defining his new meaning, if
he expects any reader to understand him, or any two readers to
understand him alike; and, if he writes without giving a hint
that he has invented or employed new meanings for the words
he uses, we are compelled to assume that his words and lan-
guage have the ordinary and universally adopted signification.
With this view of the case (as the writers of the Bible have
given no hint that they employed new meanings), it is false to
assume or say there are no contradictions in the Bible, when, if
we accept language with its ordinary and established significa-
BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.
135
tion, an honest and unbiased investigation will show that it
contains several thousand statements which conflict with each
other or with science, histoiy, or moral truth, and hence must
be totally unreliable as an authority. To prove this, we will
now enter upon the unpleasant task of arranging and classifying
a large number of these contradictions found both in the Old
and New Testaments.
I. Contradictions in Matters of Fact and in Doctrines.
1. Was it death to eat the forbidden fruit? Yes: “In the day thou eatest thereof,
thou shalt surely die” (G-en. ii. 17). No: “And all the days of Adam were nine hun-
dred and thirty years ” (Gen. v. 5).
2. Can a woman, according to scripture, ever speak on religious matters ? Yes: “ The
same man had four daughters—virgins — who did prophesy” (Acts xxi. 9). No: “I
suffer not a woman to teach, hut to be in silence ” (1 Tim. ii. 12).
3. Should a man ever laugh? Yes : “ There is a time to weep and a time to laugh ”
(Eccles. iii. 4). No: “Sorrow is better than laughter” (Eccles.viii.3). Yes: “I com-
mend mirth, because a man hath no better thing under the sun than to eat, drink, and be
merry ” (Eccles. viii. 15).
4. What is our moral duty relative to trimming the hair on our heads? “ There shall
no razor come upon his head, ... let the locks of his head grow ” (Num. vi. 5). “ If a
man have long hair, it is a shame unto him ” (1 Cor. xi. 14).
5. Is there any remedy for a fool? Yes: “ The rod of correction will drive it far from
him ” (Prov. xxii. 15). No: “ Though thou bray a fool in a mortar, yet will his foolish-
ness not depart from him ” (Prov. xxvi. 6).
6. Should we pay a fool in his own coin? Yes: “ Answer a fool according to his
folly ” (Prov. xxvi. 5). No : “ Answer not a fool according to his folly ” (Prov. xxvi. 6).
7. Is man’s life threescore years and ten? Yes: “The days of our years are three-
score years and ten ” (Ps. xc. 10). No : “ His days shall be a hundred and twenty years ”
(Gen. vi. 3).
8. Is it desirable to be tempted? Yes: “ Count it all joy to 'be tempted ” (Jas. i. 2).
No: “ Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation ” (Matt. xxvi. 41).
9. Which is the tempter, God or the devil? The devil: The devil tempted Christ and
Judas. (See Matt. iv. 1). God: God tempted David (2 Sam. xxiv. 1).
10. Does the Lord ever tempt man? No: “ Neither tcmpteth he any man” (Jas. i.
13). Yes: “And God did tempt Abraham” (Gen. xxii. 1). No: “He blinded their
eyes, and hardened their hearts ” (John xii. 40).
11. Can God be tempted? No: “ God can not be tempted ” (Jas. i. 13). Yes: “ They
have tempted me, the Lord, ten times ” (Num. xiv. 22).
12. Is any thing good? Yes: Every thing (1 Tim. iv. 4). No : “ Every thing is cor-
rupt” (Gen. vi. 12).
13. How many Gods are there? One: “ The Lord our God is the Lord” (Deut. vi.
4). Several: “ Let us make man in our own image ” (Gen. i. 26). Three: “ There are
three that bear record in heaven, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ” (1 John v. 7).
14. Is God omnipresent? Yes: David declares the Lord is everywhere, in heaven
and earth, and even in hell (Ps. cxxxix. 7). No : “ The Lord came down to see Sodom ”
(Gen. xviii. 20). Yes: “There is no place where the workers of iniquity can hide
themselves ” (Job xxxiv. 2z). No: “ Adam and Eve hid themselves from the presence
of the Lord” (Gen. iii. 8). No: “Cain fled from the presence of God” (Gen. iv. 16;.
Yes : “ Man can not get out of his presence ” (Ps. cxxxix. 7).
15. Is God omniscient? Yes : “He knoweth the hearts of all men” (Acts i. 24). No :
“ The Lord had to prove the Israelites, and also Abraham, to know what was in their
hearts” (Deut. viii. and Gen. xxii.).
16. Is God omnipotent? Yes: “With God all things are possible” (Matt. xix. 26).
No: “ He could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because their chariots were
made of iron ” (Judg. i. 19).
17. Is God unchangeable ? Yes: With him “ there is no variableness, neither shadow
of turning; I change not” (Mai. iii. 6). No: “And the Lord repented of the evil he
said he would indict upon the Ninevites ” (Jon. iii. 10).
18. Is God a merciful being? Yes: “ The Lord is very pitiful, and full of mercy”
(Jas. v. 11). No: “ I will not pity nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy” (Jer. xiii.
136
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
14). Yes: “Ilis tender mercies are over all his works ” (Ps. cxlv. 9). No: “Have no
pity on them, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling” (Sam. xv. 2). Yes:
“ His mercy cndureth for ever ” (1 Chron. xvi. 34). No: “ I have taken away my loving-
kindness and mercies ” (Jer. xvi. 3).
19. Does God even* hate? No: “ God is love ” (1 John iv. 16). Yes: “ He hated his
own inheritance” (Ps. cvi. 40).
20. Is God’s anger perpetual? No: “His anger endureth but a moment”(Ps.xxx.
5). Yes : “ Mine anger shall burn for ever” (Jer. xvii. 4).
21. Is God the author of evil? Yes: “I make peace, and I create evil ” (Isa. xlv. 7).
No : “ Out of his mouth proceeds not evil ” (Lam. iii. 38).
22. Is God in favor of war? No : “He is the God of peace.” Yes: “The Lord is a
man of war” (Exod. xv. 3). No: “He is not the author of confusion, but of peace”
(1 Cor. xir. 33).
23. Is the spirit of God for peace? Yes: It is “love, peace, joy, gentleness, and
goodness” (Gal. v. 22). No: “The spirit of the Lord came upon him, and he slew a
thousand men” (Judg. xv. 16). Yes: “The spirit of the Lord begets love, peace, and
goodness” (Gal. v. 22). No: “By the spirit of the Lord Samson slew thirty men”
(Judg. xiv. 19).
21. Has any man seen God? Yes: “Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and the
seventy elders of Israel ” saw the God of Israel (Exod. xxiv.9). No: “No man hath
seen God at any time ” (John i. 18). Yes: “ I have seen God face to face, and my j.tc
has been preserved” (Gen. xxxii. 30). No: “There shall no man see me, and live”
(E::od. xxxiii. 20). Yes : “ I saw also the Lord standing upon the throne ” (Isa. vi. 1).
No : “ Ye have never seen his shape” (John v. 37).
2-3. Can any man hear God’s voice? Yes: “I heard thy voice in the garden” (Gen.
iii. 9). No : “Ye have never heard his voice at any time ” (John v. 37).
26. Does God dwell in light? Yes: “He dwellcth in light which no man can ap-
proach to ” 1 Tim. vi. 16). No: “The Lord said he would dwell in thick darkness”
(1 Kings viii. 12).
27. Does God dwell in temples? Yes : “ I have chosen this [Solomon’s] temple for a
house” (2 Chron. viii. 16). No: “The Most High dwelleth not in temples made with
hands ” (Acts xvii. 24).
28. Docs God ever tire? Yes: “God rested,and was refreshed” (Exod. xxxi. 17).
No : “ God fainteth not, neither is he weary” (Isa. xl. 33).
29. Is God a respecter of persons? No : “ There is no respect of persons with God ”
(Rom. ii. 11). Yes : “ And God had respect to Abel and his offering” (Gen.).
30. Can God always be found? Yes: “Those who seek me early shall find me”
(Prov. viii. 17). No: “ They shall seek me early, but shall not find me ” (Prov. i. 28).
31. Docs the Lord believe in burnt offerings? No: “I delight not in the blood of
bullocks or of lambs or of he-goats” (Isa. i. 11). Yes: “Thou shalt offer every day a
bullock for a sin-offering” (Exod. xxix. 36).
32. Does the Lord believe in animal sacrifices of any kind? No : “Your burnt offer-
ings arc not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me ” (Jer. vi. 20). Yes : “ Burnt
sacrifices are sweet unto the Lord” (Lev. i. 9).
33. Does God believe in human sacrifices? No: For he condemned the human sac-
rifices of the Gentiles. (See Dent. xii. 30.) Yes: “ For his anger was abated by David’s
hanging the five sons of Miclial in the hill before the Lord.” (Sec 2 Sam. xxi. 8, and
Judg. xi. 30.)
34. Docs God ever repent? Yes: “It repenteth the Lord that he had made man”
(Gen. vi. G). No: “ The Lord is not a man that he should repent” (Num. xxiii. 19).
35. Is all scripture given by inspiration of God? Yes: “All scripture is given by
inspiration of God” (2 Tim. iii. 16). No: “I speak it not after the Lord” (2
Cor. xi. 17).
36. Is war and fighting right? No : “ They that take the sword shall perish with the
sword ” (Matt. xxvi. 52). Yes: “ lie that hath no sword, let him sell his coat and buy
one ” (Luke xxii. 36). No: “ Beat your swords into plowshares, and your spears into
prunlngdiooks” (Mic. iv. 3). Yes: “Beat your plowshares into swords, and your
pruning-hooks into spears” (Joel iii. 10). Yes: “Cursed be he who kcepeth back his
sword from blood” (Lev. xl viii. 10).
37. Shall nation war against nation? Yes: “Nation shall rise up against nation”
(Matt. xxiv. 7). No: “Nationshall not rise up against nation” (Mic. iv. 3).
3S. Khali we love our enemies? Yes: “Love your enemies ” (Luke vl. 27). No:
“ Bring my enemies, and slay them before me” (Luke xix. 27).
39. Is hatred right? No :'“Whosoever liateth his broth risa murderer”(l John iii.15).
Yes : “ You must hate father and mother, brother and sister, &c., or ye can not be true
followers of Christ” (Luke xiv. 26).
40. Is anger commended? Yes: “Bo ye angry, and sin not” (Eph. iv. 26). No:
“Anger resteth in the bosom of fools ” (Eccles. vi i- 9).
41. Is it right to steal and rob? No: .“ Thou shalt not steal” (Exod. xx. 15); “Neither
BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.
137
rob” (Lev. xix. 13). Yes: The Israelites took from the Egyptians “jewels of silver
and jewels of gold, and raiment, and they spoiled the Egyptians ” (Exod. xii. 35).
42. Is it right to kill? No : “ Thou shalt not kill ” (Exod. xx. 13). Yes : “ Kill every
male child amongst them.” Yes ? “ Go ye out and slay every man his companion, and
every man his neighbor, and every man his brother ” (Exod. xxxii. 24).
43. Is it right to lie on any occasion? No: “All liars are to be punished with fire
and brimstone ” (Rev. xxi. 8). Yes: “ Go put a lying spirit into the mouths of all the
prophets ” (1 lungs xxii. 21). No : “ Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord ” (Prov.
xii. 22). Yes : “ The harlot Rahab lied, and was justified by works ” (Jas. ii. 25). No :
“ Say nothing but the truth” (2 Chron. xviii. 15). Yes : “ If the truth of God hath more
abounded -through my lie for his glory, why am I adjudged a sinner? ” (Rom. iii. 7).
44. Is God in favor of lying and deception? No: “Thou shalt not bear false wit-
ness” (Exod. 20). Yes: “If a prophet is deceived, I the Lord deceived that prophet”
(Ezek. xiv. 9).
45. Is a pious life a happy life? Yes: “Come unto me, and I will give you rest”
(Matt. xi. 28). No : “ In the world ye shall have tribulation ” (John xvi. 33).
46. Will righteousness make a man happy? Yes : “ There shall no evil happen to the
just” (Prov. xii. 21). No: “It is through much tribulation the righteous enter the
kingdom of heaven ” (Acts xiv. 21). Yes : “ The righteous shall flourish ” (Ps. xcii. 12).
No: “ The righteous shall perish” (Isa. lvii. 1). Yes: “The prayer of the righteous
availeth much” (Jas. v. 16). No: “Thereis none righteous; no,notone” (Rom! iii. 10).
Yes: The righteous to be slain with the wicked (Ezek. xxi. 3). No: The “ righteous
not to be slain” (Exod. xxiii. 7).
47. Can we live without sinning? Yes: “ Those born of God can not sin” (1 John iii.9).
No: “ There is no man that sinneth not ” (1 Kings viii. 46). Yes: “ lie that committeth
sin is of the devil” (1 John iii. 8). No: “ There are none that doeth good, and sinneth
not” (Eccles. vii. 20).
4S. Does wickedness shorten a man’s life? Yes: “ The years of the wicked shall be
shortened ” (Prov. x. 27). No: “ The wicked live, and become old ” (Job xxi. 7).
Shall we resist evil? Yes: “Put away the evil of your doings” (Isa. i. 16). No:
“ Resist not evil ” (Matt. v. 37).
49. Who can know whether the golden rule is right or wrong? Right: “ Whatsoever
ye would that men should do unto you, do you even so unto them ” (Matt. vii. 12). Wrong:
“ Spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant. and suckling” (1 Sam. xv. 3).
50. Is wisdom desirable? Yes : “ Happy is the man that findeth wisdom ” (Prov. iii.
13). No: “Much wisdom is much grief, and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth
sorrow” (Eccles. i. 18). Yes: “ Get wisdom with all thy gettings” (Prov. iv. 7).
Yes: “Be wise as serpents” (Matt. x. 16). No: “The wisdom of the wise shall be
destroyed” (1 Cor. i. 19).
51. Shall we aim a* a good reputation? Yes: “ A good name is better than riches”
(Prov. xxii. 1). No : “ Woe unto you when all men speak well of you ” (Luke vi. 26).
52. Are riches desirable? Yes : “ The rich man’s wealth is his strong City ” (Prov.
x. 15). No: “ Woe unto you that are rich ” (Luke vi. 24). Yes:“ Blessed is the man
that feareth the Lord, . . . wealth and riches shall be in his house” (Ps. cxii.). No:
“ Blessed be ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God” (Luke vi. 20).
53. Can a righteous man be rich, or a rich man be saved? Yes: “In the house of the
righteous is much treasure” (Prov. xv. 6). No: “It is easier for a camel to go through
the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God ” (Matt. xix. 24).
54. Does the Lord believe in riches? Yes: “The Lord blessed Job with fourteen
thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen,” &c. (Job xlii.
12). No : “ A rich man can not enter into the kingdom of heaven ” (Matt. xix. 24). Yes:
“ Wealth and riches shall be in the house of the man that feareth God ” (Ps. cxii. 1). No:
“ Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth ” (Matt. vi. 19).
55. Shall we use strong drink? No : “ Wine is a mocker, and strong drink is raging”
(Prov. xx. 1). Yes: “ Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish ” (Prov. xxxi. 6).
56. Should we ever use wine? No : “ Do not use wine nor strong drink ” (Lev. x. 9).
Yes: “Use a little wine for the stomach’s sake” (Tim. v. 23). No: “ Look not upon
the wine when it is red” (Prov. xxiii. 31). Yes: “Give wine to him that is of heavy
heart” (Prov. xxxi. 6).
57. Is it right to eat all kinds of animals? Yes: “ There is nothing unclean of itself;
eat every moving thing” (Gen. ix. 3). No : “ Swine, hares, and camels are unclean; ye
shall not eat of their flesh ” {Deut. xiv. 7).
5S. Is it good to eat flesh? . Yes: It is good to eat flesh (Deut. xii. 20). No: It is
not good to eat flesh (Rom. xiv. 21).
59. Is man justified by works? Yes: “Abraham was justified by works” (Jas. ii. *
21). No : “ A man can not be justified by works ” (Gal. ii. 16).
60. Is man saved by faith? Yes : “ Man is saved by faith without works ” (Rom. iii.
28). No : “Man can not be justfied by faith without works” (James ii. 24).
-
61. Should our works be seen? Yes: “ Let your light shine before men” (Matt. v.
16). No: “ Do not your alms before men” (Matt. vi. 1).
v
138
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
62. Is public prayer right? No : “ Enter into thy closet, and shut thy door ” (Matt. vi.
6). Yes: “ Solomon prayed before all the congregation ” (1 Kings viii. 22).
63. How can it be a moral duty to pray, there being no certainty of an answer ? “ Every
one that asketh receiveth ” (Matt. vii. 8). “They that seek me early shall find me”
(Prov. viii. 17). “ Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek
me early, but shall not find me ” (Prov. i. 28).
64. Is man to be rewarded in this life? Yes: Both the righteous and the wicked are
to be rewarded on earth (Prov. xi. 31). No: They are to be rewarded after death
(Matt. xvi. 27).
65. Are children punished for the sins of their parents? Yes: “ The iniquities of the
father are visited upon the children” (Exod. xx. 5). No “ The son shall not bear the
iniquity of the father ” (Ezek. xviii. 20).
66. Should marriage be encouraged ? Yes: “ Marriage is honorable to all ” (Heb. xiii.
6). No: “ It is good for a man not to touch a woman ” (1 Cor. vii. 1).
67. Is divorce right or wrong according to the Bible? Right: “ If thou have no delight
in her (thy wife), then thou shalt let her go ” (Deut. xxi. 11). Wrong: “ Whosoever shall
put away his wife, saving for the crime of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery ”
(Matt. v. 32).
63. Is it right to marry a brother’s widow? Yes: “ If a man die childless, his brother
shall marry his widow” (Deut. xxv. 5). No: “To marry a brother’s widow is an un-
clean thing” (Lev. xx. 21).
69. Is it ever right to marry a sister? No: “ Cursed shall he be who does so ” (Deut.
xxvii. 22). Yes: “ Abraham married his sister, and was blessed” (Gen. xx. 2).
70. Does the Bible allow adultery? No: “ Whoremongers and adulterers God will
judge ” (Ileb. xiii. 4). Yes: “ The Lord commanded Hosea to take a wife of whoredoms ”
(Hos. i. 2).
71. Is fornication sinful? Yes: “ You should abstain from fornication ” (1. Thess. iv.
3) . No: “Every woman who hath not known man by lying with him, save for
yourselves” (Num. xxxi. 18).
72. Should we always obey kings and rulers? Yes: “ To resist [them] is to resist the
ordinance of God ” (Rom. xiii. 3). No : “ Whether it is right to obey God or man, judge
ye.” Yes : “ Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake” (1 Pet.
ii. 14). “ Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do ” (Matt, xxiii. 3). No:
“ We ought to obey God rather than man ” (Acts v. 29).
73. hTthe obedience of servants a duty? Yes : “ Servants, obey your masters” (Col.
iii. 22). No : “ Be ye not the servants of men ” (1 Cor. vii. 23).
74. Is slavery right? No: “ Be not called master;” “ Break every yoke” (Isa. lviii.
6). Yes: “Ye shall buy of the children of the stranger, &c., and they shall be your
possession ” (Lev. xxv. 48). No: “ Proclaim liberty throughout all the land ” (Lev. xxv.
10).
75. Who can tell if baptism is an obligatory ordinance? Yes: “ Go ye and teach all
nations, baptizing them,” &c. (Matt, xxviii. 19). No: “Christ sent me not to baptize,
but to preach the gospel” (1 Cor. i. 17).
76. Is image-making right? No: “ Ye shall make no image of any thing” (Exod. xx.
4) . Yes : “ Moses made an image of a serpent ” (Num. xxi. 9).
77. Is circumcision right? Yes: Except ye be circumcised after the manner of men,
ye can not be saved” (Acts xv. 1). No: “If ye he circumcised, Christ shall profit you
nothing ” (Gal. v. 2). Yes :“ Ye must be circumcised” (Acts xv. 24). No: “Circumcis-
ion is nothing” (Cor. vii. 19).
78. Is it right to swear? No: “Swear not at all” (Matt. v. 35). Yes: God swore
eleven times, says the Bible.
79. Why was the sabbath Instituted? Because “God rested on the sabbath day”
(Exod. xx. 11). Because “ he delivered his people on that day” (Deut. vi. 15).
80. Is it right to observe the sabbath? Yes: “ Remember the sabbath day to keep it
holy.” No: “ Your new moons and your sabbaths, . . . I cau not away with. It is ini-
quity ” (Isa. I. 12).
81. Is it right to judge? Yes: “Judge righteous judgment” (John vii. 24). No:
“Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matt. vii. 2).
82. (’an a man work miracles without divine aid? No: “No man can work such
miracles except God be witli him ” (John iii. 2). Yes : “ The Egyptians did in like man-
ner witli tiieir enchantments” (Exod. vii. 10).
83. Can any m:in a*e'*nd to heaven? Yes: “Elijah ascended in a chariot of fire” (2
Kings ii. 11). No: “No man hath ascended up to heaven” (John iii. 13). Yes: “All
men must see death ” (1 lob. ix. 27). No : “ Enoch did not see death ” (Ileb. xi. 5).
. 81. Should we fear death? Yes: “Christ walked not in Jewry because the Jews
sought to kill him ” (John vii. 1). No : “ Fear not them that kill the body” (Matt. x. 18).
85. Will the earth ever be destroyed? Yes : “ The earth also shall be burned up ” (2
Pet. iii. 10). No : “ But the earth abideth for ever ” (Eecles. 1. 4).
8G. Does the Bible teach a future life? Yea: “They shall go away into everlasting
BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.
139
punishment ” (Matt. xxv. 46). No: “ For that which hefalleth men hefalleth beasts; . . .
as the one dieth, so dieth the other,” See. (Eccles. iii. 19).
87. Does the Bible teach a future resurrection? Yes: “The dead shall be raised”
(Cor. xv. 52). No: “They shall not rise” (Isa.xxvi.14). Yes: “The saints came up
out of the ground” (Matt, xxvii. 52). No: “Those who go down into the grave never
come up again” (Job vii. 9).
88. Are the actions of men ever to be judged according to the Bible? First, “The
Father judgeth no man” (John v. 22). Second, “ I [Jesus Christ] judge no man” (John
viii. 15). So there is to be no judgment.
89. No: “God saw every thing was corrupt” (Gren.vi.il). Yes: “God saw every
thing he had made was good” (Gen. i. 31).
90. Yes: “God forgives the sinner” (Jer. xxxi. 34). No: “God kills the sinner”
(Ezek. xviii. 20).
91. Yes: “God justifies the ungodly” (Rom. iv. 5). No: “God will not clear the
guilty” (Exod. xxxiv. 7).
92. Yes: “ Man is justified by the law ” (Rom. ii. 13). No: “ Man can not be justified
by the law” (Gal. iii. 11).
93. Yes: “ Many have sinned without the law” (Rom. ii. 12). No: “ Where there is
no law there is no transgression” (Rom. iv. 18).
94. Yes: “ Heaven iiTa kingdom that can not be moved ” (Heb. xii. 18). No: “ I will
shake heaven and earth” (Heb. xii. 26).
95. Yes: “Everything is afraid of man” (Gen. i. 28). No: “ The lion is not afraid
of man” (Prov. xxx. 30).
96. Yes: “Every man in his own tongue ” (Gen. x. 5). No: “ The whole earth one
tongue” (Gen. xi. 1).
97. Yes: “ All things are become new” (2 Cor. v. 17). No: “ There is nothing new
under the sun” (Eccles. i. 9).
98. Yes: “ You shall make a likeness of a serpent and a cherubim ” (Exod. xxv. 18).
No: “Make no likeness of any thing in heaven above or the earth beneath,” &c. (Exod.
xx. 4).
99. Yes: “ Deborah the prophetess judged Israel” (Judg. iv. 4). No: “ A woman is
not to judge or rule, a man ” (1 Tim. ii. 12).
100. Yes: “ God’s people shall be ashamed” (Hos. x. 6). No: “God’s people shall
never be ashamed” (Ps. xxxvii. 19).
101. Yes: “Blessed are the fruitful” (Gen. i. 28). No: “Blessed are the barren”
(Luke xxiii. 29).
102. Yes : “ Edom being thy brother, do not abhor him ” (Deut. xxiii. 7). ’ No: “ He
slew of Edom ten thousand” (2 Kings xiv. 7).
103. Yes: “Bear ye one another’s burdens” (Gal. vi. 2). No: “Every man must
bear his own burden ” (Gal. vi. 5).
104. Yes: “ Labor not for meat” (Johnvi. 27). No: “He that labors not shall not
eat” (2 Thess. iii. 10).
105. In Genesis vi. 5 God declared he would pour out his curses because “the
imagination of man’s heart is evil, and only evil continually.” In Genesis viii. 21 he
gives the same reason for not cursing the world.
And these are mere specimens of a vast number of similar
kind. Kings and Chronicles especially are full of such discrep-
ancies of dates, numbers, names, &c. In one case the author
of Chronicles makes a son two years older than his father, the
father being forty and the son forty-two. For proof, compare
2 Chron. xxi. 20 with xxii. 1,2. And observe, the author of 2
Chron. xvi. 1 has Baasha, King of Israel, fighting against Judah
ten years after the author of 1 Kings xvi. 8 has him dead and
buried. But we have not space to spare to continue the list, as
it would comprise a large chapter. Let the reader compare the
names and numbers of the leaders, families, tribes, &c., of the
children of Israel, as recorded by Ezra (chap, ii.), with those
140
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
of Nehemiah (chap, vii.), and he will find more than a dozen
discrepancies and contradictions; the difference amounting in
some cases to thousands. He will also find a difference with
respect to the coronation, period of rule, and termination of the
reign of various kings, and wide differences tracing genealogic
families, tribes, &c., if he will compare Kings, Chronicles,
Samuel, Ezra, Nehemiah, &c. Such are the verbal discrepancies
of the “ Word of God ; ” such is arithmetic when u inspired.”
Two questions upon the above : 1. How much older can a son
be than his father according to scripture, basing the inquiry
upon Chron. xxi. and xxii. ? 2. How long can a man continue
to fight after he is dead and buried, as is illustrated in the case
of Baasha, King of Israel? (See contradictions 142, 143, and
144.)
Contradictions in History.
106. When was man created? Gen. i. 25 says after the other animals. Gen. ii. 18
says before the other animals.
107. Were seed-time and harvest to he perpetual? Yes: “Seed-time and harvest
shall not cease” (Gen. viii. 22). No: “There was neither earing nor harvest” for five
years (Gen. xlv. 6).
108. Did Eve see before she ate the forbidden fruit? Yes: “ Woman saw before she
ate the fruit” (Gen. iii. 6). No: “ Her eyes were opened by eating the fruit” (Gen. iii.
7).
109. When did the earth become dry after the flood? “In the first month the
waters of the flood were dried up” (Gen. viii. 13). “In the second month the
waters of the flood were dried up ” (Gen. viii. 12).
110. How old was Abraham when he left Haran? The eleventh chapter of Genesis
makes him one hundred and thirty-five years old; but the twelfth says he was only
seventy-live.
111. Did Abraham know where he was going? Yes: “ He went forth to go into the
land of Canaan” (Gen. xii. 5). No: “He went out, not knowing whither he went”
(lleb. xi. S). %
112. Did God give Abraham land? Yes : “I give it to thy seed for ever” (Gen. xiii.
15). No: “Abraham had none inheritance in it, not so much as to set his foot on”
(Acts vii. 5).
113. Did Moses fear Pharaoh ? Yes : “ Moses fled, fearing Pharaoh ” (Exod. ii. 14 and
18). No : “ Moses did not fear Pharaoh ” (lleb. xi. 21).
114. Who hardened Pharaoh’s heart? “The Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh”
(Exod. ix. 12). “ Pharaoh hardened his heart” (Exod. viii. 15).
115. IIow many lighting men in Israel ? Samuel says eight hundred thousand (2 Sam.
xxiv. 9). Chronicles says one million one hundred thousand (1 Chron. xxi. 5).
110. IIow many lighting men in Judah? Samuel says live hundred thousand (2 Sam.
xxiv. 9). Chronicles says four hundred and seventy thousand (1 Chron. xxi. 5).
117. Who moved David to number Israel? God: “The Lord moved David to num-
ber Israel ” (2 Sam. xxiv. 1). The devil: “ Satan provoked him to do it” (Chron. xxi. 1).
IIS. Did David sin more than once? Yes: “I have sinned greatly in numbering
Israel ” (2 Sam. 24. 10). No : “ He sinned only when he killed Uriah” (1 Kings xv. 5).
119. IIow many years of famine was David to suffer? Chronicles says it was three
years (1 Chron. xxi. 11). Samuel says it was seven years (2 fckun. xxiv. 13).
120. IIow many horsemen did David capture? Samuel says it was seven hundred
(2 Sam. viii. 4). Chronicles says it was seven thousand (1 Chron. xvlii. 4).
121. What did David pay for his threshing-floor? Samuel says fifty shekels of silver
(2 Sam. xxiv. 21). Chronicles says six hundred shekels of gold (1 Chron. xxi. 25).
122. Was David’s throne to come to an end? No : “ It shall be established for ever”
(Pa. lxxxix 4). Yea: “It was caat down to the ground” (Ps. lxxxix. 44).
BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.
141
123. Was David really a man after God’s own heart? Yes: “ David was a man after
God’s own heart ” (Acts xiii. 22). No: “ David displeased the Lord ” (2 Sam. xi. 24).
124. Was it a man or God that Jacob wrestled with? “Jacob wrestled all night
with a man” (Gen. xxxii.24). “Jacob wrestled all night with God” (Gen. xxxii.
30).
125. How many were there of Jacob’s family? “ Jacob’s family was only
seventy souls” (Gen. xlvi. 27). “Jacob’s family was seventy-live souls” (Acts vii.
14).
126. How long was Israel in Egypt? “Israel was four hundred and thirty years
in Egypt” (Exod. xii. 41). “Jacob was only four hundred years in Egypt” (Acts
vii. 6).
127. Did they see what the Lord did in Egypt? Yes: “You have seen all the Lord
did in Egypt” (Deut. xxix. 2). No: “ You have seen nothing he did in Egypt” (Deut.
xxix. 4).
128. Who was the father of Salah? Arphaxad (Gen. xi. 12). Cainan (Luke iii. 35).
129. HadMichal any children? No: “Michalhad no children unto the day of her
death ” (2 Sam. vi. 23). Yes: “ The five sons of Michal ” (2 Sam. xxi. 8).
130. Where was the law written? Exodus says it was written on Mt. Sinai. Deuter-
onomy says it was written on Mt. Horeb.
131. How many died of the plague? Numbers says it was twenty and four thousand
(Num. xxv. 9). Corinthians says three and twenty thousand (1 Cor. x. 8).
132. When did Zachariah begin to reign? In the thirty-eighth year of Azariah”
(2 Kings xv. 8). But a comparison of 2 Kings xiv. 29 and xv. 1 makes but fourteen
years.w
133. How many stalls for horses had Solomon? We are told in 1 Kings iv. 26, he had
forty thousand. But, according to 2 Chron. ix. 25, it was only four thousand.
134. How much oil did Solomon give Hiram? According to Kings v. 11, it was twenty
measures. But, according to Chron. ii. 10, it was twenty thousand.
135. Of what tribe was Solomon’s artificer, who came from Tyre? According to 1
Kings vii. 14, he was of the tribe of Naphthali. But, according to 2 Chron. ii. 14, he was
of the tribe of Dan.
136. How long were the two pillars of Solomon’s porch? According to 1 Kings vii.
15, they were eighteen cubits long. But, according to 2 Chron. iii. 15, they were thirty-
five cubits long.
137. How many baths were contained in the brazen sea? According to 1 Kings .vii.
26, it contained two thousand; but, according to 2 Chron. iv. 5, three thousand.
138. How many mothers had Abijah? and who was she? According to 1 Kings xv, 2,
she was the daughter of Abishalom. But 2 Chron. xi. 20 says she was the daughter of
Absalom; and 2 Chron. xiii. 2 says she was the daughter of Uriel.
The chronology of the kings of Judah and Israel are a mass of confusion.
139. Where was Ahaziah killed, and how often ? According to 2 Chron. xxii. 8, he
was killed at Samaria; and, according to 2 King ix. 27, he was killed again.
140. How many did Jashobeam kill? “ Jashobeam slew eight hundred at one time ”
(2 Sam. xxiii. 8). No : It was only three hundred he slew (1 Chron. xi. 11).
141. Who killed the Amalekites? Samuel says “ Saul utterly destroyed them” (1
Sam. xv. 3). But, according to chapter twenty-seven of the same book, David killed
them all, “ left neither man nor woman ” (1 Sam. xv. 13). And yet it appears they were
not well killed; for, forty years after, they fought a battle with Ziklag (see 1 Sam. xxx.
18), and they were all killed again, “ save four hundred young men; ” and Simeon after-
wards slew them. (See 1 Chron. iv. 3.) And yet, although destroyed three times, Jose-
phus says he was a descendant of the Amalekites. They must have been a live people.
142! When did Baasha fightabattle with Judah? According to 2Chron. xvi. 1, it was
in Asa’s thirty-sixth year. But, according to 1 Kings xvi. 8, in the twenty-sixth year of
Asa, Baasha died, or, at least, vacated the throne, — a difference of ten years.
143. How did Asa and Baasha stand toward each other ? “ There was war between
Asa and Baasha all their days ” (1 Kings xv. 16). But, according to Chron. xiv. 1, they
were at peace ten years.
144. How long did Baasha reign ? “ Baasha reigned over Israel twenty-four years ” (1
Kings xv. 33). But, according to 1 Kings xvi. 5, it was twenty-seven years.
145. How long did Elah reign? According to 1 Kings xvi. 8, Elah reigned two years,
commencing in Asa’s twenty-sixth year.
146. When did Ahaziah begin to reign over Judah? Kings says it was the eleventh
year of Joram (2 Kings viii. 16). Kings also says it was the twelfth (2 Kings viii. 25).
147. When did Omri begin to reign? “ In the thirty-eighth year of Asa began Omri
to reign” (Kings xvi. 15). But, as Zimri only reigned seven days, and began in Asa’s
twenty-seventh year, Omri must also have commenced in his twenty.seventh year.
148. When did Ahab commence his reign? “In the thirty-eighth year of Asa began
Ahab, son of Omri, to reign ” (1 Kings xvi. 29). How can that be if Omri reigned twelve
years? (See 1 Kings xvi. 23).
142
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-v
$
-
149. When did Jehoram, son of Ahab, begin to reign? “In the eighteenth year of
Jehoshaphat, King of Judah, began Jehoram to reign (2 Kings iii. 1). Impossible, if his
son Ahazjah commenced in Jehoshaphat’s nineteenth year (see 1 Kings xxii. 51), and
reigned two years: seventeen and two are nineteen. And, according to 2 Kings i. 17.
and 1 Kings, it was twelve years later, if Jehoshaphat reigned twenty-five years. (See 1
Kings).
150. WTien did Azziah, or Uzziah, begin to reign? In the twenty-seventh year of
f Jeroboam, according to 2 Kings xv. 1. But, according to 2 Kings xvi. 17 and 23, it was
sixteen years.
“. How long did Jehu reign over Israel? “Jehu reigned over Israel twenty-eight
“ (2 Kings x. 36). But, according to 2 Kings xiii. 1, he reigned thirty years.
How long did Jehoahaz reign? Jehoahaz reigned seventeen years ” (2 Kings
I xiii. 1). But, according to 2 Kings xiii. 10, it was twenty years.
L***00* 153. How old was Ahaz when he began to reign? Twenty years. (2 Kings xvi. 2.)
According to the text (2 Chron. xxiv. 2), his father was about eleven years old when he
was born.
# Jeroboa
I only six
I 151. :
I years ” i
J 152. ;
New-Testament Contradictions.
There is a continual conflict in the statements of Christ’s
biographers with respect to the various events of his life as
compared with each other; and in some cases they contradict
themselves. We will present some examples : —
154. Who came to worship Christ when he was bom? Matthew says, “wise men
from the East” (Matt. ii. 5). Luke says they were shepherds of the same country
(Luke ii. 8).
155. How were they led? Matthew says they were led by a star (Matt. ii. 6). Luke
says by an angel (Luke ii. 3).
156. What did the parents of Jesus do when he was born? Matthew (ii. 13) says
they fled into Egypt. But, according to Luke (ii. 26), they staid there forty-one days.
157. To whom did God speak at Christ’s baptism? To him: “ Thou art my beloved
son ” (Luke iii. 22). To the bystanders: “ This is my beloved son ” (Matt. iii. 17).
158. Where did Christ go after being baptized? Mark says he went immediately
into the wilderness, and was there forty days (Mark i. 12). John says three days after
he was in Cana (John ii. 12).
159. Where was John while Christ was in Galilee? “ John was put in prison ” (be-
fore that) (Mark i. 14). “ John was baptizing in ASnon ” (John iii. 23).
160. Where was Christ when he called Peter and Andrew? Matthew and Mark say,
“ walking by the Sea of Galilee.” Luke says, “ sitting in their ship ” (Luke v. 3).
161. Where were Peter and Andrew at the time? Matthew and Mark say, “ in their
ship, fishing.” Luke says, out “ washing their nets ” (Luke v. 2).
162. How came Peter and Andrew to follow Jesus ? Matthew and Mark say he “ called
them.” But, according to Luke, the draught of fishes caused them to go.
163. Where did Christ heal the leper? Matthew says at the mount, after the sermon
(viii. 2). Mark says when preaching in Galilee.
164. Who told Jesus the centurion’s servant was sick? Luke says he sent the elders
0 of Israel to tell him (Luke vii. 3). But Matthew says the centurion went himself (Matt.
viii. 5).
165. Where did Christ go after curing Peter’s wife’s mother? Matthew says beyond
the lake, and drowned a herd of swine (viii. 18). Luke says to Nain, and raised the dead
(Luke vii. 11).
166. Where did Christ drown the swine with devils? Matthew says in the country
of Gergesencs. Mark and Luke say in the country of Gadarenes.
167. Where did the devils remonstrate against going? Mark (v. 10) says against
being sent out of the country. Luke (viii. 31) says it was against going into the deep.
168. Were Christ’s disciples allowed to use staves? Yes: “Take nothing . . . save a
staff only ” (Mark vl. 8). No : “ Take neither shoes or yet staves ” (Matt. x. 9).
169. When did (’hrist pluck the ears of corn? Matthew (xii. 1) says after he had
appointed his twelve disciples. But Luke and Mark make it after that event.
170. What woman interceded for her daughter? “A woman of Canaan . . . cried
untof him” (Matt. xv. 22). The woman was a Greek (Mark vii. 26).
171. I low great was the multitude which Jesus fed with seven loaves and a few fishes?
Matthew says four thousand, besides women and children (xv. 38). Mark says four thou-
sand in all (viii. 9).
BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS.
143
172. How long was it after Christ was transfigured that he took James and John up
into the mountain? Six days after (Matt. xvii. 4). Eight days after (Luke ix. 28).
173. How much power did Jesus say faith as hig as a grain of mustard-seed can impart?
Matthew (xvii. 20) says enough to remove mountains. Luke says (xvii. 6) enough to
pluck up trees by the roots. Both large jobs for one man.
174. Who asked seats in the kingdom for Zebedee’s children? Matthew says (xx. 22)
it was their mother. Mark says (x. 35) they asked it themselves. Why did he refuse
them two seats when he had promised them, with the other ten disciples, twelve thrones?
(Matt. xix. 28.)
175. How many blind men did Jesus restore near Jericho? Matthew says (xx. 30)
two blind men. Mark and Luke say only one, Bartimeus.
176. Where did he perform this miracle? Matthew says as he was going away from
Jericho. Luke says as he was coming into the city (xviii. 35).
177. When did Christ drive out the money-changers ? Matthew and Luke say the day
he rode into the city. Mark says not till the next day (xi. 11).
178. What did Jesus tell his disciples about the ass? Matthew says (xxi. 2) he told
them they would find an ass and colt tied. Mark and Luke say they found tied only a
colt. And John says it was a young ass, and Jesus found it himself (xii. 14). Mark and
Luke say he rode the colt. But Matthew (xxi. 7) represents him as riding both the ass
and the colt.
179. "Who answered Christ’s question in the parable of the vineyard? Matthew says
(xxi. 41) his disciples answered the question. Mark and Luke both say he answered it
himself.
180. WTien did Christ tell the truth about Lazarus ? He first said his sickness was not
unto death, but afterwards said he was dead.
181. When did the anointment of Christ take place? Matthew says (xxvi. 2) it was
two days before the passover. But John says it was six days after (John xii. 1). And
Luke makes it much later (viii. 36 and xxii. 1).
182. Where did the anointment take place ? Matthew says (xxvi. 6) in the house of
Simon the leper. Luke says (vii. 36) in the house of a Pharisee. But, according to John,
it was in the house of Lazarus (xii. 1).
183. Where was the ointment poured? Matthew and Mark say on his head. But
Luke and John say on his feet.
184. When did Christ say one of his disciples would betray him? Matthew says
(xxvi. 21) while they “ did eat supper.” But, according to Luke (xxii. 20), it was after
supper wa3 over.
185. Where did Jesus go after supper ? John says “ over the brook Cedron ” (xviii. 1.).
But the other three evangelists say to the Mount of Olives.
186. "When did Judas betray Christ? John says (xii. 27), after supper he went out
and made the bargain. But the other three say it was before supper he made the bar-
gain.
187. Where and to whom did Peter first deny Christ? John says (xviii. 17) to the
damsel at the door. The other three say to the men in the hall.
188. To whom was the second denial made? Matthew and Mark say to a maid. Luke
says to a man. John says to those who stood by the fire (xviii.).
189. To whom was the third denial made? Matthew and Mark say to those who
stood by. John says (xviii.) to the servant of the high priest.
190. Where was Christ crucified? John says at Calvary. The other three say at
G-olgotha.
191. At what hour was Christ crucified? Mark says (xv. 25) it was the third hour.
But, according to John (xix. 14), it was after the sixth hour.
192. How was Christ dressed for the crucifixion? “ And put on him a scarlet robe ”
(Matt, xx vii. 28). “ They put on him a purple robe ” (John xix. 2).
193. What was the drink offered to Christ at the crucifixion? Mark says it was wine
mixed with myrrh (xv. 23). Matthew says it was vinegar mingled with gall. But Luke
represents it as being only vinegar (xxiii. 36). Matthew says Christ tasted it; but, ac-
cording to Mark, he did not.
194. Who bore Christ’s cross? Matthew says Simon of Cyrene (xxvii. 32). But
John says Jesus bore it himself (xix. 17).
195. Which of the thieves reviled him? -Mark says both of them (xv. 29). Luke says
(xxiii. 39) only one of them, and the other reviled him for it.
196. What were the words of the superscription on the cross? “This is Jesus, the
King of the Jews ” (Matt, xxvii. 37). “ The King of the Jews ” (Mark xv. 26). “ This is
the King of the Jews” (Luke xix. 18). “Jesus, of Nazareth, the King of the Jews”
(John xix. 19). But one of these can be right.
197. Was it lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death? Yes: “We have a law by
which he ought to die” (Johnxix. 7). No: “It is not lawful to put any man to death”
(John xviii. 31).
198. Who came to Christ’s sepulcher? Matthew says (xxviii. 1) Mary Magdalene and
144
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
another Mary. According to John, it was Mary Magdalene only (xx. 1). But Luke says
the two Marys and Joanna (xxiv. 10).
199. Was it daylight when they came to the tomb? No: “They came while it was
yet dark ” (John xx. 1). Yes: •“ They came at the rising of the sun ” (Mark xvi. 2).
200. Whom did the women see at the tomb? Matthew says (xxviii. 1) an angel sit-
ting. Mark says (xvi. 5) a young man. Luke says (xxiv. 4) two men. John says (xx.
12) two angels.
201. Did any of the women enter the sepulcher? Yes: They entered in (Mark xvi.
5). No : They did not (John xx. 2).
202. Who looked into the sepulcher? According to Luke, it was Peter (xxiv. 12).
According to John, it was another disciple (xx. 4).
203. Did Peter go into the sepulcher? John says he did go in (xx. 6). According to
Luke, he did not (xxiv. 12).
204. Did those who visited the tomb relate the case to any one? According to Luke,
they told the eleven disciples (xxiv. 27). But Mark tells us they said nothing to any man
(xvi. 8).
205. To whom did Christ appear after his resurrection? Matthew says to the two
Marys (xxviii. 9). Mark says to Mary Magdalene alone (xvi. 9). According to Luke, it
was to two of his disciples at Emmaus.
206. When did Christ first appear to his disciples? Matthew says it was at Galilee
(Matt, xxviii. 16). Luke says it was at Jerusalem (Luke xxiv. 33).
207. How did Christ’s disciples feel when they met him? Luke says they were terri-
fied (xxiv. 37). But John says they were glad (xx. 20).
208. How often did Christ show himself to the disciples? John says, “ This is now
the third time.” But, according to the other three, it was the sixth time.
209. Where did Christ part from his disciples? Mark says (xvi. 14) it was at Jerusa-
lem. But, according to Luke, it was at Bethany.
210. When did Christ ascend? According to Luke, it was the day of his resurrection
(Luke xxiv. 13). John says it was nine days after (John xx. 26). But, according to Acts
i. 3, it was forty days after.
211. From what place did Christ ascend? Luke says (xxiv. 5) it was from Bethany.
Acts says (i. 5) it was from Mount Olivet.
212. Did Christ bear witness of himself? Yes: “ I am one that bear witness of my-
self” (John viii. 18). No: “ If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true” (John
v. 21).
213. Could man bear testimony for Christ? Yes: “ Ye also shall bear witness ” (John
xv. 26). No: “ I receive not testimony from man ” (John v. 23).
214. Did Christ come on a mission of peace? Yes: “To preach glory to God, . . .
and on earth peace ” (Luke ii. 13). No: “ I came not to send peace but a sword ” (Matt.
x. 34).
215. Did Christ have a dwelling-place ? No: Matthewsays (viii.20), “ He had not where
to lay his head.” But John says he had a house, and his disciples saw it (i. 34)/>> \
216. Was Christ the savior? Yes: “ Christ is the savior of all men” (1 Tim. iv. 10).
No: “ Beside me [Jehovah] there is no savior” (Isa. xliii. 11).
217. Was Christ omnipotent? Yes: “I and my Father are one” (John x. 30). No:
“ My Father is greater than I” (John xiv. 28).
218. Was Christ equal to God? Yes; “lie thought it no robbery to be equal with
God ” (Phil. ii. 6). No : “ My Father is greater than I ” (John xiv. 28).
219. Was Christ supreme God? Yes: “ He was God manifest in the flesh ” (1 Tim.
iii. 16). No: “ He was man approved of God ” (Acts ii. 22).
220. IIow did Judas die? Matthew says lie went out and hanged himself (Matt, xxvii.
6). The Acts says he went out and fell headlong (Acts i. 18).
221. Did the men at Paul’s conversion hear a voice? Yes : “ Hearing a voice, but see-
ing no man ” (Acts ix. 7). No: “ They heard not the voice” (Acts xxii. 9).
222. Did John see a book? Yes. “I saw . . . a book written within,” &c. (Rev.
v. 1). No : “ No man In heaven or earth could look on the book ” (Rev. v. 3).
223. Was John the Baptist Elias? Yes: “This is Elias which w.as to come” (Matt.
xi. 14). No: “ And he said I am not Elias ” (John i. 21).
224. When did llerodlas ask for the head of John the Baptist? Matthew says before
Herod’s great promise to her; but Mark says it was after (Mark vi. 24).
225. Is the law of Moses superseded? Yes : “ We are delivered from the law ” (Rom.
vii. 6). No : “ I came not to destroy the law ” (Matt. v. 17).
226. Who was the father of Joseph? “And Jacob begat Joseph, husband of Mary
(Matt. 1. 16). “ He was the son of Heli ” (Luke iii. 23).
227. Who purchased the potter’s field? “ Judas, with the reward of iniquity” (Acts
i. 18). “The chief priests look the silver, and bought the potter’s field” (Matt, xxvii. 6).
228. Yes: “The spirit led Christ to Jerusalem” (Acts xx. 22). No: “The spirit
forbade him to go ” (Acts xxl. 4).
229. Yes : “ I go to prepare a place for you” (John xiv. 2). No: “It was prepared
from the beginning” (Matt. xxv. 34).
OBSCENE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE.
145
230. Yes: “ The mission of the gospel began at Jerusalem” (Luke xxiv. 47). No:
“ It began at Galilee ” (Acts x. 37).
231. Yes: “ I beseech you as strangers ” (1 Pet. ii. 11). No: “ You are not strangers ”
(Eph. ii. 14).
232. Yes: “Christ died for his enemies” (Rev. x). No: “For his friends” (John
xv. 13).
233. Yes: “I write unto you, fathers” (1 John ii. 13). No: “Call no man father”
(Matt, xxiii. 9).
234. Yes: “ I am with you alway ” (Matt, xxviii. 20). No: “ It is expedient for you
that I go away ” (John xvi. 7).
Total, 277, including double contradictions.
We will not attempt to argue that these conflicting statements
prove that no such events as here referred to ever transpired,
and that the whole thing is a fabrication. We only argue that
it proves the writers were not inspired by infinite wisdom, or they
would have told the exact truth in all cases, so that there could
have been no mistakes. It also proves that we never can know
the real facts, or arrive at an accurate knowledge or the exact
truth, with respect to any of those doctrines, duties, or events
the contradictions appertain to; and, as these contradictions
refer to almost every doctrine, precept, and event of any im-
portance, it thus sinks all Bible teaching into a labyrinth of
uncertainty. Hence not one single statement in it can be set
down as absolutely true without corroborative evidence.
Note.—The reader will observe, from the contradictions in the foregoing list with
respect to all the duties of life, as well as all the crimes of society, — such as war, intem-
perance, slavery, theft, robbery, murder, falsehood, swearing, lying, &c., — that it is
absolutely impossible to learn our moral and religious duties from the Bible.
CHAPTER XXin.
OBSCENE LANGUAGE 0E THE BIBLE-TWO HUNDEED
CASES.
No person of refinement and good morals, who has not been
warped and biased by education or religious training in favor
of the Christian Bible, can read that book through without
being often shocked and put to the blush by its obscene and
vulgar language. Indeed, there are more than two hundred
texts calculated to raise a blush on the cheek of modesty.
Many of them are so obscene that we would not dare copy
them into this work. It would not only outrage the feelings of
146
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
the reader, but it would render the author liable to prosecu-
tion. A law has been recently passed by Congress prohibiting
the publication and circulation of obscene literature ; and many
persons have already been prosecuted under that law, — some of
them for merely selecting and publishing some of the obscene
texts of the Bible. But, without being influenced by these
considerations, we will, in order to spare the feelings of the
reader, merely state the import of some of these texts.
1. Omitting the history of Adam, in which we find some not
very refined language, we will commence with Noah. We are
told that Noah became so drunk as to strip off all his clothing,
and one of his sons, to avoid seeing him in that situation,
walked backward, and covered him: for which act his father
cursed him. Thus it appears that Noah, although “a righteous
man,” was not a very modest or decent one. And such a man
being held up as a righteous example must have a demoralizing
tendency upon those who accept him in this light. (See Gen. ix.)
2. The story of Abraham and Sarah, and the account of
Abraham’s illicit intimacy with his servant-maid Hagar, as
related in Genesis (chap, xvi.), and his and Sarah’s gossip
over the affair, is any thing but modest.
3. The “ holy man” Lot: The story of Lot’s incest with
his daughters, as set forth in Genesis (chap.xix.),is both im-
modest and disgusting.
4. Rachel and Bilhah: The tea-table talk of Jacob and
Rachel, about the act of Jacobin seducing their maid-servant
Bilhah, must be morally repulsive to all only Bible believers.
5. The story of Leah and Zilpah is not much better. (See
Gen. xxx.)
G. The bargain between Leah and Rachel about Reuben’s
mandrakes (Gen. xxx.) is too immodest to relate or con-
template.
7. Jacob’s trick of using peeled sticks and poplar-trees
among his cattle is something more than a descent from the
sublime to the ridiculous. And were it not deemed divine
revelation, heavenly instruction,” it would have been left out
(Gen. xxx.).
8. The account of Rachel’s stealing her father’s images, and
OBSCENE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE.
147
then telling an indecent falsehood to hide it, is not very suitable
for a “ Holy Book ” (Gen. xxxi.).
9. The story of the defilement of Dinah we will not attempt
to describe, as we can not do it without offending decency. (See
Gen. xxxiv.)
10. The story of Reuben and Bilhah, in the next chapter,
may be instructive to the pious, but is not so to persons of
refined taste.
11. If you read the narratives of Judah, Onan, and Tamar,
as related in the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis, for human-
ity’s sake keep it out of the hands of your children, and use your
influence to prevent its circulation among the heathen; for it
must have the effect to sink them still deeper in moral depravity
and mental degradation.
12. The disgusting story of Absalom’s familiarity with Ms
father’s concubines, as related (2 Sam. xvi. 32), is so disgust-
ing, that we will barely allude to it.
Having referred to twelve cases as samples, we shall pursue
the repulsive subject no further, except merely to indicate the
chapter and verse where a long list of such cases may be found
and examined by those who may need more evidence that the
Bible is an obscene book, not fit to be read in decent society.
13. Vulgar language is used in representing men as acting
like dogs. (See 2 Kings ix. 8.)
14. Job describes disgusting conduct toward a woman (Job
xxxi. 9).
15. Solomon’s Song of Songs contains much that is obscene
language from the first to the eighth chapter.
16. Isaiah makes revolting suggestions relative to stripping
women. (See Isa. xxxii. 2.)
17. Ezekiel is represented as eating disgusting food (dung)
(Ezek. iv. 12).
18. Jehovah’s command to .Hoseato marry a harlot is of
immoral tendency.
19. Isaiah frequently makes use of vulgar language. One
case may be found in chap. lxvi. 3.
20. Another case in Hosea, describing horrible treatment of
women and cMldren. (See chap. xiii. 16.)
148
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
21. The conduct of Sechem towards certain women, as told
in Gen. xxxiv. 4, is loathsome.
22. The conduct of parents toward their daughters, as de-
scribed in Deut. xxii. 15, and as enjoined by the Mosaic law,
is disgusting and shocking in the extreme.
23. And language no less disgusting, relative to the treatment
of men, as prescribed by law, is found in Deut. xxiii.
24. The account of Paul’s conversion, as described in Acts
ix., is extreme^ vulgar.
The above-cited cases are mere samples of hundreds of simi-
lar ones to be found in God’s Holy Book in the use of indecent
language, calculated to make any person blush to read in pri-
vate, much more if read in public. Indeed, no person dare
read them to a company of decent people. Look, then, how
the case stands. Look at the mortifying condition in which
every devout Bible believer in Christendom is placed. Here is
a book which, it is claimed, emanated from a pure and holy being ;
which contains so many passages couched in such obscene and
offensive language, that any person who attempts to read the
book to a company must be constantly and critically on his
guard, and is liable to be kept in a state of fearful anxiety (as
the writer knows by his own experience), lest he stumble on
some of these offensive texts. What an uncomfortable situa-
tion to be placed in when reading a book wdiich is claimed to be
perfect in ever}T respect! We have seen a Bible class in school
stopped suddenly by the teacher, with orders to close their Bibles,
because he had observed, by looking ahead, that the chapter con-
tained language which would bring a blush to every check if read.
In the same school we saw a modest boy, of refined feelings, burst
into tears because he was required to read to the school a cer-
tain passage in the account of the conversion of Paul. The
teacher being a devout Christian, whose piety overruled his
decorum, attempted to enforce the reading by a threat of pun-
ishment, but failed. We have also seen the offer of one hun-
dred dollars’ reward, standing in a paper for a considerable time,
to any person who would read a dozen texts to a company of
ladies, which the gentleman offering the reward might select;
but no person dared to disgrace himself by accepting the
offer.
CIRCUMCISION A HEATHEN CUSTOM.
149
And what is the moral, or lesson, taught by these things?
Why, that the Bible is a very unsuitable book for a refined nation
of people to read habitually, or for a morally elevated and enlight-
ened age of the world, though it was probably adapted to the
age and to the people for which it was written. J?hey had not
attained to the present standard of morality and refinement.
We cherish no disposition to censure them. They were probably
honest, and lived up to their highest idea of right. If anybody
deserves censure in the case, it is the professedly enlightened
Christians of the present age for going back to a savage, unen-
lightened age and nation for their religion and morals.
A Partial List op the Obscene Passages of the Bible.
The following figures point to texts, many of which are too
vulgar to be described in any kind of language : —
Gen. xvii. 2, very disgusting; xix. 8, 33, 35, a shocking case; xx. 18; xxv. 23, disgust-
ing; xxx. 3, very obscene; xxx. 15,16; xxxi. 12; xxxiv. 2, 7, 16, 22; xxxviii. 9, loath-
some; xxxviii. 29; lix. 25; Exod.i.16; xix. 15; xx. 2; xxii. 16; xxxiv. 15, 16; Lev. xii.
15; xviii. 7, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24; xxi. 7, 20, extremely vulgar; Num. xiv. 33; xix. 5,
disgusting; xxv. 1; xxxi. 35; Deut.xxi.il; xxii. 15, 21; xxii. 22, 23, 25; xxiii. 1, very
disgusting; xxiii. 13,17,18; xxv. 5, 7,10; xxxi. 16; Judg. xi. 37; xix. 2, 25; Ruth i.ll,
12; iii.; iv. 13; 2 Sam. vi. 20, 22; vii. 12; xi. 4,11; xii. 11, 12, very disgusting; xiii. 11,
12,14, 20, 22, 23; 1 Kings i. 4; iii. 16,17, 26; xi. 3; xvi. 11, very filthy; xxi. 21; 2 Kings
xviii. 27, very filthy; 2 Chron. xxi. 13,15; Esth. ii. 12, 14; Job iii. 10; xvi. 15; xxi. 24;
xxxi. 10, very disgusting, and 15; xxxii. 19; xl. 16; Ps. xxii. 10; xlviii. 6; cxxxix. 13; Prov.
. xxiii. 27; xxx. 16,19; Eccles. iv. 11; xi. 5; Sol. i. 13; iii. 1; vi. 8; vii. 2, 3; viii. 8; Isa.
iii. 17; xxvi. 17, very nasty; xlvii. 2; xlix., very obscene; xlvi. 7; Jer. ii. 20; iii. 1, 2, 6,
9, very filthy, and 13; iv. 31; xiii. 27; xiv. 17; xvi. 3, 4; xxix. 8; xxx. 6; xxxi. 8, 27;
Lam. ii. 13; vii.; Ezek.iv. 15,16, 17,18,19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 28, 33, 35; xviii. 6; xix. 2; xxii.
11; xxiii. 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10,11,14,17, 18,19, 20, 21, 29, 43; xliv. 25; Hos. i. 2; ii. 2, 4, 5; iv.
14,18; vii. 4; ix. 1,14; Mic. i. 2; iv. 10; Nah. iii. 4; Hah. ii. 16; 2 Esd. viii. 8; ix. 43;
xvi. 38, 49; Jud. ix. 2; Wisd. of Sol. iii. 13; iv. 6; Ecclus. xx. 4; xxvi. 9; xxxviii. 25;
xiii. 10; Bar. vi. 29; 2 Macc. vi. 4; Matt. i. 25; xxiv. 19; xxv. 10; Luke i. 15, 24, 31, 36,
41,44,49; ii. 6, 7,23; xi.27; John xvi. 21; Acts ii. 30; Rom. i. 26,27; iii. 28; 1 Cor. vii. 1;
2 Cor. vi. 12; Heb. xi. 11; 2 Pet. ii. 2; Rev. xii. 2; xvii. 1; xviii. 4.
CHAPTER XXIV.
CIRCUMCISION A HEATHEN CUSTOM.
Circumcision is a very ancient rite, and of heathen origin,
though we are told in Genesis that it was a command of God to
Abraham; and it was nationalized by Moses. It was considered
by the Jews a very important religious rite, and has been prac-
150
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
ticed by them from their earliest history. So highly was this
ordinance esteemed amongst them, that it was in some cases
performed twice. According to Herodotus and Diodorus, in-
stead of the Jews getting the command direct from God, they
borrowed the custom of the Assyrians; and Josephus silently
assents to its truth ; and J. G. Wilkinson says, u It was estab-
lished in Egypt long before Joseph was sold into that country,”
which furnishes evidence of its existence before the time of
Moses.
Among the Jews this rite was performed on the eighth day
after birth: all converts to their religion, and all servants, had
to submit to the ordinance.
Jerome says that in his day a majority of the Idumaeans,
Moabites, Ammonites, and Ishmaelites were circumcised. The
ancient Phoenicians also observed this rite, and the aboriginal
Mexicans likewise. The Mahomedans also practice it; and,
although the Koran does not enjoin it, it has been practiced
wherever that religion has been adopted. The rite is performed
on both sexes in Arabia. This rite was practiced by the early
Christians. Even the wise Paul gave practical sanction to this
ordinance in the case of Timothy. The Coptic and Abyssinian
Christian churches still observe the custom. A circumcision
festival was established in the Church, and kept on the 1st of
January in commemoration of the circumcision of Jesus.
The toleration of this rite by the Jews and Christians shows
that they were dwelling on the animal plane,—that they had
not risen to that high state of spirituality which would lead them
to abandon such heathenish ordinances and customs. It is so
repulsive to refined society, that some civilized nations have en-
acted laws interdicting the custom. Yes, this senseless, cruel,
heathenish rite has to some extent been abandoned, and must
ere long entirely disappear from the earth. It can not with-
stand the lights of science and civilization: it is a childish,
senseless, obscene, vulgar, heathenish, cruel, and disgusting
superstition.
II. Fasting and Feasting.
A total ignorance of the laws of health is indicated as exist-
ing amongst the disciples of all the ancient religions by the
HOLY MOUNTAINS, LANDS, CITIES, AND RIVEBS. 151
alternate extremes of fasting and feasting. The latter is injuri-
ous to health, and the former, also, if long continued, as was
frequently the case. But the subject of health did not occupy
the minds of religious enthusiasts. They knew nothing of the
laws of health, and cared less if possible. Fasting is reported,
in some cases, as extending to an incredible period of time, con-
tinuing in some cases for months. Hindoos often fasted for a
week, and in some cases, if reports are true, for several weeks.
Pythagoras of Greece fasted, it is said, forty da}^s. Both the
fasts and the feasts were generally held to signalize or celebrate
some astronomical epoch; such as the changes of the moon,
changes in the seasons, &c. The ancient representatives of the
Christian faith were much given to fasting, as were also some of
the Jews ; but, at the present day, Christians, with others, are
more addicted to feasting than fasting, although fasting is en-
joined by the Bible both by precept and practice. In this
respect modern Christianity bears no resemblance to ancient
Christianity.
CHAPTER XXV.
HOLT MOUNTAINS, LANDS, CITIES, AND RIVERS.
I. Holy Mountains.
Those who have read the Christian Bible are familiar with the
fact that the ancient Jews and early Christians had their holy
mounts and holy mountains, and that they are often referred
to in the Bible. Mount Sinai and Mount Horeb were to the
Jews consecrated spots. They called forth their highest feel-
ings of veneration; they occupied a place in their devout medi-
tations, similar to that of heaven in the mind of the Christian
worshiper. It may be said to have been a substitute for
heaven with the Jews; for they knew no other heaven, and
dreamed of no other in their earlier history. And Mount Zion
was a x>lace equally sacred in the devout meditations of the
early Christians. All the Oriental nations had their holy
mountains before the Jews were known to history: Merau was
152
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
the holy mount of the ancient Hindoos ; Olympus, of the Greeks ;
Athos, of the Egyptians. It is therefore evident that the found-
ers of the Christian religion borrowed the idea of attaching
sacredness to mountains. Several of Christ’s important acts
were represented as having been performed on mountains. His
sermon was delivered on a mount; his march into Jerusalem
was from the “Mount of Olives.” Luke says he went and
abode in the Mount of Olives (xxi. 87). The Devil took him
up into an exceeding high mountain, and showed him all the
kingdoms of the world; and, finally, his earthty career culmi-
nated on Mount Calvar}r. “Holy hill,” holy mount, and holy
mountain — the most important of which was Mount Zion
— are terms often used in the Old Testament. History dis-
closes very fully the origin of the custom of attaching sacredness
to hills and mountains. One writer sa}^s it was partly from the
conviction, that, the higher the earth ascends, the nearer it ap-
proaches the residence of the Gods ; and consequently thejT would
the more certainty hear the pra}’ers and invocations of mor-
tals. Prophets, seers, and anchorites were accustomed, from
these considerations, to spend much time on the hills and moun-
tains. In view of these facts, we may conclude that all persons
acquainted with history will acknowledge that the Jews and
Christians derived the tradition of regarding hills and mountains
as “holy” from the Orientals, hnd that it is consequently a
heathen tradition.
II. Holy Lands and Holy Cities.
Jerusalem was the principal holy cit}rof both Jews and Chris-
tians ; and Palestine was their holy land. Here, again, we find
them anticipated by heathen nations. Thebes was the holy city
of Eg}’pt, Ida the hoty city of India, Rome the holy city of the
Greeks and Romans, Mecca the hoty cit}r of the Mahomedans.
And, like the earty Christians who spent much time in visiting
Jerusalem, the Mahomedans make frequent pilgrimages to Mecca.
Syria was the hoty land of the Chaldeans and Persians, Wis-
dom the hoty land of the Hindoos, and Benares the principal
‘i hoty city. ’ ’ And these hoty places the}r visited very fre-
quently, going in large companies, singing hymns, and reciting
BIBLE CHARACTERS.
153
texts from their holy books as they traveled. And Christians
in the time of Constantine spent much time in traveling to and
from Jerusalem and the Holy Land, prompted by the same su-
perstitious notions and feelings. Here we observe another
analogy in the religious customs of the Jews, Christians, and
heathens, all of which were derived from ancient India.
III. Holy Livers and Holy Water.
Holy rivers were quite numerous among the devotees of
the ancient religions. Ganges, in India, appears to have been
the first river invested with the title of “hoi}7.” Its waters
were used for the rite of baptism, and were supposed to impart
a spiritual life to the subject of immersion. Jordan and the
Euphrates were regarded as sacred by the Jews, and the former
was the chosen stream for the rite of baptism by that nation.
Even Christ appears to have believed he could receive some
spiritual benefit by being dipped beneath its waves. The Nile
was a sacred river in Egypt, and many repaired to it for spir-
itual benefit. Thus the origin of holy rivers and holy waters
is plainly indicated to be of heathen origin.
CHAPTER XXVI.
BIBLE CHARACTERS.
I. Character of Jehovah.
The Old Testament is principally a history of the Jews and
their God Jehovah, — a narrative of their trials, troubles, treach-
ery, quarrels, and faithless dealings toward each other. No
other God ever had so much trouble with his people; and no
other nation ever showed so little respect for their God, or so
little disposition to obey him, or live up to his commands.
There appears to have been almost a natural antipathy between
them ; so that they were constantly repelling each other. The
relationship appears to have been a forced one, possessing but
few of the adhesive ties of friendship.
154
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
Both parties were apparently happier when separated, as they
were several times, —on one occasion for a long period (Lam.
v. 20). And yet, according to the biblical history of the case,
the}" got along as well, were as moral and as happy, as when
their God was with them. Hence it is evident, if he had never
returned, the}" would have sustained no serious loss or disad-
vantage in any way. The case furnishes an argument in favor
of that class of people who are frequently denounced by the
priesthood for u living without God in the world.” If “ God’s
own people ” could get along without him, why can not men and
women of this intelligent age? And the reason he assigns
for remaining with them as much as he did shows it was not
from natural affinity or affection for them, but because he had
u promised ” to do so. Did he not know that u a bad promise
is better broken than kept?” Another circumstance which
implies that Jehovah cherished but little respect for his people,
and cared but little about them, is that, from his neglect (as it
seems most natural to attribute it to this cause), they were lit-
erally broken up while he was apparently with them. One
portion of them fell into the hands of Shalmaneser, King of
Assyria, and the other portion into the hands of Nebuchad-
nezzar, King of Babylon; and they were never able to regain
their political power as a nation afterwards. And, to cap the
climax, ten out of the twelve tribes were lost entirely, thus leav-
ing Jehovah almost childless, and destitute of worshipers. And
a search for them for several thousand years has failed to bring
them to light. This circumstance is entirely irreconcilable with
the idea that the Jews were the special favorites of God. In-
deed, it prostrates the assumption entirely beyond defense. It
proves, also, that Jehovah’s promise never to leave or forsake
them was not adhered to. (See 1 Sam. xii. 22.)
And the language and conduct of the God of the Jews on
several occasions imply that, if he ever did make choice of them
as his pets, he was disappointed in them, and repented of the
act. When lie exclaimed, u I have nourished and brought up
children, and they have rebelled against me” (Isa. i. 2), he
virtually confesses he had been short-sighted, or that he had
erred in judgment in selecting the Jews as special favorites.
BIBLE CHARACTERS.
155
Certainly this is the language of vexation and disappointment,
and want of judgment or foresight.
2. We are told 44 he hated his own heritage ” (Jer. xii. 8).
Here is evinced again a feeling of hatred, vexation, and dis-
appointment, that no sensible being should manifest, much less
a God.
3. 44 He gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Ama-
lek, and went and smote Israel” (Judg. iii. 13). This was a
traitorous act, calculated to discredit any being. Hence it
could not have been the act of an all-wise and benevolent God.
Think of such a being getting into a squabble with his own
children, and having to invoke the aid of heathen tribes to
subdue them, and get him out of the difficulty! One day he
heads an army composed of his 4 4 peculiar people ” to fight the
heathen, with the avowed determination to exterminate them,
and 44 leave nothing alive that breathes.” The next day he
gets out of patience with their stubbornness and iniquity ; his fury
gets up to fever heat; and he traitorously abandons them, and
joins those same enemies to fight them, and reduce them to
slavery. It is scarcely necessary to say we do not believe such
a God ever existed, excepting in the imagination of ignorant
people.
4. Again : Jehovah is represented as selling his people several
times to the neighboring heathen tribes, which again leads to
the conclusion that he was disappointed in them, tired of them,
and wished to get rid of them. He sold them once to Jaban,
King of Canaan (Judg. iv. 2), and twice to the Philistines.
Wonder what he got, and what he did with the money! The first
time he sold them to the Philistines, he told them he never would
deliver them again: but he seems either to have forgotten his
promise, or forgot there is a moral obligation to stick to the
truth; for he delivered them several times after that, if his
own biographer and inspired writer tells the truth, Here is
more evidence that he is fickle-minded and unreliable, or that
the Bible writers have misrepresented his character.
5. If we could assume there is any truth in the Bible history
of Jehovah, we should not wonder that the Jews preferred wor-
shiping a golden calf to paying their devotions tQ such a God ;
156
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
and, on the other hand, it is not surprising that he should mani-
fest his displeasure toward them, and frequently steal away from
them, and often confess grief, vexation, and regret for having
made choice of such an ignorant, rebellious set of rambling
nomads, who subsisted by war and plunder.
6. Jehovah’s jealousy of other Gods, which he so frequently
manifested and so often confessed, and which is one of the
most objectionable traits of his character, must be attributed to
his own moral defects; for he acted in such a manner as to
cause his own people to prefer other Gods to him. He fre-
quent^ scolded and punished them for worshiping other Gods, —
a circumstance which furnishes evidence that other Gods were
better, and therefore more worthy of being worshiped. What
else could have caused them to prefer other Gods ? He should
have acted in such a loving and fatherly manner that other Gods
could not have been more venerated and sought after. Then he
would not have been so often vexed, harassed, and perplexed^at
the idolatrous proclivities of Iris worshipers, and so often resorted
to retaliation by forsaking them, selling them, enslaving them,
or delivering them into the hands of the spoiler. In Judges ii.
14, it is declared, u The Lord delivered them into the hands of
the spoiler ; ” and, in Judges vi. 1, we are told he delivered them
into the hands of Midian for seven years. This looks like an
attempt to spoil his own plans, and to falsify his own promises
to be with them, and protect them at all times.
7. Much of Jehovah’s dealings with his people seemed to be
by way of experiment, as in the case of trying Abraham’s faith
by requiring him to offer up his son. What an idea for an all-
wise and omnipotent God, of whom it is said, u Known unto him
are all his works ’ ’!
8. But many circumstances prove that Jehovah was not the
God of the universe, but only a family or national God. 1.
His acknowledgment of the existence of other Gods (Deut. vi.
14). 2. Ilis jealousy of other Gods (Exod. xxxiv. 14). 3. His
traveling on foot, lodging in tents, having his feet washed, eat-
ing veal and cakes (Gen. xviii.), &c., all tend to prove this.
4. And the fact that he could not know what was going on in
other nations, and not even his own until he visited the spot in
CHARACTER OF GOD9S “HOLY PEOPLE” THE JEWS. 157
person (as in the case of the Tower of Babel), is proof he was
not the God of the universe.
9. We can not concede that the “ Creator of unnumbered
worlds ” is (like Jehovah) an angry, malevolent being, addicted
to feelings of revenge and retaliation, which seemed to banish
the feeling of love and goodness entirely from his mind, and
who is represented as being frequently thwarted in his designs
and purposes by the caprices of his weak and ignorant children,
who, so far from answering his expectations of being the best,
turned out to be the worst, of his human heritage. Such ideas
would be derogatory to Deity.
And this is the God the “ American Christian Alliance ” are
trying to obtain a recognition of in the Constitution of the
United States. What a moral calamity such a step would be!
CHAPTEE XXVII.
CHARACTER OE HOD’S “HOLY PEOPLE,” THE JEWS.
As the Jews are reputedly “the chosen people of God,” —
chosen by him out of all the nations of the earth to be the
special recipients of his favors, —the chosen instruments through
which to communicate his will and his laws to the whole human
race, and chosen to be a moral example for all mankind, for that
age, and for all future generations, —it becomes a matter of great
importance to know their real character for morality, for intelli-
gence, for honesty, and for reliability. And that we may, in
the effort to present a brief sketch of their character, furnish no
ground for suspecting any misrepresentation, we will present it
in the language of Jewish and Christian writers of established
reputation. It may reasonably be presumed that their own
writers would be more likely .to overrate than underrate their
virtues. Hear, then, what one of their leading prophets says
of them. Isaiah thus describes them (Isa. lix.) : “ Their hands
are defiled with blood, and their fingers with iniquity ; and their
lips speak lies ; their tongues mutter perverseness. None of
them call for justice ; none of them plead for truth. They trust
158
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
in vanity, and speak lies ; they conceive mischief, and bring forth
iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hand. Their feet
run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood. Their
thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are
in their paths.” Such is a description of God’s holy people by
one of their number. And David completes the picture by de-
claring, “ There is none righteous ; no, not one.”
And Christ calls them “ a generation of vipers.” Bather a
shocking picture of God’s peculiar people! “Peculiar” they
were, if Isaiah’s description of them was true,—peculiar for de-
fective character. It is rather strange that Jehovah should have
selected such moral outlaws as lawgivers and moral examples for
the whole human race. There were, at the time, several nations
superior to the Jews in morals and intelligence, and much
further advanced in civilization. The Greeks, Egyptians, Chal-
deans, and a portion of the Hindoos were in advance of the
Jews.
The Rev. Mr. Hilliard, in a sermon preached in New York in
1861, says of the Jews, “They were by nature, perhaps, the
most cruel and blood-thirsty, as well as idolatrous, people in the
world.” And yet he says in the same sermon, “ that the Lord
chose the Israelites because of their adaptedness of character to
the carrying out of his divine ends of mere}7 to the race.” What
cogent reasoning! Why not select the Devil at once, if beings
the most cruel and blood-thirsty were best calculated for “ car-
lying out his divine ends of mercy to the race ’ ’ ? Here is more
proof of the evil effects of preaching, or adhering to, a religion
which is so full of errors, absurdities, and immoral elements, that
it blinds the moral vision, and weakens the reasoning faculties
to give it a place in the mind, and leads to a s}'stem of false
reasoning, and often corrupts the natural judgment. We have
more orthodox testimony to show the defective morals of the
Lord’s chosen people. Dr. Burnet (a Christian writer), in his
“ Archneologia Philosophic,” says, “ The}' were of a gross and
sluggish nature, not qualified for the contemplation of natural
tilings, nor the perception of divine ones. And consequently,”
lie tells us, “ Moses provided nothing for them of an intellectual
nature, and promised them nothing bej^ond this life,—did not
CHARACTER OF GOD’S “HOLY PEOPLE,” THE JEWS. 159
teach a future state of existence.” Lactantius says, “ They
were never visited by the learned men of other countries, be-
cause they were never famous for literature.” St. Cyril says,
“ Moses never attempted to philosophize with the Jews, because
they were ‘ grossly ignorant/ and addicted to idohdiy.” Dr.
Burnet further says, “ The}7 were depraved in their manners and
discipline, and almost bereaved of humanity. If I may speak
the truth, . . . they were a vile company of men, — an assembly
of slaves brought out of Egyptian prisons, who understood no
art but that of making bricks.” Josephus, being a Jew, was
their friend and defender; and yet he says, “They were so
illiterate, that they never wrote any thing, or held intercourse
with the learned.” St. Cyril says, “ Some of them adored the
sun as a deity ; others, the moon and stars ; and others, beasts,
and birds.” One writer says, “They hated all nations, and
were hated by all nations,” and they seemed determined to
exterminate all nations but their own. They might also have used
the language of an ancient Christian sect, who declared, “We
are the friends of God, and the enemies of all mankind.” Lot
it be borne in mind that the testimonies here cited are not from
infidel writers, but all from Jews and Christians, who, we should
presume, could have no motive for exaggerating their moral
defects, but rather inducements for concealing them. Other
similar testimony might be presented. Some of the laws which
Moses adopted for the government of the Jews corroborates
still further the statement that they occupied a very low position
in the scale of morals as well as intellect; for the laws of a
nation are a true standard of their character. Hence the law
of Moses prohibiting uncleanness (Lev. xv.), the law against
incest (Lev. xviii.). Laws against bestiality, to prohibit both
sexes from carnal familiarity with beasts, and various other
laws of a similar character, furnish a clear implication that they
were addicted to all these vile habits; and a law to compel
them to wash their hands leads to the conclusion that they were
inclined to be filthy in their habits. And the following law
shows that they were not very particular about their food : “Ye
ma}- eat the locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind,
and the grasshopper after his kind ” (Lev. xi. 22). Here were
160
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
three kinds of rather repulsive insects which the Jews were ex-
pected to eat, at least licensed to use as food. Can such a nation
be considered to be civilized ? If so, where is a nation now ex-
isting that can not, with equal propriety, be said to be civilized?
This portraiture of the Jewish character is not here presented
in any caviling spirit, or to show that they are justly objects of
either censure or ridicule. Far from it. They most probably
acted up to the highest light they were in possession of. The
primary motive of this exhibition of their character is to show
that the}" possessed no qualifications and no traits of character
calculated to fit them for moral lawgivers and moral exemplars
for us, and for the whole human race; and we can not assume,
without really dishonoring ourselves, that such a morally and
intellectually inferior nation of people were the chosen instru-
ments in the hands of God to communicate the revelation of
his will to the human family. We are under no moral obligation
to believe it. A revelation from a pure, perfect, and holy God
must (if we assume a revelation necessary) come through a
pure and holy channel: otherwise it would be contaminated and
corrupted before it reached us. If God could consent to com-
municate a revelation to the human race through such a channel
as the Jewish nation furnished, we see not how he could escape
a stigma upon his character for stooping to such ignoble means.
And would not the act of familiarizing himself with such a
people show that he kept bad company, and furnish a bad ex-
ample to us who are enjoined to be u perfect as our Father in
heaven is perfect”?
CHAPTER XXVIII.
-
CHARACTER OP MOSES, MORAL DEFECTS OP.
Tiie history of Moses is so intimately and thoroughly inter-
blcndcd with that of the Jews, that, to present the character of
one, is to present the character of the other. We shall there-
fore devote but a brief chapter to a special exposition of his
character, as it will be found fully set forth in the history of
CHARACTER OF MOSES.
161
the Jews, and the practical illustration of their moral character.
No religious chieftain ever claimed to be on more intimate terms
with God,, and no writer ever presented a more dishonorable
exhibition of his character. He made God the author of nearly
every thing he said and did, no matter how wicked, how cruel,
how demoralizing, or how shocking to decency or refined moral
sensibilities. If some of his characteristics of God are not
blasphemous, we can have but little use for the word. Some
of his laws serve as an illustration of this statement. He sa}^,
u The Lord spake unto Moses,” and told him that no person
with a flat nose or crooked back or broken hand, a crooked
eye, or who was lame or possessing any kind of a physical
blemish, should be admitted into the congregation of the Lord
(Lev. xxi.) This was punishing the unfortunate for defects
they could not help, thus aggravating the misfortunes of a class
who, above all others, had special claims upon his kindness on
account of the very defects for which they were excluded.
These laws, and many others no better, sufficiently illustrate the
character of the man. His penal code, which inflicted death
for two hundred acts, many of them no crime at all (such as
picking up sticks on the sabbath to make a fire to cook their
food with), furnishes conclusive evidence that he was a cruel
and unmerciful lawgiver. And the fact that he was almost
constantly engaged in a bloody warfare with neighboring na-
tions, with the avowed determination to exterminate them, and
“ leave nothing alive that breathes,” simply because they pre-
ferred to worship some other God than the cruel Jehovah, leads
to the conclusion that he was a bloody-minded warrior. Had
Christ lived under the Hebrew monarchy, Moses’ laws would
have put him to death; and yet they both claimed to derive
their moral code from the same God, the Jewish Jehovah. A
circumstance is related of Moses killing an Egyptian, and hiding
him in the sand. And it is stated, u He looked this way and
that way” before committing the deed, and then concealed the
dead body. This implies that he felt guilty, and that it was an
act of murder in the first degree. Although every chapter of
Moses’ history proves him to have been a cruel and bloody-
minded barbarian, with a moral code possessing but a slight ex-
162
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
hibition of the elements of mercy, humanhy, and justice, yet
Dr. Gaussel, in his 44 Theopneustia,” calls him 44 a holy and
divine man,” and says, 44 He was such a prophet, that his holy
books were placed above all the rest of the Old Testament.”
The doctor furnishes us one of the many cases of the blinding
and biasing effect of a perverted religious education, and an
argument in favor of laboring to supersede Bible religion with
something better. Here we will notice it as a curious circum-
stance, that, after Jehovah had occupied but six days in creating
eighty-five millions of worlds, and made most of them in a few
hours, it should have taken him and Moses both forty days
to write a law, and a very imperfect one at that. And then it
would seem it took Jehovah three thousand years to make a
devil, as his Satanic Majesty does not figure in the Jewish hier-
archy till after the lapse of that period.
One of the most conspicuous traits in Moses’ mental compo-
sition was an unbounded self-esteem. Although he claimed to
be in constant consultation with Jehovah, he seldom j’ielded to
his advice when it conflicted with his own judgment. On the
contrary, he several times detected his God in error, and ad-
monished him, and entered into an argument to convince him
that he was wrong; and, of course, he alwa}rs came out first
best in the logical contest. Take, for example, the case of
Aaron making the golden calf. It occurred while he and Jeho-
vah were engaged in writing 4 4 the holy law” on Mount
Sinai. When the case became known to Jehovah, it so
disturbed and aggravated him, that he at once declared he
would not only punish the guilty sinner, — the apostate Aaron,
— but would exterminate the whole race. But the better tem-
pered and more considerate Moses began to reason and remon-
strate against such a rash act. He appealed to his honor and
love of approbation, and told him the Egj-ptians would report
that lie was not able to get his 44 holy people” to the prom-
ised land, and hence killed them to conceal the failure. 44 Oh,
yes, Moses, jtou are right! I never thought of that,” was the
seeming reply of Jehovah. And thus Moses proved to be smarter
than his God, and enlightened his ignorance.
Here we will call the attention of the reader to the resemblance
CHARACTER OF MOSES.
163
between Moses and the still more ancient Egyptian Mises, or
Bacchus. It is so striking, that we can not resist the convic-
tion that they were originally closely connected with each
other. 1. Bacchus, like Moses, was born in Egypt. 2. Bac-
chus, or Mises, was also exposed to danger on the River Nile,
like Moses. 3. Bacchus lived on a mountain in Arabia called
Nisas ; Moses sojourned on Mount Sinai in Arabia. 4. Bac-
chus passed through the Red Sea dry-shod with a multitude
of men, women, and children, as Moses is represented as doing.
5. Bacchus likewise parted the waters of the River Orontes, as
Moses did those of Jordan. 6. Bacchus commanded the sun
to stand still, as Moses’ friend Joshua did. 7. Bacchus, with
his wand, caused a spring of wine to spring from the' earth,
as Moses did a spring of water to flow from a rock with the
“rod of God,” or “the rod of divination.” 8. Mises, like
Moses, also engraved his laws on tables of stone. 9. Both have
been represented in pictures with rays coming out of their heads,
indicative of the light of the sun. Thus, it will be observed, the
resemblance runs through nearly the whole line of their history.
That Bacchus figured in history anterior to the time of Moses,
no person versed in Oriental history can doubt, — a fact which
impels us to the conclusion that the two stories got mixed before
the history of Moses was written. There is one important
chapter in the practical life of Moses we can not omit to notice
before we close his history, as it furnishes a still fuller illustra-
tion of his character. We allude to his deliverance of “ the
Lord’s holy people” from Egyptian bondage. Several of the
incidents in this narrative are incredibly absurd; and some of
them of such demoralizing tendency, that it becomes the duty
of the moralist to expose them to view. The conduct of his
God Jehovah toward the King of Egypt in this case is so repul-
sive and unjust, that it must call forth the condemnation of
every honest-minded reader possessing a true sense of justice.
1. We are told that Jehovah, through Moses, frequently
ordered Pharaoh to let his people go, and then as often hard-
ened his heart that he should not let them go ; and finally pun-
ished him with death because he was unwilling to let them go.
It would certainly be difficult to discover any sense or any justice
or any consistency in such conduct.
164
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
2. It looks like not only a strange kind of justice, but mon-
strous injustice, for Jehovah or any God to- kill a man for
doing what he had purposely compelled him to do. Live frogs,
lice, flies, blood, vengeance, and death were poured out upon the
king and his subjects, ostensibly for the purpose of compelling
him to liberate the Jewish nation; and yet it was moralfy impos-
sible for him to do so, because the same Jehovah had planted
in his mind the determination not to let them go.
3. When Moses spake to Pharaoh in the name of Jehovah
to release the Israelites, the king asked, “ Who is the Lord [thy
Lord] that I should obe}7 his voice? ” Here let it be borne in
mind that different nations had their own Gods. And Moses’
God is here the same itinerant being who had been rambling
about among the bushes, hunting his lost child (Adam), eating
griddle-cakes with Abraham, wrestling all night with Jacob,
getting whipped in a fight with the Canaanites, &c. Pharaoh
was therefore justified in calling for his credentials.
4. In nearty all the contests between Jehovah and other
Gods, their power is full}T admitted ; and their success was only
secondary to that of the God of Israel. The question was not,
Shall Jehovah succeed, and other Gods fail? but* Shall Jehovah
be awarded the first prize in the contest, and his name stand at
the top of the list ?
5. There are man}’ texts in the Bible which go to show that
Jehovah was jealous of other Gods, and perpetually in fear of
being outgeneraled by them. “Ye shall know that I am the
Lord,” was the constant burden of his song. In the case be-
fore us he is represented as saying to Pharaoh, “In this thou
shalt know that I am the Lord ” (Exod. vii. 17). “ It is true
you have a God, and he is ver}7 smart and powerful; but he can’t
come up to me.”
C. Jehovah seems to have been actuated by an aspiration for
fame and power, as well as by a sympathy for his people in this
contest with Pharaoh ; for he is represented as sa}’ing, “ I will
get me honor upon Pharaoh and his host” (Exod. xiv. 17).
Here seems to be displa}Ted a spirit of vanity, and a thirst for
gloiy, —the aspiration of vain rulers and petty t}Tants.
7. The magicians kept up with Moses’ God in the perform-
CHARACTER OF MOSES.
165
ance of miracles till it came to making lice : here the}- failed.
We might conjecture it was because all the dust had been already
converted into lice by Jehovah, were it not that they had pre-
viously converted the water into blood just after Jehovah had
performed that miracle, and left not a pint to drink.
8. In the achievement of all the ten prodigies, there is no inti-
mation but that the heathen magicians performed the miracles
in the same manner that Moses did, and with equal success in
most cases and in all the most difficult ones ; thus leaving Jeho-
vah no laurels worth boasting of.
9. There must have been a great many thousand honest men
and women in Egypt; and yet Jehovah is represented as killing
the first-born of all Egjqptian parents without an}r distinction of
character, or any regard to their innocence ; and even the first-
born of beasts also. In the name of justice and mercy, what
sin had the beasts committed that they had to be punished ?
10. We are somewhat puzzled to see how the magicians could
turn all the waters of Egypt into blood, when it was already
blood, having been converted into blood a short time before by
Moses and Jehovah.
11. And it seems strange that Pharaoh should have horses
enough for six hundred u chosen chariots ” (Exod. xiv. 7) after
they had all been killed three or four times by some of the
plagues of Egypt.
12. It is not strange that Aaron’s rod should swallow up the
others as represented ; for he had such a start in the business,
and had made such a large serpent, he had probably used up
most of the materials, and left nothing but scraps for making
others.
13. The Christian who can lay down his Bible after reading
such stories as this, and not feel his natural and instinctive love
of honesty, justice, and morality weakened, must be strongly
fortified by nature against moral corruption.
166
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XXIX.
CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM, MORAL DEFECTS OF.
A brief history of the father of the Jewish tribe will tend to
illustrate and indicate the character of the whole nation, as chil-
dren usually inherit the qualities of their parents.
1. We will first notice the great promise which Jehovah
made to Abraham with respect to the boundless extent of his
future dominion. His seed were to be as the dust of the earth
or the sands of the sea for multitude (Gen. xiii. 16). And how
lias this promise been fulfilled ? Why, after a faithful compli-
ance with the command to u multiply and replenish the earth’’
for more than three thousand years, his whole tribe only num-
bers about six million souls, which is less than one in two hun-
dred of the entire population of the globe. It would take but a
few handfuls of dust to furnish the particles to represent the
number, instead of all the dust of the earth as promised or
predicted.
2. Jehovah promised Abraham, in the second place, all the
country u from the river of Egj’pt to the great river,—the
River Euphrates” (Gen. xv. 18). And yet, after the lapse of
three thousand years, we do not find them occupying a foot of
it. Another failure to execute his promise.
3. “To thee will I give it [the promised land], and to thy
seed for ever” (Gen. xiii. lf>). It will be observed here, that
the title and possession was to be perpetual, —to the end of the
world, “for ever.” And }Tet it lias been in the possession of
other nations five or six times ; and now not one family of the
Lord’s holy people can be found there. Another signal failure.
4. .Jehovah promised Abraham all the land u from the river
of Egypt to the River Euphrates ; ” but they have never had
possession of the country within two hundred miles of the river
CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM.
167
of Egypt (Nile). A writer quaintly suggests that Jehovah
could never have previously seen the country he selected for his
holy people, or he would not have chosen it; for all modern trav-
elers agree in describing it as being a poor, mountainous, rocky,
barren, and desolate country. One writer says, “ It is a coun-
try of rocks and mountains, stones, cliffs, bounded by vast,
dreary, and uninhabitable deserts. St. Jerome describes it as
being “ the refuse and rubbish of nature.” And this is the
country, let it be remembered, that Jehovah promised his people
as the chosen spot of the earth. How little he knew of geography!
5. Jehovah and Abraham appear to have been very intimate
friends, as they ate and slept together; and the “Judge of all
the earth” was often a guest in the little, narrow, mud-built
hut of the patriarch to eat veal, parched corn, and griddle-cakes
with him, and have his feet washed also by the old man (Gen.
xviii. 18). From such circumstances it would appear that Jeho-
vah traveled over the country in the character of a foot-pad or
“tramp,” and got into the mud occasionally. It is strange
that Christians can read their Bible without noticing this dispar-
aging caricature of their God.
6. Abraham’s conduct towards his servant-girl Hagar is both
disgraceful and inhuman, as he first destroyed her character
and virtue by criminal intimacy, and then turned her and her
child into the wilderness to starve (Gen. xxi.). Such conduct
is certainly very reprehensible.
7. And this is the man who is represented as being chosen by
a God of infinite wisdom, infinite purity, and infinite holiness, to
stand at the head of the moral regeneration and salvation of the
whole human race. Such a conception is derogatory to the divine
character, and demoralizing to those who read and believe it.
8. Among other immoral and disgraceful acts of “ God’s
chosen servant,” “the righteous patriarch,” “the Holy man
of God,” was that of uttering.the most shameful and unblushing
falsehood. He is charged with intentional lying on two different
occasions, in representing his wife as being his sister, —once to
Pharaoh, and once to King Abimelech; and his wife indorsed
his falsehood. (See Gen. chap. xii. and xx.)
9. And yet, in the face of all these immoral deeds, God is
168
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
represented as saying, “ Abraham kept all my commands, all
my statutes, and all my laws.” (See Gen. xxvi. 5.)
Hence the inevitable conclusion that Abraham was living up
to the commands, statutes, and laws of God, while committing
these crimes and outrages upon humanity. What a moral, or
rather immoral lesson, is this to place before the heathen of for-
eign countries, and the children of our own, who read the Bible !
It must have a tendency to demoralize them, and encourage
them in the commission of similar crimes, as certainly as they
are beings endowed with human frailties. Note these facts.
10. And we find other disgraceful, as well as incredible, deeds
charged to the father of “ the faithful.” The account of the
surrender of his manhood, and the obliteration of ever}- impulse
of parental feeling required to obtain his consent to butcher his
son Isaac upon the altar, imparts a humiliating moral lesson
(Gen. xxii.). It matters not that he did not commit the deed.
He consented to do it, and was ready to do it; which proves a
state of mind calculated to make humanity shudder. The New-
Zealanders have been known to point the missionaries to this
example as a justification of their cruel practices of slaughtering
human beings. If a father in this age of civilization should do
such a thing, or even attempt it as Abraham did, he would be
looked upon as a monster in human shape, or perfectly insane,
even if he should claim that God called upon him to perform the
act. It would have been infinitely better to disobey such a God
than to disobey and outrage every parental and kindly im-
pulse of his nature. But the case furnishes prima-facie evi-
dence that Abraham was under a religious delusion in supposing
God required the performance of such an inhuman deed. To
assume that he did would make him more of a demon than a
God. Any man or woman is to be pitied whose education has
misled him or her, and blinded them so that they can not see
that the reading of a book teaching such lessons must prove
morally injurious to the mind.
11. The injunction on Abraham to slay his son is said to
have been imposed upon him to try his faith. His faith in
what? I would ask. Faith in his own humanity? faith in his
love and affection for his son? Nothing of the kind ! but faith
CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM.
169
in his susceptibility of rendering himself an inhuman monster.
Let us suppose a father says to his son, u Richard, I want }tou
to draw a knife, and cut your brother Robert’s throat; ” and
afterwards explains the matter by telling him he issued this or-
der to try whether he would obey him. But his son would
evince more manhood, and a better moral character, by refusing
to obej^ him. It is much better to obey the dictates of con-
science, humanity, and mercy, than to obey a father or a God in
a case like this.
12. And Jehovah is represented as saying, through an angel,
u Now I know that thou fearest God ” (Gen. xxii. 12) ; equiv-
alent to saying, “ If I had not tried this experiment, I should not
have known any thing about it.” What blind mortals human
beings can become, to suppose that a God of infinite wisdom,
who “ searcheth the hearts of all men,” must resort to cruel and
shocking experiments to find out the the state of their minds !
13. But the history of the case discloses the fact that it did
not effect the end desired, — that of proving Abraham’s faith,
— not in the least, unless we assume that Abraham lied in the
case. For he said to the 3'oung men while on the road to
the altar, u Abide here until we [mj^self and son] go yonder
and worship, and come again to you.” Here is evidence that
Abraham knew he wx>uld bring his son back alive ; that is, that
Isaac would return with him, or that he told a falsehood in
order to deceive. The reader can seize which horn of the
dilemma he prefers. If he knew what the issue of the case
would be, it would, of course, be no trial of his faith whatever.
And yet Paul and other New-Testament writers laud the act as
being one of great merit and a proof of his faith.
14. We must hasten on. We can only give a passing notice
of a few other acts of this illustrious patriarch, in whom u all
the nations of the earth were to be blessed.” Jehovah is repre-
sented as saying to Abraham, on a certain occasion, u I will go
down now, and see whether they [the Sodomites] have done
according ” to my desire. “ If not, I will know ” (Gen. xviii.
21). This is one of several cases in wThich u the Judge of all
the earth ” is represented as abandoning the throne of heaven,
and coming down to learn what was going on below. What a
contracted and ignorant being was the Jewish Jehovah!
170
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
15. The mission of Jehovah at one time, when he called upon
Abraham, was to inform him that his gray-headed wife, ap-
proaching a hundred years, was to be blessed with a son in her
old age. Has it never occurred to Bible admirers that this and
other similar cases represented the Almighty, whom “ the heav-
en of heavens can not contain,” as traveling over the country in
the character of a fortune-teller, notifying old women that the
laws of nature would be suspended long enough to allow them to
be blessed or cursed with the care and perplexity of children in
their old age ?
16. It should be noticed that Abraham’s God never reproved
him for any of his misdeeds; while, on the other hand, the
heathen King Abimelech called the man of God to account for his
moral defects (Gen. xx.).
17. One of the most dishonorable acts recorded in the history
of Abraham’s God was that of bringing a plague upon Pharaoh
and his household for receiving Abraham’s wife, when it was
brought about wholly through his treachery and misrepresenta-
tion, and tv hen it appears that Pharaoh treated her in the most
respectful manner.
18. But, with all these moral stains upon the character of
Abraham, it becomes a pleasant task to record one good act in
his life. lie seems to have presented the practical proof that
he was a better man than his God ; for, when Jehovah threat-
ened the destruction of Sodom for her wickedness, Abraham
remonstrated, and suggested that it would be an act of injustice
to destroy the righteous with the wicked. It appears that this
moral consideration had escaped the mind of Jehovah. What
an inconsiderate, reckless being Bible writers represent the
Almighty as being!
1 \). Abraham, according to his history, was a man of valor, and
achieved some great exploits. For instance, with the assistance
of his regiment of one hundred and eighteen servants, he chased
at one time four great kings, with their mighty hosts, —the King
of Babylon, the King of Persia, the King of Pontus, and the King
of Nations (Gen. xiv.). lie drove them, we are told, more
than a hundred miles, and recovered his brother Lot from their
grasp. A few such daring heroes could have put down the
American Rebellion without a battle.
CHARACTER OF ABRAHAM,
171
20. We will only observe further, that this 44 true servant of
the Lord ’ ’ was both a polygamist and an idolater ; at least we
have the authority of the Jewish writer, Philo, for saying that
his father was a maker of images, and that Abraham worshiped
them. Such is a brief outline of the character of the man who
is held up as an example for us to imitate, and through whom
44 all the nations of the earth are to be blessed,” and the man
who stands at the head of that nation through which, we are
told, a revelation has been given to the world which is to effect
the moral regeneration and salvation of the whole human race.
Whether the means are adapted to the ends, the reader is left to
judge.
II. Character of Isaac.
1. In accordance with the adage, 44 Like father, like son,” we
find Isaac carrying out the same spirit of fraud and deception
practiced by his father. When 44 the men of the plain asked him
about his wife, he said, she is my sister ” (Gen. xxvi.) ; and this
man Isaac was another of 44 the faithful servants of the Lord.”
2. If the statement is true that the Lord struck Ananias and
Sapphira with sudden death for telling a falsehood, as related
in Acts v., the question naturally arises, Why did Abraham and
Isaac escape the same fate, as they were guilty of the same sin?
Why this partiality? Manifestly, this is a bad lesson in morals.
III. Character of Jacob, Moral Defects of.
1. 44 Like father, like son,” is again verified in the practical
life of Jacob. We find this patriarch excels, in moral defects,
both his father and his grandfather.
2. His conduct toward his brother Esau, in robbing him of
his just and inherited rights, is an act which stamps an eternal
stigma upon his character. When Jacob’s father, old and blind,
asked him, 44 Art thou my son Esau?” he replied, 441 am”
(Gen. xxvii. 24), thus telling a base falsehood, and deceiving
his old father; and this deceptive and underhanded act caused
his brother 44 to cry an exceedingly bitter cry ” (Gen. xxvii. 34).
What an unfeeling brother was this 44 true servant of the Lord ” !
It appears that Isaac and Jehovah both intended that Esau
should inherit the blessing; but Jacob outwitted them by the
172
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
aid and connivance of his mother. This is but a sample of the
character and conduct of the family throughout their whole
history.
3. Jacob seems to have entertained very singular and selfish
ideas in regard to his religious obligation to serve and worship
his God. He made it entirely a question of bread and butter,
or, rather, of bread and raiment. He proposed to strike up a
trade with Jehovah relative to his future allegiance to his gov-
ernment, and to fix the terms of the contract himself (Gen.
xxviii.). He kindly and condescendingly told Jehovah, that if
he would provide him with food and raiment, and be his con-
stant companion in the future, “then shall the Lord be my
God, and this stone shall be God's house; and I will give one-
tentli to the Lord of what he giveth me ” (Gen. xxviii. 20).
Here is the attempt to drive a bargain with Jehovah on the
quid-pro-po principle. We are not informed how Jehovah ap-
preciated this kindly offer. This is an unfortunate omission, as
every reader must feel interested in knowing whether he ac-
cepted the proposition; and henceforth he whom “the heaven
of heavens can not contain ” took up his abode in the patriarch’s
little stone hut. We are led to infer, that, if Jehovah refused to
accept his terms, Jacob would henceforth refuse to be a subject
of God’s kingdom, and thus bring him to grief. This is a
sample of the childish conception entertained by the whole
Jewish nation of “ the God of the universe,” if we may presume
their God was any thing more than a family or national deity.
4. The proncncss of the Lord’s hoi}’ people to falsify, cheat,
and deceive is well illustrated in the case of Laban, who, after
Jacob had, by a fair contract, labored seven years for him for his
daughter Rachel, would not let him have her, but forced his
older daughter Leah upon him ; and, when Jacob complained, he
told him lie must serve seven years more if he got Rachel; and
his love for her prompted him to accept the terms. But he
seems not to have been well compensated for his fourteen long
years of* toil for these two sisters. Their subsequent conduct
indicates that he fcfc paid dear for the whistle; ” and one month’s
labor ought to have paid for both, even at ten cents a da}’, for
they both turned out to be failures. They were, however, a fair
CHARACTER OF DAVID.
173
specimen of the race. Rachel stole her father’s images; and,
when pursued and overtaken by him, she hid them, and told him
a falsehood to conceal the act. The circumstance of her father
. having images, and of her stealing them, is an evidence that both
were idolaters (Gen. xxxi.).
5. It is easy to see, from the foregoing facts, from what source
the Jewish proclivity to idolatry and also to falsehood was de-
rived. The latter was practically manifested by four hundred
prophets at one time. It is true the Lord was charged with
putting the lie in their mouths (1 Kings xxii. 22).
6. We are told, that, on a certain occasion, u the sons of Jacob
answered Shechem, and Hamor his father, deceitfully” (Gen.
xxxiv. 13) ; by which it appears the spirit or propensity to fraud
and deception was still transmitted to their posterity.
CHAPTER XXX.
CHARACTER OF DAVID-HIS NUMEROUS CRIMES.
Here is one of the illustrious Bible characters who has been
held up to the world for several thousand years as the “ sweet
singer of Israel,” and u the man after God’s own heart;”
whose life is stained by the commission of a long list of crimes
of the blackest character, some of which would send him to
the State prison for life if committed in this morally enlightened
age.
1. One of his first acts of moral delinquency was that of turn-
ing traitor to Achish, King of Gath. After the king had kindly
given him a ruler ship over the city of Ziklag, he manifested his
ingratitude by waging an unprovoked war for plunder upon the
king’s friends and relatives, to rob them of their cattle (1 Sam.
xxvii.).
2. David, with an army, committed a similar act of aggression
and spoliation upon the rights and property of Nabal, to attain
his cattle by robbery (1 Sam. xxv.).
3. David at one time turned traitor to his own nation by join-
ing the army of Achish to fight them (1 Sam. xxix.).
174
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
4. David obtained possession of the kingdom of Ish-bosheth
by bribery and intrigue, after acknowledging him to be a right-
eous man (2 Sam. iii.).
5. David robbed Mephiboshetb, the son of his bosom-friend
Jonathan, and a poor cripple, of one-half of his estate, upon
the plea that might makes right (2 Sam. xvi.).
6. David connived at some of the most abominable and
atrocious crimes of his sons (2 Sam.).
7. The manner ill which David obtained his first wife Michal
is shocking to all who possess kind and philanthropic feel-
ings. Saul had proposed a hundred foreskins of the Philistines
as the price of his daughter; but David, in wanton cruelty,
killed two hundred for this purpose.
8. The manner in which David obtained his beautiful wife
Bathsheba, to add to his list of wives, might be tolerated in that
era of barbarism ; but it must be looked upon at the present time
as an act of cruelty and wickedness. He said to Joab, kCSet
Uriah in the front of the battle . . . that he maj" be smitten
and die ” (2 Sam. xi. 15) ; which was equivalent to sla3Ting him
with his own hands, and for no crime, but solely to get his
widow for a wife.
9. Thus, we see, David was not only a polygamist, but he
obtained his wives by fraud, murder, and intrigue.
10. David’s dancing naked in public was an indecent act,
although several cases are reported of u the holy” men of that
age appearing in public in a state of nuditj\ His wife Michal
upbraided him for u uncovering himself to the eyes of the
handmaids, his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly
uncovereth himself” (2 Sam. vi.). It is said that “ David
danced before the Lord with all his might.” Can we suppose
the Lord would fancy such sights?
11. David’s treatment of the Moabites in killing two-thirds
of them without any just provocation is an act that would hang
any man of the present da}r (2 Sam. viii.).
-
12. The fiendish act of David in placing the Moabites under
saws and harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and making
them walk through brick-kilns (2 Sam. xii.), bespeaks a heart
callous with cruelty, and unmerciful as a tiger. The very
CHARACTER OF SOLOMON.
175
thought of it is calculated to chill the blood of a person with the
feelings of common humanity.
13. David’s murder of five step-sons and two brothers-in-law,
to gratify a malignant grudge toward the house of Saul, is
another act showing the fiendish character of the man.
14. ,'WTien David was so old and stricken in years that no
amount of bed-clothing could keep him warm, he made this a
plea for marrying another wife — and a young maid at that —
to lie in his bosom, and keep him warm (1 Kings i. 1). Lust
knows no failure in expedients.
15. David’s advice to his son Solomon on his death-bed, to
assassinate Joab and his other enemies, shows that his ruling
passions — animosity and revenge — were strong in death.
16. And finally David’s wicked prayer, as found in the hun-
dred and ninth Psalm, in which he invokes a string of the most
horrid curses upon his enemies, culminates his immoral history.
It completes the demoralizing picture of the “ man after God’s
own heart.” Now, we ask in solemn earnest, is it not evident
that a book indorsing such characters as David, placed in the
hands of the heathen of other countries or the children of our
own, must have a demoralizing tendency? Most certainty, if
Franklin was right in saying, “ The reading of bad examples
will make bad morals.” Remember, the perpetrator of all
these crimes is said to be “ a man after God’s own heart.”
If so, then God must have approved of all his crimes. But
such a God will not do for this age; and to teach children and
heathen such a lesson is calculated to efiect their moral ruin.
II. Character of Solomon.
Solomon’s writings and history both show that he was a liber-
tine, a tyrant, and a polygamist. His tyrannical monopoly
of seven hundred wives and three hundred prostitutes, making
him a practical “ Free-lover ” on a large scale, is an indelible
stigma upon his character. It was a usurpation of the rights,
and a trespass upon the liberties, of nearly two thousand men
and women. It prevented them from filling the mission or
sphere in life that God designed them to enjoy. The organiza-
tion of the sexes shows they were designed to be husbands and
176
THE BIBLE OF BIBLEB.
wives and parents. And the nearly equal number of the sexes
is an evidence that nearly a thousand men were deprived of
wives by Solomon’s monopoly of women; while, on the other
hand, those women were prevented from sustaining the true
relation of wives. When he could not see those women more
than once in three years by calling on one of them each day, it
is a farce, and an insult to reason, to call them wives. Could
a woman sustain the practical relation of wife to a man she
only saw as husband once in three years ? The very idea is
ridiculous, and a mockery of the true marriage relation. And
yet this is the man who is represented as being such a special
favorite of God as to receive a portion of his divine wisdom. It
is a slander, if any thing can be, upon Infinite Wisdom. By
reading his amorous song, we can learn his motives for enslav-
ing such a large number of women.
If this c c wise man ” is to be accepted as authority (and he
should be if he got his wisdom directly from God), then we must
relinquish all hope of an immortal existence. Hear him : “ For
that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth the beasts:
... as the one dietli, so dieth the other ; yea, they have all one
breath, so that a man hath no pre-eminence over a beast ’ ’ (Eccles.
iii. 19). Here is a plain and unequivocal denial of man’s
conscious existence beyond the grave. Nor does one Old-Tes-
tament writer teach the doctrine. Job denies it in still more
explicit terms, if possible. (See Job xiv. 10.)
III. Lot and I-Iis Wife and Daughters.
The act of Abram’s brother Lot delivering up his two daugh-
ters to the Sodomites, u to do to them as is good in your eyes ”
(Gen. xix. 8), must excite reflections in the highest degree
revolting to the mind of every father who has daughters. The
act of a father voluntarily offering up his virtuous daughters to
gratify the depraved passions of a mob is too shocking to con-
template. And to accept such a character as a “righteous
man” must certainly weaken the faith of the Bible believer
in a true system of morality, and plant in his mind a very low
standard of the moral perfections of God.
We arc told (Gen. xix. 2G) that Lot’s wife was converted
CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.
177
into a pillar of salt as a penalty for the simple act of looking
back. Several absurdities are observable in this, story: —
1. It is difficult to conceive how any sin or crime could be
attached to the natural act of turning the head to look in any
direction, especially when no injunction had been laid upon
the act.
2. If there were any thing so inherently wrong in the act of
looking back as to be visited with such direful penalties, pillars
of salt would soon become more numerous than frogs were in
Egypt.
3. Reason would suggest that, to put the thing in shape to
be believed by future generations, the woman should have been
converted into some imperishable substance, such as granite,
gold, silver, or pig-iron. A woman made of salt, or salt of a
woman, would soon dissolve and disappear.
4. The Hindoos relate that a woman in India was once con-
verted into a pillar of stone for an act of unchastity; and
“the stone is there unto this day.’5 Here is a story with a
better foundation: the Egyptians have the tradition of a woman
being converted into a tree for the act of plucking some fruit
after it had been interdicted. How many of these stories should
we credit?
CHAPTER XXXI.
CHARACTER OE THE JEWISH PROPHETS.
It is a circumstance indicative of the natural moral defects of
the Jewish character, that their most 66 holy men,5’ who were
assumed to be familiar with the counsels of Infinite Wisdom,
and on terms of daity intercourse with Jehovah, yet were,
according to their own history, men of such defective moral
habits and moral character as to be unreliable either as exam-
ples of moral rectitude, or with respect to their prophetic utter-
ances. We will here present a brief sketch of the character of
the principal prophets, drawn from their own “inspired writ-
ings :99 —
The leading prophet Isaiah says, “ The priest and the prophet
178
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
have erred through strong drink. They are swallowed up of
wine. They are out of the way through strong drink. They err
in vision. They stumble in judgment” (Isa. xxiv. 7).
Here is a sweeping charge against all the prophets, —not one
of them excepted. If they err in vision (of course he means
spiritual vision), then what reliance can be placed in their
prophecies, especially if it is true, as he declares in chap, ix.,
that “ the prophets teach lies ” ? Then we can not confide im-
plicitly in any thing they say. This conclusion, and also the
foregoing portraiture of their character, is confirmed by Hosea,
who says, in chap, ix., that “ the Lord will punish the prophets
for their sins and their iniquities; ” also, “The prophet is a
snare in all his ways; the prophet is a /ooZ,” &c. (Hos. ix. 7,
9). Micah says that they divined for money, and made the
people err. What confidence, we ask, can be placed in men,
either for truthfulness or as moral teachers, who are thus repre-
sented by their own historians and their own friends to be
almost destitute of moral principle ? Each one denounces all the
others. The implied meaning in each case seems to be, “ Take
my pills, and beware of counterfeits.” Zechariah, who was one
of them, declared the Lord would drive them all out of the
land with the unclean spirits (Zech. xiii. 2). We should not,
however, be surprised to find them possessing such a character,
when their God, Jehovah, is represented as being no better, and
is on the same moral plane. They, in fact, make him responsible
for all their moral derelictions and sinful acts by representing him
as being the author or instigator. “If a prophet be deceived,
... 1 the Lord have deceived that prophet” (Ezek. xiv. 9).
Here the word prophet is used in a general sense, so as to imply
that none are excepted. Jeremiah takes God at his word when
he exclaims, “O Lord, thou hast deceived me” (Jer. xx. 7).
Here, it will be observed, the moral character of Jehovah and
his prophets were all cast in the same imperfect mold.
That superstition reigned supreme in the veiy highest order
of the Jewish minds, to the exclusion of science, is shown by
some of the wild, superstitious freaks of the prophets. Isaiah
traveled through Egypt and Ethiopia three }'ears stark naked
(Isa. xx. 3). Such a disgusting exhibition, if attempted in
CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.
179
this age of civilization, would terminate in a few hours by the
lodgment of the lunatic in the calaboose. Jehovah, it appears,
first prompted the act, and afterwards spoke approvingly of it
by saying it was performed by “ my servant Isaiah” (Isa.
xx. 3).
Ezekiel and Habakkuk both would have us believe that God
seized them by the hair of the head, and carried them, —the
former, the distance of eight miles ; and the latter, three hundred
miles. How Jehovah himself traveled while performing this feat
of carrying the prophets is not explained. It must have been
rather an unpleasant way of traveling, and must have caused
some serious perturbation of mind lest the hair-hold should slip,
and precipitate them to the ground. If this mode of travel could
have been continued, it would have superseded the necessity of
railroads.
Ezekiel, we are told, lay three hundred and ninety days on
his left side, and forty days on his right side ; and then, having
swallowed a roll of parchment with the aid of Jehovah (Ezek.
iii. 1), he was prepared for business. We are not told what
was the object in swallowing such a formidable document, or
how he managed to get into his stomach an article having a
diameter four times that of his throat. Jeremiah wore cords
around his neck, and a yoke on his back (rather a singular
place for a yoke). Hosea claimed that God commanded him
twice to go and marry a whore (Hos. i. 2). This looks like a
connivance at, if not a tacit indorsement of, whoredom. Eze-
kiel relates a “ story” about being carried by u the hand of
the Lord,” and set down among some old dry bones, which he
proceeded to invest with human flesh and sinews, and then drew
skins over them to hold the flesh and bones together (Ezek.
xxxvii.). Having thus manufactured a new supply of the genus
homo, he invoked the four winds to inflate their bodies with
breath, when, lo! there “ stood upon their feet an exceeding
great army.” We use his own language. Here is a story
that casts all the wild and weird tales of heathen mythology in
the shade. There would have been no necessity for drafting
soldiers in the recent Rebellion if the country could have been
blessed with such a creative genius as Ezekiel. Such stories set
180
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
all logic at defiance. If the first commandment, “Multiply and
replenish the earth,” had been neglected so as to render it
necessary to adopt another process for increasing the number of
human beings, certainly a more rational and decent mode might
have been invented. We will not relate any more of the curious
capers of these “ inspired men of God.”
Some Christian writers have disposed of such erratic conduct,
and such wild freaks of fancy, b}r assuming them to be the
garb or metaphor of some great spiritual truth. This is ex-
plained by the proverb, “ Necessity is the mother of invention; ”
but the common mind knows nothing of these inventions of the
priesthood to save the credit of the Bible. Hence, whether true
or false, such an explanation does not destroy the demoralizing
influence of such ideas and language upon the public mind;
and then it is derogatory to the character of God to assume he
would do such senseless and unrighteous things as are related
in some of the above cases. We insist that it would be a
serious calamity upon the country to make a book containing
such moral lessons, or rather immoral lessons, “the fountain
of our laws and the supreme rule of our conduct,” as urged by
the Evangelical Alliance ; and it is a sorrowful and deplorable
circumstance that such a book is circulated among the heathen
by the thousand as guides for their moral conduct. We wish
they would refuse to accept it, as the Japanese have done in the
past.
II. The PnoniETS Elijah and Elisha.
There are some peculiar features in thd history of these two
Hebrew prophets, for which they seem to merit a special notice.
They appear to have been on very familiar terms with Jehovah ;
and the whole machinery of heaven, we are led to conclude, was
under their control, with no special reason why they should
merit such divine partiality, as they were not overstocked with
practical righteousness. The acts of raising the dead and con-
trolling the elements appear to have been to them very common-
place performances. One of Elijah’s greatest miraculous feats
was that of “ shutting up the heavens,” so that there was no
dew nor rain for three years (1 Kings xvii. 1). Aside from
CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.
181
the absolute impossibility of intercepting the action of the laws
which control and regulate* the entire machinery of the universe,
there are several considerations which render this story wholly
incredible. It appears, from the language used, that this
drought extended over the whole earth, and all nations must
have suffered the direful consequences; and yet none of their
histories allude to it. The absence of rain and dew for three
3^ears must have caused the surface of the earth to become dry
and parched to a considerable depth, particularly in the torrid
zone. The creeks and rivulets must have been dried up. Every
spear of grass, every tree, every plant, must have withered and
perished ; and all the cattle must have died for want of food and
drink ; and the people must have shared the same fate. Indeed,
not a living thing could have been left upon the face of the earth
where this drought prevailed. And yet no other history makes
any allusion to such a calamity ; and a circumstance which ren-
ders it more incredible is, that the moisture which is constantly
ascending from the earth could not have been held in the upper
strata of the atmosphere for half that period of time. When it
ascends and accumulates, and becomes sufficiently condensed, it
must fall in the shape of rain.
2. It appears that the prophet himself, in order to escape the
fatal consequences of this terrible visitation of divine wrath,
was instructed to flee, and hide near the Brook Cherith, which
was in the vicinity of Jordan. Here, we are told, he was fed
by a raven, which brought him both bread and water. The
queries naturally arise here, Where did the raven obtain those
articles of food ? Why can not suffering and starvation be pre-
vented at the present day by a similar expedient ? Why should
several millions of human beings have suffered a terrible death
by starvation in India within a recent period, if ravens can be
employed as messengers of mere}" ? Why should God be par-
tial? The preservation of the life of the prophet could not
have been of so much more importance, judging from his sub-
sequent history, as he achieved but little good afterward ; and,
as nobody claims to have seen the raven but Elijah, the case
looks a little doubtful.
3. The next miraculous feat of Elijah was that of increasing
182
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
a widow’s barrel of meal and cruse of oil after they were nearly
exhausted, so that they lasted for many months. In nearly all
such cases we find incredible features, in addition to the impos-
sibility of performing the act. No reason can be found, in the
history of this case, for bestowing such miraculous favors upon
this woman that would not apply to thousands of women now,
some of them even in a worse state of suffering, and in greater
need of divine aid. It does not appear that the miracle had
the effect to convince anybody of the might and power of his
God, nor that it was designed to produce such an effect. Hence
nothing was accomplished by it but the relief of the poor
widow’s wants, which was a very good thing; but, as we have
already remarked, she had no more claim upon the benevolence
and munificence of God than thousands of poor widows and
others of the present day who receive no such aid.
4. The prophet performed, we are told, another miracle for
the benefit of this woman, though we do not learn that she was
more righteous than other women. Her son sickened and died
(perhaps the meal was not in a very healthy condition) ; and
Elijah restored him to life. If there were any truth in the story,
it could be accounted for by supposing the boy was in a state of
catalepsy, or trance, as life has been revived in numerous cases
in persons in this condition in modern times ; and the conduct
of Elijah furnishes some evidence that he understood it in this
light. lie took the body into an upper room, so the performance
should not be witnessed by an}7 of the company (perhaps for fear
of being disturbed ; and he was probably apprehensive that they
would suspicion, from his actions, that the boy was not dead).
In fact the narrator does not say he was dead, but only that
the breath had gone out of him ; and this could be said in any
case of swooning, trance, or catalepsy.
5. Aliab is reported as reproving Elijah for bringing so much
suffering upon the people by the great drought. The reason
the prophet assigns for this divine judgment is worth}7 of note.
It was because Ahab and his subjects worshiped a false God
(Baalim). This explains the whole affair. The Jews were
always assuming that those who did not worship as they did
were worshipers of false Gods ; but there is no evidence of
CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS.
183
this, and no reason in the assumption. As St. John (i. 18)
declares, u No man has seen God at any time,” it follows that
each worshiper, under every system of religion, pictures out
the form, size, shape, and character of God for himself; and,
certainly, other nations had as much right to form their own
mental conceptions of God as the Jews had, and were as likely
to form a correct idea of him as they. They could not picture
out a worse God than Jehovah. Here we have a true explana-
tion of the reason the Jews were perpetually denouncing and
making war on other nations: it was simply because they
would not subscribe to the Jewish creed. The Jews were creed-
worshipers.
6. This conclusion is confirmed by the relation, in the next
chapter, of a contest between the God of Elijah and the God
of the prophets of Baal. We are told that Elijah’s God could
kindle a fire upon the altar, while theirs could not. Here is
admitted the existence of other Gods. The only difference be-
tween them is, Elijah’s God was a little smarter. The same
thing is aimed to be shown in numerous other contests between
Jehovah and other Gods. It is merely a trial of skill, strength,
and knowledge.
7. And because the God of the prophets of Baal fell a little
behind, and could not quite equal the achievements of Jehovah,
we are told that Elijah put the prophets all to death. Here is
another circumstance tending to show that Elijah could not have
been a true servant of a just God ; for such a God would not
sanction such cruelty. But the story carries an absurdity upon
the face of it. To suppose that four hundred and fifty men
would stand quietly, and submit to be slain by one man single-
handed and alone, without any resistance, is altogether too
incredible to be entertained for a moment.
8. The next achievement of Elijah, after eating a barley cake,
baked on the coals, and drinking a cruse of water (1 Kings
xix. 8), was to walk forty days and forty nights, without stop-
ping to eat or sleep. This performance was almost equal to
that of the Hindoo, Yalpa, who walked round the sun in eleven
hours. One story is just as credible as the other.
9. We are told that, when Ahaziah, who succeeded his father
184
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Ahab upon the throne, got crippled by falling, and sent to con-
sult the God of Ekron, Elijah, on hearing of it, asked why
he did not consult the God of Israel (2 Kings i. 6) ; and, when
the king’s messengers reported to him what the prophet Elijah
had said, he sent fifty messengers to the prophet to invite him
to come and see him, that he might consult with him. These
messengers treated him very respectfully, and called him u the
man of God ; ” but the prophet, we are told, instead of com-
plying with the king’s request, called down fire from heaven,
which consumed the whole number. When the king heard of the
circumstance, he sent fifty more messengers, who shared the
same fate, and were likewise consumed by fire from heaven.
An uncivil and ver}r wicked thing for a righteous prophet to do.
10. We are told that Elijah, in the course of his travels, came
to a stream of water, and took off his mantle, and smote it.
The water parted hither and thither, and permitted him to walk
in the bottom of the stream. Another displa}T of his great
miraculous power ; but it is void of truth.
11. The last astounding feat reported of this miraculous
prophet was that of ascending to heaven in a chariot of fire,
with horses made of the same material. Rather a hazardous
mode of traveling. This stor}r is contradicted both by the laws
of nature, and the express declaration of the Bible itself. The
former teaches us that the fire would have been extinguished for
want of oxygen before he had ascended many miles from the
earth ; and the latter declares, u Flesh and blood can not enter
the kingdom of heaven ; ” and also that “ no man hath ascended
up to heaven but lie that came down from heaven,”—Christ
Jesus (John iii. 13). There are several circumstances which
render these marvelous achievements of Elijah wholly incredi-
ble, in addition to their setting aside the laws of nature. We
can not learn that any good was accomplished by it. It does
not appear that anybody was converted to a life of practical
righteousness; while we must assume that God must have
had some great purpose in view to cause him to thus set aside
and trample under foot his own laws. On the other hand,
a great deal of bad feeling was engendered, and a great many
lives destroyed. And then there is no allusion whatever to
CHARACTER OF THE JEWISH PROPHETS. 185
these astonishing miracles in any other history. All these cir-
cumstances and considerations warrant us in discarding the
whole affair, though Christian writers attach great importance
to it.
The Feats of Elisha.
The marvelous deeds of Elisha appear to be, to a considera-
ble extent, a mere repetition of those of Elijah. Like his
predecessor, he raised a dead child to life, increased the supply
of oil for a widow after it had run short, and also increased
the quantity of good water for the people by a supernatural
process, though not by a shower of rain, as Elijah did, after a
three years’ drought. There is evidently a disposition to imitate
and outdo his predecessor: hence he brings water without the
process of rain. There are two or three incidents in his his-
tory worthy of notice : —
1. When Elijah took his perilous flight heavenward, and left
him alone, we are told he rent his garments. This act, although
customaiy among u the Lord’s holy people,” was rather an
insane way of manifesting his grief. A man in this age doing
so would be taken to the insane asylum.
2. The second performance of Elisha, deserving particular
notice, was an act of malignant revenge upon some frolicsome
boys reminding him that he was bald-headed. For this simple,
childish, though rude, act of calling him u bald-head,” we are
told he caused u two bears to come out of the woods, and
tear forty-two of them to pieces.” Why the other children
escaped this fate, we are not told. This conduct on the part
of the prophet evinces a morose, cruel, and revengeful disposi-
tion, instead of a philanthropic and benevolent one, as we
should have expected the Lord’s chosen prophet to manifest.
If the story were a credible one, it would be a stigma upon his
character while it stands on the page of history.
3. There is one circumstance related in the history of Elisha
which seems to indicate that he was a man of rather gross habits.
It is stated, that, when he killed a yoke of oxen for food, he
“ boiled their flesh with the instruments of the oxen,” and gave
the people to eat (1 Kings xix. 21). We infer, from this lan-
«
186
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
guage, that the oxen were thrown into the cooking-vessel whole,
without being skinned or cleaned. It must have been rather a
rare dish, and a tough one also.
4. We will notice one more remarkable incident in the history
of this remarkable prophet. We are told, that, as some men
were felling some trees on the banks of the Jordan, one of
them, by accident, let his ax fall into the stream. On the case
being reported to Elisha, he soon relieved the man of his trouble
by throwing a stick into the water, which caused the ax to swim.
Here is another specimen of the philosophy of the Christian
Bible. Heathen mythology is full of such lawless stories.
When the boat in which a Hindoo was rowing capsized, and
threw his dinner into the Indus, a fish was accommodating
enough to arrest it in its descent, and bring it to the surface,
and restore it to the hungry boatman. A very accommodating
fish ! as much so as the stick !
We will now take a view of the moral bearing of the stories
of these great “ God-chosen ” and “God-favored prophets/’
as one Christian writer styles .them. We must assume that God
would not suspend the action of those laws which secure order
and harmony throughout nature to perform such miracles as
these prophets are represented as performing, unless some
great and important end was to be accomplished by it. Well,
let us see if this was the result; if not, we must assume that these
miracles were never performed. According to Dr. Lardner,
miracles were always designed to accomplish some great good,
and generally to remove the skepticism of unbelievers, and to
convince them of the mighty power of God. But we do not
find that an}' such effects were produced by any of the miracles
here reported. The performance of Elijah did not convert
Ahab nor Jezebel, nor the worshipers of Baal, either to the
faith or to a life of practical righteousness; nor did those of
Elisha convert Naaman ; nor did either of the prophets convert
or reform any of the thousands of heathen in the countries
through which they traveled. The contemporary kings of Judah
and Israel still continued in their ungodly course as before. In
a word, nobody was benefited, nobody reformed, and no good
effected by any of these miracles, only to a few individuals, who
PBOGBESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
187
-
could have been accommodated in the usual way, — by ordinary
means. On the other hand, bad feelings were engendered,
many lives lost, and much suffering caused by their miraculous
proceedings. We must conclude, then, that,* so far as any
agency of God is claimed in the several cases, these miracles
were never performed ; and we have the negative testimony of
history to prove still further that these miracles were never
wrought. The history of no other nation mentions them, not
even the three years of drought; yet Christ speaks of it, and
indorses it with all its impossibilities and all its bad conse-
quences, which is an evidence of his ignorance of natural law.
As these stories, by their stultifying absurdities, do violence to
our reason, and also to our moral faculties, on account of the
cruelty, injustice, bloodshed (for it shows both prophets were
murderers), we hold, from these considerations, that the influ-
ence of these stories is demoralizing, and that they should not
be put into the hands of the heathen, as they are every year by
the thousand.
CHAPTER XXXII.
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
Idolatry : its Character, Uses, Harmlessness, and Primary
Origin.
There is no act, no species, of human conduct, nothing
recognized as a sin within the lids of the Christian Bible, which
is perhaps more fearfully or more frequently condemned, or
denounced with more awful and terrible penalties, than that of
idolatry. Those who practiced it are ranked with murderers
and liars (Rev. xxii. 15) ; and it is declared, “ The}" shall not
inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. vi. 9), but “ shall have
their portion in the lake of fire and brimstone” (Rev. xxi. 8).
Now, we propose to bestow a brief examination upon the origin,
character, and practical moral effect of this ancient practice,
that we may learn the nature of the custom which is thus placed
at the head of the list of the acts of human depravity, and
188
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
regarded as the blackest and most infamous crime ever perpe-
trated b}r sinful man. We find it manifested under various
forms, the original or most primitive aspect of which, so far as
disclosed by the light of history, is known as Feticliism,—the
worship of inanimate objects. Stretching the imagination far
awaj" in the rearward of time,—far back along the receding
pathway of human history, over a series of many thousands, not
to say millions, of years,—we arrive at a period in which
man is found occup3dng a plane of mere animal, sensorial exist-
ence, connected with which was an imperfect development of per-
ception and reflection. In this era of his mental growth he began
to perceive and recognize the motions of objects around him.
He observed bright and shining bodies rolling over his head, —
one by da}T, and ten thousand more by night. At least he ob-
served that they changed positions,—being in one locality in the
morning, and in the opposite direction in the evening. What
conclusion from these observations could be more natural, more
childlike (for, bear in mind, this was realty the childhood of the
race), or more reasonable, than that these bodies possessed life, —
that they inherently possessed the power of locomotion, the same
ability to move that he did himself,—just as the infant, now gaz-
ing out upon the sky' from the lap of its mother, fancies the darting
meteor to be a bird or an animal? Wherever the ignorant, illit-
erate, primitive inhabitants of our globe perceived motion,—
whether it was displaj^cd in the revolution of the planets, the
falling tree, or the rippling stream, — there they associated life
and motion. And, soon learning that these adjuncts of nature
possessed a power and force superior to that with which they
themselves were endowed, tlicir feelings of awe and veneration
were thereby excited ; and to the highest degree their deep in-
wrought devotional feelings first found an outlet by bowing in
humble acknowledgment to the superior greatness of the shining
orbs wheeling in such majestic grandeur along the deep blue sky,
and “ bidding defiance to all below.” This is believed to have
been the first form, the first practical manifestation, of religious
worship, and the first form or phase of idolatiy now denomi-
nated Feticliism.
Polytheism. —This word is from polus, u many,” and Theos,
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
189
‘•God;’’ and hence is used to denote a belief in many or
several Gods, which comprehends the second form and stage
of idolatry. We have spoken of the early recognition by the
primitive inhabitants of the earth of the motion of the heavenly
bodies as giving rise to the belief that they possessed self-
constituted life and volition. But, progressing a step farther,
their attention was turned to motion where there was no visible
agent to produce it, — action without a visible actor. The
thunder rolled and reverberated along the great archway of
heaven, the winds whistled and moaned through the thick
foliage of the trees, and rushed along the valleys, oft-times
with such violence as to overturn their rude tenements, and
prostrate the towering oak at their feet. Yet nothing could
be seen of the agent which produced these direful effects. No
being, no agent, no cause adequate for their production, was
visible. Hence they very naturally concluded that they were
produced by invisible beings who could wing their way through
space without being seen. This assumed discovery soon gave
rise to the thought that the stars might be moved by these
beings, instead of possessing, as they had previously been sup-
posed to do, an inherent power of motion of their own. And
these prime movers of the planets they concluded to be Gods,
or moving spirits. Thus originated the notion of a plurality
of Gods, each planet having a separate ruling Deity. And the
sun—being greatly superior to, transcending in magnitude, light,
power, and influence, all the other luminaries, with their quali-
ties all combined — was, with the most childlike naturalness,
supposed to be ruled by the chief of the Gods, “the Lord
of lords and King of kings.” It was he who, every morning
throwing open the magnificent portals of the Orient, — the huge
golden gates of the eastern horizon, — slowly lifted aloft his stu-
pendous body of lighf to dispel the deep dark gloom which for
many hours had been spread like a pall over universal nature.
It was he who, plowing his way through the heavens, despite
the mist and clouds piled upon the great highway of his wonted
march, rolled down at eventide the western declivity of the
cerulean causeway to give place to Luna, queen of night, real-
izing that,
190
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
“ Soon as the evening shades prevail,
The moon takes up the wondrous tale;”
and that
“ Ten thousand marshaled stars, a silver zone,
Diffuse their blended radiance round the throne.”
It was this mighty solar orb, “ the king of day,” who, having
performed his wonted journey to the south, returned in early
spring to banish the chilling blasts of the drear cold season ; to
drive from off the earth the biting frosts and freezing snows of
gloom-dispensing winter, and pour down, in lieu thereof, his
genial and vivifying rays to waken the flowers ; to call forth
vegetation, and ultimate^ ripen the golden harvest. In a word,
he dispensed heat, light, life, and blessings innumerable over
all the earth. How eas}r, how natural, then, it was for the
untutored savage to conclude that the indwelling or ondwelling
spirit of the sun was u the chief of the Gods,” to whom all
the inferior Deities (those who presided over the stars) bowed
in humble allegiance, acknowledging his superior sway, his right
to rule over the boundless universe ! The sun, being thus the
great central wheel of all recognized power,—i.e., the tabernacle
or dwelling-place of the supreme, omnipotent God, —became the
principal object of admiration and adoration, the pivot around
which clustered their deepest devotional aspirations ; the subor-
dinate Deities of the planets holding but a second place in their
devout contemplations and uprising venerations. The worship
of these imaginary beings, including the ruling and overruling
“ God of all,” with his tabernacle pitched in the blazing sun, is
now termed idolatry, and may be regarded as the second phase
or form of this species of worship. Hence we may note it as
a remarkable circumstance, that all the principal systems of
religion now existing, as well as most of those which have
passed away, exhibit very strong marks of this ancient solar
worship ; and it is more especially remarkable, that both Juda-
ism and Christianity, with all their exalted claims to a super-
natural origin, should be, as they seemingly are, deeply tinctured
with this ancient Sabean or solar worship. Distinct traces of it
are observable in the whole religious nomenclature of Christian-
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
191
ity. It, in fact, pervades the whole s}Tstem. This declaration
is borne out by the fact that nearly every divine epithet, nearly
eveiy name applied to the Deity in the Christian scriptures,
including those addressed to Jesus Christ, and also nearly every
theological term in both the Old and New Testaments, are
traceable to the ancient solar worship ; that is, the words, when
traced to their roots, or original form, are found to have been
solar titles. We will present some samples by way of proof:
The divine title Lord, in the New Testament, is translated from
the Greek Kuros, which is the Persian name for the sun ; God
is from Gad, an Ammonian name for the sun; Jehovah, by
translation and declension, becomes Jupiter, which, according
to Macrobius, is 44 the sun itselfDeity is from the Latin
Bens, which is traceable to dies, a day,—a period of time
measured by the sun ; Jesus is from Jes or J-es (with the Latin
termination us), which means 44 the one great fire of the sun;99
and Christ is derived from Chris, a Chaldean term for the sun ;
and so on of other divine titles. And whole phrases of scripture-
texts disclose the same idolatrous solar origin. Why is Jesus
Christ called 44 the sun of righteousness 99 ? (spelled s-u-n, let
it be noticed), as this text, quoted from Malachi, is assumed to
apply to him ; and why is the term 44 light,” so frequently used
and preferred throughout the Christian scriptures, to denote
the spiritual condition of man? Why are nations, whose
minds are cultivated and stored with knowledge, said to be
44 enlightened 99 ? Certainly, to our external vision, they are as
opaque as the most grossly ignorant barbarians. But they are
called enlightened when advanced in knowledge, simply because
all knowledge was once supposed to be imparted by the God
of the sun through its descending rays of light. Hence light
and knowledge are now synonymous terms. David says, 44 The
Lord is my light and my salvation ” (Ps. xxvii. 1), —just what
the ancient pagans used to say of the sun. Isaiah says, 4 4 The
Lord shall be to thee an everlasting light’9 (Isa. lx. 19),—
exactly such a conception as the ancient heathen entertained of
the sun, to which its application is more obviously appropriate.
Habakkuk says,44 His brightness was as light99 (iii. 4). Apply
this language to the sun, and its meaning becomes strikingly
192
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
significant. Christ is said to be “ a light to lighten the Gen-
tiles,” “the true light,” “the light of the world,” &c. ; and
yet we can not discover that those who have embraced his
doctrines, and thus come into possession of this “true light,”
shed any more light upon a devious pathway, traveled in the
darkness of night, than the veriest Jewish pharisee or infidel.
The Christian reader will reply, “ These phrases are mere figures
of speech.” To be sure they are : we admit it. But then their
derivation and origin are none the less obvious, and, when scru-
tinizingly examined, disclose remote traces of Oriental idolatry ;
and, moreover, they most unmistakably prove Christianity to be
of heathen extraction with respect to its verbal habiliments, or
external vestment, as well as the main drift and scope of its
doctrines and teachings, as shown elsewhere. We will observe
further, that such conceptions (found in the Christian Bible) as
“God is a consuming fire,” “ God is light,” &c. (John i. 5),
originated in the primeval ages, when God was supposed to
reside in the sun; also such ejaculations as “O Lord, the
Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of
thy rising ” (Isa. lx. 3). The words “ light,” “ brightness,” and
“ rising ” apply with striking force to the sun, and were used by
the ancient Persians in such a relation, while, on the other
hand, it is difficult to discover any sense or appropriateness in
applying them—at least the word “ rising ”— to the Supreme
Being; for lie is represented as alwa}Ts occupying “ the highest
heavens : ” so there can be no higher point to rise to. We might
also ask, Wli}^ are “the Lord’s day” and “Sunday” used as
s3’nonyinous terms ? or why is the Lord now worshiped on the
very day anciently set apart for the worship of the sun or solar
Deities? Do not these facts prove that many remnants of
the ancient idolatrous religions are still retained in Christian
theology ?
Monotheism.—This word — from monos, one, or alone, and
Theos, God — represents a belief in but one God. We have
shown in the preceding section how a belief in a plurality of Gods
originated. We will now trace the progress of this idea to a uni-
tary conception of the Deity. It will be observed, b}" the study of
ancient theology, that, as the human mind becomes enlightened
PBOGBESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
193
and expanded by the discovery of the laws governing the heav-
enly bodies, the lesser or inferior Deities gradually fall into
disbelief and disuse, and u the Supreme Holy One ” proportion-
ally becomes exalted in the devout affections of the worshiping
multitude, until most religious nations become, in one view,
virtually and practically monotheists. And it may be remarked
here, that, as neither the imaginary God nor carved images of
God were objects of worship by the most enlightened classes of
any nation, they can not strictly and truthfully be termed idola-
ters. Hence some writers are bold to affirm there never was a
nation of idolaters ; and we incline to this opinion-. We are also
bold to affirm that there never was, properly speaking, a nation of
monotheists, —believing in but one God, and no more, —neither
Jews nor Christians excepted; and we are likewise prepared to
exhibit the proof of the affirmation, that every nation, reported
in history making a profession of religion, has acknowledged
the existence of one supreme God. This is true even of those
who believe in a multiplicity of Gods, — a circumstance which
places both Jews and Christians in rather an awkward position,
claiming as they do, and always have done, a monopoly of this
faith ; and the fact that they have long professedly labored to
bring other nations to this belief, while some of those nations
have, as we shall show, been much more consistent, both in
the belief and practice of this doctrine, than themselves, places
them, as we conceive, in rather a ludicrous aspect. The Chris-
tian Bible and the Christian world have arrogated vastly too
much to themselves, and overstepped the bounds of truth, in
claiming to be the only propagators of the unitary conception
of a God, as the following citations from historical authorities
will clearly manifest: —
1. Christians have a numerous cortege, or retinue, of angels
in their system of inspired theology, as is shown in various parts
of the Bible, which, in theological parlance, must be regarded
as so man}" secondary Gods, inasmuch as they are assigned the
same duties, perform the same functions, and sustain precisely
the same relation to the supernal Deity as did the subordi-
nate Gods of the pagans under the ancient systems. It is, in
fact, only a change of name, in order to get rid of the illogical
104
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
dilemma of holding to the existence of but one God, while vir-
tual^ acknowledging the existence of many. We might cite
manj’ facts and testimonies from history in proof of this state-
ment, but will restrict ourselves to one. Mr. Higgins says,
“ All nations believed in one supreme God, and many subordi-
nates. The latter some termed angels ; others called them Gods.”
More anciently than the Jews, we find that the Babylonians,
Chaldeans, Persians, and Syrians all vested these subordinate
beings with the properties of mere angels. “Angels,” then,
with Christians, we legitimately infer, is only another name
for second-class Gods, or subordinate Deities of the Orientals.
2. Even if we should pass over, as unworthy of considera-
tion, the historical facts which go to identify the Christian
angels with the subordinate Deities of the ancient pagans, there
is yet spread out before us a broad and tenable ground for
charging Christians with being polytheists, — that is, for re-
jecting their pretensions of worshiping and preaching a unitary
God; for it is a very striking and depreciating fact, that, not-
withstanding their boastful and arrogating claims, there are
many texts in the Old Testament which imply, in the most dis-
tinct manner, a belief in a plurality of Gods. Indeed the
first passage in the book, according to Mr. Parkhurst, would
read, if correctly translated, “In the beginning the Gods
created the heavens and the earth,” thus disclosing an acknowl-
edgment of more than one God. And we find man}’ other
passages which arc made to conceal the old polytheistic idea
by a wrong translation. Fortunately, however, for the disclo-
sure of truth, there are many texts in which it comes very dis-
tinctly to the surface. As for example, in Genesis i. 26, we
have the undisguised language, “Let us make man in our own
image.” Now “us” and “our” being plural pronouns, it
would be folly and nonsense to deny that they refer to a plural-
ity of Gods. “ Let us make man ” means, “ Let us Gods make
man;” for no sophistry, shifting, or dodging can make sense
of it with any other construction. And several times, in this
and other chapters, is similar language used. Wc will cut the
matter short by observing, upon the authority of Parkhurst,
that Alcim and Elohim arc the Hebrew plurals used to represent
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
195
God in the Old Testament; that these are much more frequently
employed than the singular forms, Al and jE7, thus disclosing
the conception of a plurality of Gods beyond dispute.
3. And this argumentation acquires additional logical strength
when based on the fact that the Jews did not claim Jehovah as
the only God, but merety as supreme to other Gods. He
was “ God of Gods” and u Lord of Lords.” Nor was he
claimed to be a God of anj^ but the Jewish nation. Jethro is
made to say, “Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all
Gods” (Exod. xviii. 11). And in Exodus xv. 11 it is asked,
“Who is like unto Jehovah among the Gods?” Just such a
claim as is put forth for Jupiter by Homer in his Iliad :—
“ O first and greatest God, by Gods adored,
We own thy power-, our Father and our Lord! ”
Hence it will be observed, that if there were any merit or any
honor in professing faith in a unitary Deity, or any truth form-
ing a basis for such a claim, neither Jews nor Christians could
justl}r arrogate a monopoty of such faith, inasmuch as there
is an older claim to the doctrine.
4. But we find that the professors of the Christian faith occupy
still more untenable and more palpably erroneous ground than
the Jews with respect to the profession of holding strictly to
the unitary conception of Deity ; for they not only tacitly
accept the contradictory phases of this doctrine, which we have
pointed out above, in the Jewish writings, but they add thereto
a new installment or chapter of errors by having accepted into
their creed the old Oriental doctrine of a trinity of Gods.
They have “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy
Ghost,” which present us with a family of Gods as complete
and absolute as the confederated union of Gods in either the
ancient Hindoo or Grecian Pantheon. To allege, in defense,
that these three Gods were all one, while we find each in various
parts of the Bible spoken of separate^, and discriminated b}r
peculiar and distinct properties and titles, instead of mitigating
the error and contradiction, such a plea only aggravates it. In
the same sense the Hindoos claimed that their thousand Gods
were one. And all the triads or trinities of Gods swarming
196
TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
through the ancient mythologies were x)roclaimed to be each
44 a trinit}’ in unity;” so that such a defense only lands the
professor of Christianity amongst heathen myths.
5. The absurdity of the Christian Church in professing to
worship a single God, also making a profession of rising above
and contemning the idolatrous, polytheistic conception of Deity,
culminates in their act of embodying and incorporating the infi-
nite deityship in 44 the man Christ Jesus,” and declaring him
to possess 44 the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” For we thus
have one fall and absolute God perambulating the earth in the
person of Christ during his temporary sojourn here, while another
absolute God (the Father) occupied the throne of heaven, thus
presenting us with a plurality of Gods too marked and undis-
guised to admit a rational defense. . A profession of monotheism
arrayed with such facts bespeaks folly supreme. The polythe-
ism of the ancient heathen is science and sense compared with
such jargon. For, with all their Gods, they never paid divine
honors, or prayed to but one God (44The Supreme Ruler”) ;
while Christians, on the contrary, worship all of theirs, — Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost, — frequently naming each one separately
in their supplications to the throne of grace, thus rendering
themselves more open to the charge of polytheism, and that
species of idolatry which consists in worshiping several Gods,
than those whom they condemn as heathen for committing similar
acts. We will prove this statement. The reverend missionary,
D. O. Allen, says of a large body of heathen professors, 4k They
believe in the existence of beings whom they call Gods, but do
not recognize them as possessing any qualities, or as having an}’
agencies in human affairs, which properly make them objects
of worship. They resemble the angels in the Christian system.
Brahma with them is the supreme God, and all the other Gods
offer him worship.” It is evident, then, that they virtually wor-
ship but one God, the inferior Deities being but angels; while
Christians, on the contrary, have placed two, if not three, Gods
on the throne. Which, then, have the best claim to bo consid-
ered monotheists?
G. And what sense, we would ask, can attach to the profes-
sion of monotheism with such a God as the Bible sets forth, —
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
197
a limited, local, personal God. No doctrine stands out more
prominently as a fundamental tenet of the Christian faith than
that which makes God appear a circumscribed, finite being.
He is represented in their “ inspired ” book as possessing those
qualities, properties, faculties, and functions which only a local,
organized being can possess, — such as a body, head, eyes, nose,
mouth, arms, fingers, feet, stomach, bowels, heart, &c. ; as
eating, sleeping, walking, talking, riding, laboring, resting,
laughing, crying ; and as getting angry and jealous, and cursing,
swearing, smiting, fighting, &c., and on one occasion getting
whipped or vanquished in a fight because the enemy were forti-
fied with chariots of iron. (See Josh. 17-16.) And hardly
was creation completed before he was down in Eden striding
over the bushes, hunting for his lost child Adam,—the first sam-
ple of the genus homo. And several times he had to leave his
golden throne, and descend to earth before he could be posted
in human affairs.
Now it must be evident to any person possessing a moiety
of common sense that such a limited, local, circumscribed
being, limited in size, and restricted in powers and qualities as
Jehovah is represented in the Bible to be, could neither be
omnipotent, omniscient, nor omnipresent. True, Christians con-
sider him so; but the Bible fails to make him so. And hence
there would be room in infinite space for countless millions of
such Gods, and the doctrine of polytheism would be perfectly
consistent. Indeed, such a dwarfish and circumscribed God
would need thousands of such confederates to aid him in gov-
erning the countless worlds of the vast universe; so that the
polytheistic doctrine from the Christian stand-point becomes a
necessity, as it does also from another plane of view. We are
told in Gen. i. that the wmrk of creation wras completed in six
days; that the myriads of worlds which now chase each other
through the sky were all rolled put of the vortex of infinitude in
a week. But it is evident to every scientific or reflecting mind
that a million of years would not have sufficed for the work, espe-
ciall}7 for such a God as Moses describes and sets to the task.
Hence the period of creation should be extended, or the number
of Gods increased ad infinitum, to save the credibility of the
198
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
cosmologic traditions. We would say, then, that, for the fol-
lowing reasons, the more Gods Christians acknowledge, the
better for the consistency of their cause: —
1. Their conception of the Divine Essence is that of a local,
limited, anthropomorphic, organized being, in exact conformity
with the notion of the ancient pagans; with which, in order to
have every part of the infinite universe supplied, would require
more in number than the most fertile imagination of the hea-
then ever created. 2. A countless host of such finite Gods
would have been required to complete the work of creation in
six da}^s. 8. There is room enough for any number of such
finite Gods to exist without encroaching on each other’s domin-
ions. 4. There should have been at least one such God to be
assigned the creation of each planetary world, which would re-
quire many millions of creative entities. 5. And the superin-
tendence of the endlessly complicated machinery of each planet,
and the supply, specifically and individually, of the various wants
of its swarming millions of diversified inhabitants, would require
an infinite host more of such local Gods as Jehovah of the Jews.
6. And, as Christians already practically acknowledge the wor-
ship of three Gods, the addition of three hundred or three thou-
sand more would only be an extension of the principle, and could
not be a whit more objectionable. For it is not any specific
number of Gods they object to, but a “ plurality; ” and three is
as certainly and absolutely a plurality as three hundred or three
thousand. From the above considerations, founded on views of
consistency, we think Christians should ground their arms, and
cease their moral warfare upon the votaries of other religions
for being polytheistic or idolatrous. And “the sin of worship-
ing man}' Gods,” which they declaim so much on, is all a mere
phantom. We can not see how the divine mind could possibly
be offended at the simple mistake of overnumbering the God-
head. We will illustrate the case. We will suppose a mer-
chant in Cincinnati orders a bill of goods from New York,
addressing the order to John Ap John & Co. The latter opens
and examines it, then returns it unfilled, with the following
quaint protest: “Sir, there is no 1 Co.’ attached to m}r address.
It is simply John Ap John ; and yon have insulted my dignity
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
199
by this mistake, thus assuming that I have not the brain and
bullion to do business on my own hook, but must have partners.
I therefore return it with contempt for your insolent blunder.5 ’
Now, we ask if there can be a man found who would be guilty of
displajdng such coxcomb vanity as this. We trow not. Then,
why charge it upon an infinite God — an all-wise Deity — by
supposing that a prayer addressed, by an innocent mistake, to a
hundred or a thousand Gods would not be as acceptable to him
as if addressed to him alone, or even if erroneously addressed
to the Christian trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost ?
The Construction and Worship of Images. —In Exod. xx. 4
we find the following command: “Thou shalt not make unto
thee any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in
heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the
water under the earth.’9 Here, it will be observed, is a sweep-
ing interdiction against image-making; and, as it prohibits
“ the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above or the earth
beneath,” it is a dead-lock upon the fine arts. All engravings,
paintings, photographs, &£., with which the civilized world is
now flooded, and which hold high rank among the arts and
sciences, involve an open infraction of this command. And
hence, this biblical interdiction being devoid of reason, and of
an anti-civilizing tendency, the enlightened portion of Christen-
dom, by common consent, tramples it heedless^ under foot.
And we are bold to say that this command is both foolish and
of impracticable application; for a living, thinking human
being can no more avoid forming images of every thing that
comes within the range of his mental vision, whether situated in
heaven above or the earth beneath, than he can stop the entire
machinery of his thoughts, or the blood from circulating through
his veins. It is as natural as eating, and as inevitable as
breathing. To be sure, he does not.give expression with wood,
metal, or canvas to every image .formed in the mind; but the
nature of the act, morally speaking, is precisely the same as if
he did. St. Clemens admits this when he declares it to be a
sin for women to look in the glass, because they form images of
themselves. All true ! viewed from the Christian stand-point,
which regards image-making as a sin. The most sinful or rep-
200
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
rehensible act of image-making, however, in the view of Chris-
tians, is the construction of idols or images to represent the
Deity. Living in a civilized age, they would be ashamed to
occupy the broad ground assumed by the command which we
have quoted above, which forbids the likeness of ever}' thing that
exists ; yet they still hold that it is wrong to make images of
the Deity, —not anymore so, according to the above command,
than the acceptance of engravings of animals and photographs
of friends. But where is the man now living, or when did the
man live, who has not formed images of the Deity, or who does
not instinctively and habitually do it every day of his life?
Ever}' man makes a likeness of God, or what he supposes to be
such, every time he thinks of such a being. It is impossible to
make him the subject of thought without constructing a mental
image of him, —i.e., without constructing an image of him in
the brain. And can it be more sinful to make an image of
him with the hand than with the head?—in other words, to
construct a likeness of him externally, than to construct it
internally. Certainly not. One is shaped out in the mind ; the
other is shaped out of a block of wood or metal: and most cer-
tainly, if the latter is idolatry, the former is also. The Chris-
tian kneels in supplication with the image of God set up in his
mind ; the pagan worships with the image set up in the temple
or on the altar. One is externally represented with words ; the
other, with wood. The only difference between the Christian
and pagan idolatry is, that, after each has sketched out a like-
ness of the Creator upon the tablet or dial-plate of his mind
according to his conception of the form of Deity, the Christian
stops short with his work but half completed, while the pagan
goes on and gives practical expression to his by representing it
with wood, stone, or other material, by which it is more thor-
oughly impressed upon the memory, and u the devout contem-
plation/’ the remembrance of God,” kept more constantly in
the mind ; and thus the savage is proved to be the most practi-
cally religious of the two. We have shown that the representa-
tion and delineation upon canvas, paper, wood, or steel, of the
various objects of art, — of human creation, —are set down as
the highest marks and the most distinguishing proofs of civiliza-
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
201
-
tion. And can it be right and laudable to thus represent or
image the works of the Creator, and wrong to image the Creator
himself? Not according to the above command. Or can one
be pleasing to him, and the other offensive? There is neither
sense nor science, logic nor lore, in such conclusions. Christian
reader, do you not know that your little innocent daughter vio-
lates the command every day of her happy life by nursing,
dressing, and caressing her wax doll, her image miniature man?
For if it be true — and the Bible teaches it — that c ‘ man was
created in the image of God,” then these artificial human like-
nesses, these images of the infant man, are also images of God ;
and your little girl daily commits “the awful sin of idolatry,”
and you, too, for countenancing her in the act. It may be no-
ticed here that the pious Christian confers upon himself an
honor which he denies to the Creator when he has his photo-
graph struck off for the accommodation of a friend, while he
denounces as idolatry all attempts to construct an imaginary
likeness of God. But consistency is a jewel rarely found.
Image - Worship. —We may be met here with the answer that
“it is not the making of images, but the worship of images,
in lieu of the worship of God, that constitutes idolatiy.” To
this we reply, we have no proof that any nation or people
reported in history were ever obnoxious to the charge. True,
the people of man}r countries have been in the habit of pros-
trating themselves before idols in their daily worship. Yet in
no case which we have examined do. we find that those idols
were worshiped with the thought of their being the true and
living God, or of their being endowed with divine attributes,
but only as types or representations of God. It is possible that
some of the lower stratum of society—some of the debased and
ignorant — ma}^ have been deluded into the idea that God had
taken up his abode in those lifeless images. In fact we are
assured that the priest, in some cases, labored to instill this
belief into their minds. Some of them may have been ignorant
and pliable enough to be misled by his artful misrepresentation.
But, by a large proportion of the idol-worshipers of every nation,
we have the highest authority for asserting that these artificial
images were not regarded as any thing more than the mere
i
!
202
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
representation, or outward type, of the Deity, and were venerated
with the same religious conviction which Christians experience
in partaking of the body^ and blood of Christ with the images of
bread and wine, and without the suspicion of incurring the charge
of idolatry. The two acts are precisely the same in spirit and
essence. But the untutored denizens of the Pacific isles do not
conceive that the dumb and lifeless sylvan figure before which
the3T prostrate themselves in worship is the omnipotent, self-
existent God, the Creator of heaven and earth, more truty than
the Christians believe they are realty eating and drinking 44 the
body and blood of Christ” when partaking of the sacrament.
They are both mere symbols, or representations, of something
higher. It is irrational to suppose that beings endowed with
minds believe that inanimate figures of gold, silver, iron, &c.,
possess omnipotent thought, power, and feeling. That able,
pious Mahomedan writer, Abel Fezzel, declares (in his 44 Aren
Akberry ”) that 44 the opinion that the Hindoos (who make many
idols) are idolaters has no foundation in fact; but they are
worshipers of God, and only one God.” 44 This,” says the
modern traveler, Mr. Ditson of New York, 44 I know to be true ;
for I had it from the lips of the Hindoos themselves.” And
this will apply wfith undiminished force to other nations liabitu-
ualty styled idolaters. 44 Even the most savage nations,” says
Mr. Parker, “regard their idols only as types of God.” And
we might quote whole pages from heathen writers to that effect.
The ancient Grecian poet.Ovid says, 44 It is Jove we adore in
the image of God.” 44 The Gods inhabit our minds and bod-
ies,” says Statius, a Latin writer, 44 and not the images made
to represent them.” Ilencc it is evident they had a perception
of their true character. And the missionary, Rev. D. 0. Allen,
tells us that even those who have been represented as worship-
ing the sun, moon, and stars, only contemplate these planets
as symbols of the Deity, and that 44 their worship is realty aimed
to the invisible, omnipotent, omnipresent God.” It appears,
then, that whatever external objects the most ignorant and
savage tribes have addressed, or have been supposed to worship,
have been used merely as types and symbols to enhance their
devotion in the worship of the true God. Though, as Cicero
PBOGBESSIYE IDEAS OF DEITY.
203
remarks (in kis philosophical works), 44 A few may have
been so feeble in their perceptions as to confound and iden-
tify the statues and Gods together.” But another writer
avers, 44 There is not in all antiquity the least trace of a prayer
addressed to a statue.” He also sa3rs, 44 All paganism does not
offer a single fact which can lead to the conclusion that they
ever adored idols; nor was there ever a law compelling them
to do so.” When Paul declared to the Athenians, 44 Whom ye
ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you,” he confessed most
explicitly that they worshiped the true God through their idols.
Where, then, is the sin of idolatry?
In one of the Hindoo Bibles (the Baghavat Gita) God is
made to say, 44 They who serve other Gods with a firm belief
of being right do realty involuntarily serve me, and shall be
rewarded.” How admirable, how noble, how magnanimous
and merciful is this sentiment compared with the damning, death-
dealing denunciations against idolatry by^ the Jewish Jehovah !
And the Mahomedan Bible (the Koran) contains a similar
sentiment to the above. Thus, we observe, both the Hindoo
and Mahomedan Bibles evince in this respect a higher degree
of moral sense than that of the Christian Bible, whose violent
interdictions against idolatry have caused many nations to be
butchered, and their lands deluged with blood. 44 There is noth-
ing in the Christian Bible,” says Mr. Higgins,44 of one-twentieth
part of the value of this text of the Hindoo Bible in the way
of preventing a foolish persecution and bloodshed.” It may be
remembered here that Christians inherited their extreme hatred
of idolatry from the Jews, which is fostered by the Jewish
Bible, and that the Jews derived their feelings of opposition to
it from the two nations under which they were long enslaved, —
the Persians and Egyptians,—both of which, according to
Herodotus, forbid the making of idols, the former interdicting
it by law ; as did also the Roman.emperor, Numa Pompilius, 600
B.C. The Parsees of India to this day oppose idolatry ; and the
learned among the Chinese have always discountenanced it.
Strabo and other Grecian philosophers wrote against it. 44 And
many sects arose among the ancient heathen,” says the 44 Hiero-
phant,” 44 who rejected all external symbols of the Deity.” On
204
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
the other hand, neither Jews nor Christians have been entirely
free from this 44 sin’’ so called. As for 44 the Lord’s holy
people,” there probably never was a nation who manifested h
stronger or more invincible proclivity to idolatry than they, or
wTho indulged more eagerly in the practice of it whenever oppor-
tunity presented; and frequently did they break over all re-
straint to plunge into this seemingly enticing luxury, not even
withholding their ear-rings when a molten image or golden calf
was to be constructed. And even their lawgiver Moses con-
sented to the construction of a number of imitations or substi-
tutes for the carved images of the pagans. Their brazen
serpent displayed upon a pole ; their carved cherubims with the
body of a man, the head of an animal, and the wings of a bird ;
and the ark of the covenant, which was borne about in the
same manner the heathen carried their idols, —were all compro-
mises with and concessions to idolatry, and were all venerated
with the same spirit and in the same fashion the heathen adored
their carved or molten images. As for the holy ark, the Jews
as solemnly believed that God Almighty was shut up in that
little box of shittim-wood as truly as ever the pagans believed
that he sometimes condescended to a transient abode in their
idols ; while it was death to touch it with 44 unholy hands,” and
sixty thousand were butchered because one man (the pious Uzza),
on a certain occasion, instinctively and devoutly clapped his
hand on it to keep it from falling. In fact, the golden image
which it contained was an idol to all intents and purposes;
nor were the brazen serpent and cherubim of the altar much
less so. Hence the vindictive condemnation of other nations
for making and adoring images came with an ill grace from
the Jews. Nor are the skirts of the disciples of Christ any
freer from the stain of idolatry. In fact, it constitutes the veiy
substratum of their religion. In the first place, they quote
approvingly such texts as the following: 44 The Lord is my
rock” (Ps. xviii. 2) ; 44 Who is a rock save our God?” (Ps.
xviii. 31) ; 44 The shepherd the stone of Israel ” (Gen. xlix. 24).
Peter calls him 44 a living stone ” (1 Pet. ii. 4). And there are
a number of other similar texts, all of which disclose real fetich-
ism, or the first form of idolatry. The ancient Laplanders,
PBOGBESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
205
Arabians, Phoenicians, and several tribes of Asia Minor used
rocks and stones as representative images of Deity. And here
we find the same association of ideas in the Christian Bible.
Do you reply, u They must be considered figurative”? Very
well: prove that the ancient heathen tribes did not also consider
them figurative.
But we have a much more serious and conclusive proof than
this that nearly the entire retinue of Christian professors are
practical idolaters, and that their “ holy religion,” in all its
essential characteristics, comprises, in its very nature, the high-
est species of idolatry. Some Christian professors tell us that
those who worship idols must have a limited conception of the
character and attributes of the Deity; thus conceding that idol-
atry consists in ascribing to God a false character. Well, now,
this is the very objection which we would urge as one of the
first, and one of the most serious charges against the Christian
system. It presents us with a cramped, dwarfish, and childish
conception of Deity. In the first place, the disciples of Chris-
tianity still cling to the old tradition, which they inherited from
the heathen, of investing God with the form and characteristics
of a man. For if the Deity possesses the human form, as they
and their Bible teach, then he must possess the human character-
istics,— a logical sequence, which science defies all Christendom
to overturn, as it is the infallible testimony of the natural his-
torj of all time that nothing can possess the form of one being
and the characteristics of another. As is form, so is and must
be the character, is an axiom supported by numberless proofs
of daily and hourly observation. Hence, Jesus Christ possess-
ing, according to the scriptures, the form of a man, — “ the form
of a servant,” —must inevitably have possessed the character of
a man. Hence we are not surprised to find, that, in spite of the
combined efforts of his evangelical biographers to make him a
God (if they are really to be understood as designing to ele-
vate him to the Godhead), his finite human qualities are dis-
played in his history in every chapter. Every saying and every
credible incident of his life prove him to have been a man, not-
withstanding some of them are apparently set forth as prima-
facie evidence of his being a God. Therefore the conclusion
206
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
that, as Jesus Christ Had the form of a man, he could not have
been a God ; and to worship him as such was and is idolatry in
the highest and fullest sense. And, besides the form, there are
other evidences of his having been a man. He walked, talked,
ate, slept, wept, shed tears, &c., and finally died just as other
men do. And, furthermore, he believed and taught some of the
traditions and superstitions of finite, ignorant men, — such as a
vengeful God, an endless hell, disease produced by demons, a
personal devil, the speed}7* conflagration of the world, &c. Thus
we have a threefold proof of his manhood, and disproof of his
Godhead, and a proof that those who worship him are idolaters.
And as the primitive or primordial Bible God Jehovah is rep-
resented as possessing, as we have alread}" shown, a compre-
hensible body, e}^es, nose, mouth, hands, arms, legs, feet,
bowels, &c., and as being a jealous, angry, revengeful, fighting
God (the God of battles), and inferior in several respects to
some of the men who worshiped him, such worship is conse-
quently idolatry. We observe, then, that the Jews worshiped one
idol (Jehovah) ; and the Christians, three (“ Father, Son, and
Holy Ghost ”), —the two former possessing the form of man,
and the latter the form of a bird (a dove). There is exactly
the same objection, and it is to exactly the same extent idol-
atry, to worship Jesus Christ as to worship Chrishna, Confu-
cius, Mahomet, or any of the wooden Gods or graven images
of the idolatrous pagans. In each case it is assuming that God,
instead of being eternally infinite in all his attributes, has
been invested with the finite, limited, and comprehensible form
of man, to say nothing of the corresponding finite qualities
which his worshipers have assigned him. And this narrow,
childish assumption, with its attendant conceptions, keeps the
mind of the worshiper in an intellectually cramped and dwarf-
ish condition, besides perpetuating their dishonorable and dis-
paraging views of Deity. And herein lies the great objection
to idolatry. If any of these venerated beings could possess
divine attributes, there would be less moral objection to wor-
shiping them as Gods. The error is not in ascribing divine
attributes to the wrong being, but in the conception of wrong
qualities and attributes as comprehensible in a divine being.
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
207
-
For God is not possessed of tlie vanity to be offended by the
simple mistakes of men and women directing their prayers and
devotions to another being or object instead of to him. The
grand error consists in mistaking the real character and attri-
butes of Deity; that is, in constructing false images of him, —
whether mental or material is all the same. In other words,
idolatry consists in worshiping, for God, beings or objects pos-
sessing finite forms, with whom, consequently, infinite and divine
attributes could not be properly associated, and through whom
they could not possibly be displayed. And so self-evident was
the proof that these beings, possessing the form, size, and
physical outline of men, and presenting every appearance of
men (as Christ, Chrishna, Confucius, &c.), were nothing but
men, that even those who were habitually taught to adore them
as the supreme, omnipotent Deity, naturally and instinctively,
in their intercourse with them and their descriptions of them,
invested them with human qualities as well as divine. And
thus they came to present to the world the awkward and ludi-
crous figure of beings displaying both finite and infinite attri-
butes,— i.e., of being demi-gods, half God and half man.
This is especially true of u the man Christ Jesus.’’ And it
may be safely assumed as an incontrovertible proposition, that
just so long as men are in the habit of worshiping beings in
the human form, whether Jehovah or Jesus Christ, or beings
possessing any conceivable form as the great UI am,” just so
long will they entertain, to their own injury and to the disgrace
of religion, inferior and dishonorable views of God. They
must learn that a finite body can not contain an infinite spirit,
nor possess an infinite attribute ; and that to worship an object
or being known to possess or even supposed to possess any con-
ceivable form, size, or shape within the comprehension of man,
whether the materials composing this adored object or being are
gold, silver, wood, brass, iron, or flesh and blood (as in the case
of Jesus Christ), constitutes the highest species of idolatry.
It can make no difference what the materials are, as it is just as
impossible to associate divine and infinite attributes with an
image of flesh and blood or a finite body, as to associate them
with an image of wood, stone, or metal. All is alike idolatry.
208
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
The Christian world have an image or idol, constructed in
part of flesh and blood, restricted, as they tell us, to a spiritual
body, which they call Jesus Christ, and which they place upon
an imaginary throne situated in or above the clouds, and wor-
ship it as God; while the Babylonians had the same image
carved from wood and metal, which they called Dagon, and set
upon a throne in the temple: and, in both cases, we are told, by
way of apology, that it was not the external form, or outward
bod}T, which constituted the divinity, but the spirit within. Now,
as there is room in infinite space for millions of such beings
(such finite Gods), there could be no moral objection to mul-
tiplying their number, and worshiping as many of them as the
imagination could conjure up, or the polytheist’s fancy could
create. We worship none but the infinite God; the living,
moving, all-pervading, and all-energizing spirit of the infinite
universe, who has no finite or comprehensible body, and never
had; and hence, being infinite in extent and in all his attri-
butes, but one such being can possibly exist, and monotheism
thus becomes a virtue and a necessity. We will only remark
further, that the man who can worship a being with the human
form or any form as the infinite God, no matter if he swells
his proportions by imagination to the size of the planet Jupiter
or the whole solar system, yet still, as this is not one step of an
approach toward infinitude or omnipresence, his conceptions of
Deity are puerile, childish, belittling, and dishonorable, if not
blasphemous. If there is such a thing as blasphemy, it is
found here. And his ignorance of the essential characteris-
tics of an infinite being, or the scientific view of God, is on a
par with the child’s ignorance of astronomy, who exclaims,
“ Give me the moon ! ” Here we desire to apprise the reader
more distinctly that we do not regard idolatry as a crime or
blamcworth}” act in those who originated it, but actualty useful
when restricted to its legitimate uses. To those groveling in
spiritual darkness, on the lower plane of religious development,
it is as 44 eyes to the blind, and crutches to the lame.” It is
only in those, who, like Christians, profess to be enlightened,
that it becomes a culpable act. Several writers have shown
that idols were really practically useful, in a religious point of
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
209
view, in the primitive spiritual condition of mankind, and are
yet so to the lower classes in various countries; that is, to
those who dwell upon the sensorial plane, and whose spiritual per-
ceptions are hence too feeble to soar to an ethereal world to find
the great object of spiritual worship. The learned Hindoo,
Roh Mun Roy, who wrote a work against idolatry, and who
condemned the Christian churches for 6 4 worshiping an idol in
the person of Jesus Christ,” beautifully sets forth the true na-
ture and purpose of idolatry when he says (after stating that
idols were not made for the learned), 44 The Yedas [Hindoo
Bible] directs those who are spiritually incapable of adoring the
invisible Supreme Being to apply their minds to some visible
object as an external manifestation of the only true God, rather
than lose themselves in the mazes of irreligion, the bane of
society. As God exists everywhere, and pervades everything
(even idols), such means were mercifully provided for the
ignorant and untrained to lead them on to true mental adora-
tion and spiritual worship.55 And thus idols were used as
aids and stepping-stones to the true worship for those who were
mentalty incapable of raising their minds from 4 4 nature up to
nature’s God,55 as taught by this heathen writer. Thus they
served the same purpose as pictures do for children, and were
equally innocent and useful. It is, therefore, no more sinful to
be an idolater than to be a child. In fact, idolatry was a neces-
sity of man’s religious nature. The Yedas makes God say,44 The
ignorant believe me visible while I am invisible.55 The able,
pious Abel Fezzel (a Mahomedan writer) says, in his 44 Aren
Akberry,” 44 The Brahmins and Hindoos all believe in the unity
of the God-head ; yet they hold images in high veneration, be-
cause they represent celestial beings, and prevent the mind from
wandering.” Swedenborg says in like manner, 44 The heathen
kept images not only in their temples, but in their houses, not
to worship them, but to call to mind the heavenly being they
represented.” Thus it will be observed that the idol was the
sanctuary where man, in his childhood, met to commune with
his God, just as the Christian now seeks his spiritual presence
at the communion-table or the altar. The pagan, who was a
child in religious experience, was morally necessitated to have
210
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
a God, or representation of God, he could see, feel, and handle.
And it is remarkable that the Christian world, after two thou-
sand years’ religious experience, still occupy the same plane, —
are still pagans or children with respect to believing in visible
external Gods, as they virtually worship two, Jehovah and Jesus
Christ, who, according to the teaching of their Bible and their
established creeds, were often seen in the human form, and
one of them with a human body. Thus it will be observed they
have not outgrown or advanced beyond the essential principle
of idolatry, —that of worshiping a visible or imaginary form for
an invisible God, who, the u positive philosophy” teaches,
never has been and never can be seen under any circumstances,
because, being omnipresent (that is, present everywhere, and
everywhere alike), if he could be seen at all, he could be
seen at all times and in all places. This is a self-evident, axi-
omatic truth.
Origin of Idolatry. —Here we deem it proper to speak more
directly and specifically of the primary origin of idolatry, or
image-worship, than is disclosed in the preceding pages. After
the primitive inhabitants of the earth had conceived the notion
that the sun, moon, and stars are moved in their orbits through
the heavens by beings who occupied them (as has alread}" been
shown), the}^ were in the habit of gazing upon these tower-
lights of the Elysian fields (the home of the Gods) with the
most intense delight, the most reverential awe and devotion.
But ever and anon this pleasing reverie was interrupted, and
subjected to sad suspense, by 66 the departure of the heavenly
host to other and distant lands.” First of all, the solar God,
mounted upon his gem-wlieeled chariot drawn by his fleet steeds,
after plowing his wa}T through the deep-blue vault of the sky,
was off on his swift-sped journey behind the western hills, but
followed almost immediately by the whole retinue of stellar orbs
(the homes of the lesser Gods), who danced along in his wake;
but, ever true to the line of march, followed on apace, and
were soon beyond the bounds of human vision. This left an
aching void in their devout minds. Hence the invention and
construction of images as imaginary likenesses of the Gods, to
serve as substitutes for them, to be venerated in their stead
PROGRESSIVE IDEAS OF DEITY.
211
during their absence, as we secure the likeness of a friend when
about to leave us for a journey, or to be long absent. And
here we may date the primary origin of idolatry, which is noth-
ing more nor less than the first rude germination of man’s
religious nature.
II. All Christians Atheists or Idolaters.
It seems most strikingly strange that atheism and idolatry
should be considered by the orthodox representatives of the
Christian faith as 6 ‘ the most God-defying and heaven-daring sins
that man can be guilty of” (as one Christian writer represents
them to be), when there is not a professor of the Christian faith,
and never has been, who was not guilty most unquestionably
of one of these sins. It requires but a few words to prove this
statement. Nearly all the early Christian writers defined atheism
to be u disbelief in a personal God,” and idolatry as u image-
making.” How obtuse must have been their perceptions that
they could not see that their definition of these terms made
them all either atheists or idolaters, and that it is impossible
to escape one of these charges without becoming obnoxious to
the other! No person can believe in a personal God without
forming an image of him in the mind ; and this is just as much
idolatry as though that mental image should find expression in
wood or stone or brass, as shown in the preceding chapter.
On the other hand, to believe in an infinite and spiritual God,
instead of a personal God, is, as shown above, atheism. It will
be seen, then, to believe in a personal, organized Deity is, to
all intents and purposes, idolatry; while to reject this anthro-
pomorphic and sensuous idea, and accept the belief in a spiritual
God in its stead, is atheism. And thus the position is reduced
to a demonstrated problem, that all Christians are either athe-
ists or idolaters.
212
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
NEW-TESTAMENT ERRORS.
I. Divine Revelation Impossible and Unnecessary.
The Hindoos, Egyptians, Persians, Chaldeans, Jews, and
Mahomedans, and various other nations, claim to have had a
special revelation of God’s will communicated to them for the
benefit of the whole human race. But the following facts and
arguments will tend to show that no such revelations have ever
been made, and that there is none necessary : —
We will inquire, in the first place, what a divine revelation
would be. Coming from a perfect being, it would of course be
perfect, and perfectly adapted to the moral and spiritual wants
of the whole human race. Such a revelation would be so clear,
explicit, and unequivocal in its language with respect to every
doctrine, principle, and precept, and eveiy statement of fact,
that no person of ordinary mind could possibly misunderstand
it; and no two persons could differ for a moment with respect
to the meaning of an}r text embraced in it. It would need no
priest and no commentator to explain it; and, if any attempt
should be made to explain it, it would only “ darken counsel,”
render the matter more obscure, and would amount to the blas-
phemous assumption that Omniscience can be enlightened, and
his works improved. And a divine revelation should be com-
municated to the whole human race; for, if restricted to one
nation, it would render God obnoxious to the charge of par-
tiality. And, in order to make it practicable to communicate it
to all nations, it would be necessary to comprehend it in a uni-
versal language constructed for the purpose, or else impart it to
the world through all the three thousand languages in use by
different nations and tribes. But, as such a revelation has never
been made or known on the earth, it is at once evident that
NEW-TESTAMENT ERRORS.
213
no such revelation has ever been communicated to man by Infi-
nite Wisdom.
II. Revelation for One Age. and Nation no Revelation
for Another.
A revelation issued two or three thousand years ago could
be no revelation for this age. The Rev. Jeremiah Jones admits
that 4 4 a revelation can only be a revelation to him who receives
it,” and can not be made use of to comince another (Canon,
p. 51). Bishop Burnet admits that a revelation to one man
is no revelation to another. You can neither see nor feel a
revelation made to another person. You can merely see the
marks on the paper on which he has recorded what he claims to
have been a revelation to him. And this is all the proof you
can have in the case, which is no proof at all.
III. A Revelation on the Brain called Reason.
I know that God has inscribed a revelation on m3" brain called
reason, as it is ever present with me. Hence I know that it
was designed for me. But I can not have this testimonj- with
regard to a written revelation, as it was not communicated to
me. Hence, as a matter of certainty and safetj", I should
hold to m}T own revelation in preference to any other.
I can 011I3" be certain of m}r own revelation. Indeed I can
not know that any other revelation was designed for me, because
a dozen revelations are brought forward b}T different nations for
m3" acceptance ; and I can not determine to an absolute certainty
which is divine and which is human. To settle the matter, I
must have another revelation made express^ to me to inform
me which is the true revelation. To save this extra labor, I
might as well have had the original revelation itself.
IV. The Human Brain Superior to xVny Revelation.
As an idiot can not be made to understand a revelation, it is
evident that a revelation presupposes a rational mind for its
reception; otherwise the revelation would be perfectly useless.
Hence it is evident the brain must be right before the revela-
tion is given, or it will not be able to understand it. This
214
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
makes the brain superior to, and of higher authority, than reve-
lation.
The moment we begin to reason on the revelation of the
Bible, which we are compelled to do to determine which is the
true one, that moment we transfer the authority of the Bible to
the brain, and the brain thus becomes its judge and jury. The
reason sits in judgment over the Bible, and is thus proved to be
superior'to it. This is realized in the experience of every man
who is superior to an idiot; and thus the question of Bible
authority and superiority is at once and for ever settled. It is
proved to be inferior to reason, and subordinate to it, and dare
not advance a step beyond it.
V. Infallible Revelation Impossible.
A Bible or revelation could only be infallible to a man or
woman of infallible understanding; that is, to an infallible
being. And, as no such being has ever existed, it is evident
that no infallible revelation has ever been issued.
VI. Every Thing must be Infallible.
No infallible revelation could be of any practical use to
any person unless all the circumstances connected with it were
infallible. The language in which it is written must be infal-
lible ; the person receiving it must be infallible ; and the reader,
or his understanding, must also be infallible. But, as no such
state of things has ever existed, it follows that no infallible
revelation has ever been given to man, and is absolutely imprac-
ticable.
-
VII. No Divine Revelation without a Series of Miracles.
A divine revelation must be miraculously inspired ; and then
it must be miraculously preserved from the slightest alteration
by the translator or the transcriber, and from any error on
the part of the printer. And, finally, the reader’s mind and
understanding and judgment must be miraculously guarded
from any mistake or misunderstanding or wrong conclusions
relative to every text in the book. Otherwise there is no abso-
lute certainty that the revelation is a true one, or superior to a
mere human production.
NEW-TESTAMENT ERRORS.
215
VIII. Our Moral and Religious Duties can not be learned
from any Bible or Revelation.
A critical investigation of the matter will show that our moral
and religious duties are not half of them enumerated in the
Bible; and to suppose that God would reveal only a portion
of them, and leave us in the dark with respect to others, and
compel us to find them out by chance and conjecture, is to trifle
with Omniscience, and assume that he is short-sighted and im-
perfect.
IX. No Moral Duty clearly defined by the Bible.
As the circumstances of each case of moral duty differ from
every other case, so our courses of action must be different.
Hence revelation, to be of any practical use, should have fore-
seen those circumstances, pointed them out, and instructed us
how to act in the case. But this is not done in any case. We
will illustrate : We are enjoined by the Bible to u bring up a child
in the way he should go; ” but that way is not pointed out or
defined. We are not told which one of the thousand churches he
should join; we are not told, when a man’s leg is broken, how
it should be mended ; we are not told what means we should use
to restore the sick to health, nor instructed as to the best means
to be used for the preservation of health and life. And, as
these are among the first and most important duties, we should
have been instructed as to the best means to be used for that
purpose ; but these things are omitted, and left to the province
of reason. There is no case in which we are not compelled to
make reason our supreme judge to decide how we shall practice
the duties of revelation ; and thus revelation is made a servant
or subsidiary agent.
Christians sometimes tell us, u Give us something better in the
place of our religion before you take it from us.” But the Bible
tells them, “ Cease to do evil [before you] learn to do well.”
Doom error to destruction, and truth will spring out of the
ashes. What would you think of a man who should say to a
physician, “Stop, sir! before you administer that medicine to
my child, I want to know what you are going to let it have in
216
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
place of its pains and aches” ? We do not propose or desire to
destro}' any religion as a whole, but only the deleterious weeds
which are choking and poisoning the healthy plants. We do
not wish to put down or arrest the progress of any truth.
The clergy sometimes assert that 44 we could not distinguish
right from wrong, but for the Bible.” And was nothing known
to the world about right and wrong, or the means of distin-
guishing between them, during the two thousand years which
elapsed before the Bible was written? Christians place Moses,
its first writer, about fourteen hundred years before Christ,
while the Bible dates back 4004 B.C. And then what about
those millions of the inhabitants of the globe who never had
our Bible ? And millions of them never had a Bible of any kind.
Are they destitute of moral perception ? On the contrary, reliable
authority, and even Christian writers, assure us that the morals
of man}T of those nations will put to shame the morals of any
nation professing the religion of Christ. Take, for example,
the Kalaos tribe of Africa, who appear to have no formal re-
ligion whatever ; and }ret, as Dr. Livingstone informs us,
they maintain strict honesty in all their dealings with each
other, and have made considerable progress in the arts and
manufactures. They have never had a Bible or revelation of
any kind. Look also at the inhabitants of the Arru Islands.
44 These people,” saj^s Dr. Livingstone, 44 appear to have no
religion whatever; and yet they live in brotherly peace, and
respect each other’s rights,” —the rights of property in the fullest
sense. The Rev. W. H. Clark, speaking of the Yoruba nation
in Central Africa, says, 44 Their moral and even their civil rights
in some respects would put to shame any Christian nation in the
world.” We might present a hundred more cases of this kind ;
but these three cases are sufficient to show that nations with no
Bible, no revelation, and even no religion, transcend any Chris-
tian nation with respect to strict honesty and a practical sense
of right and wrong. How absurd, therefore, is the idea shown
to be, that a knowledge of the Christian Bible is essential to
the knowledge and practice of good morals ! (See chap. 30.)
NEW-TESTAMENT ERBORS.
217
X. Our Duties are All recorded in the Bible of Nature.
There is not a moral or religious dut}r that is not inscribed on
the tablet of man’s soul or consciousness which he would not soon
learn if his attention were not constantly directed to, and his mind
occupied with, the erroneous theories of the dark, illiterate ages.
The God of nature has endowed every human being with two
sensations,— one of pleasure, and the other of pain,—which
serve as guides in all his actions, both ph}rsical and moral.
They stand as sentinels at the door of his soul to warn him
of the approach of evil of every kind. The moment their king-
dom is invaded, they raise an alarm, which he soon learns he
must heed or suffer a penalty. If he drinks intoxicating drinks,
or improper^ indulges his appetites and propensities in any
way, he learns, by suffering, that is the penalty affixed to the
violation of the law of health, and that he can not escape it, and
that no one can suffer for him, or make any “ atonement for
his sins.” If he attempts to handle fire, he is soon apprized that
he is meddling with something that will injure him ; if he com-
mits a moral wrong against a neighbor, it re-acts upon himself in
various wa}^s, as explained in Chap. 46. It thus acts as a
two-edged sword, which cuts both ways, punishes both the vic-
tim and the perpetrator. Man learns by experience that crime
will not only injure him, but, in many cases, will destroy him.
On the other hand, when he practices virtue, she greets him with
her smiles, and fills his soul with pleasure. Let me illustrate :
The bells in some city toll the alarm of fire at midnight. In a
few minutes thousands of men and bo3Ts are congregated on the
spot, many of them half-dressed, and without hats or shoes,
in order to aid a fellow-being in rescuing his dwelling from the
all-devouring element. What prompts them to this act? It is
not an injunction of their Bible. No: it was the well-spring
of philanthropy leaping up through their souls that prompted to
the deed, and not a written Bible. Again*: why is a mother’s
loving, watchful care ever exercised for the protection and wel-
fare of her child? She will endure almost any hardship or
privation which its welfare requires. Why does she do this?
Her Bible is silent on the subject. It is the impulse of nature
218
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
welling up from the fountain of maternal affection which prompts
to these acts of loving care, — to this moral duty. And this is
true of all the other moral duties of life. They are all imbibed at
her fountain, —at the fountain of Nature. A man with a good
moral development needs no revelation to teach him what is
right, no Bible to prompt him to the performance of his duties.
We rejoice “with jo}^ unspeakable” that the world is fast
learning this moral axiom. The Bible truly teaches us that our
moral duties are revealed in the book of nature (Chap. 14).
And Christian writers also admit this. Tertullian says, “ Why
pain yourselves in searching for a divine law while you have that
which is common to mankind, and engraven upon the tablet
of nature ? ’ ’ This is a wonderful admission for a Christian writer
to make, as it virtually concedes there is no moral or religious
necessity for a written Bible or revelation.
XI. A Divine Revelation adverse to Human Progress.
One argument against the belief in a divine revelation is
found in the fact that it would tend to paralyze human effort,
and thus make man a mental sloth. If a man could find all his
moral and religious duties “ cut and dried,” and laid out before
him, he would be thus robbed of the motive to study and learn
his duties by the exercise of his mental powers. And having
no incentives to healthy, energetic action, he would become a
drone and mental sloth. We can not believe God ever made
such a blunder as this.
XII. A Divine Revelation would imply Imperfection on
the Part of Deity.
It is admitted that no revelation was ever given to man for
more than two thousand years after creation. This would imply
that it was forgotten by Infinite Wisdom, or else the moral ne-
cessity for it overlooked. Either assumption would make God
an imperfect and short-sighted being. It would appear like an
after-thought. After man had lived so mail}’ years upon the
earth, it just occurred to God that he had not given him a
written revelation instructing him what to do and believe. The
assumption of a divine revelation presupposes such a blunder
PRIMEVAL INNOCENCY OF MAN NOT TRUE. 219
as this on the part of Omniscience, and is therefore derogatory
to his character.
Now, we ask seriously, Do not the foregoing facts and argu-
ments show that there is no moral or religious necessit}^ for a
divine revelation to man ? Let the believers in the necessit}’ of
the Bible, or a divine revelation, show their fallac}^, or for ever
abandon the old Mythological assumption that it is necessary.
Another conclusive argument: A mind that could comprehend
a truth divinely revealed could originate that truth. We will
give an illustrative proof: A teacher works out a mathematical
problem on the blackboard for the benefit of his school. Now,
every teacher and every logical mind will admit that every
pupil, possessing the mental capacity to understand the mathe-
matical truth thus revealed, could, by his own unaided powers,
have developed it himself sooner or later. In like manner, the
mind that could comprehend a truth revealed from God, could
originate it without the aid of revelation. Hence revelation
would be worse than useless, as it would furnish a pretext for
mental or intellectual sloth, and thus have a tendency to stop
human progress by doing for us what we could and should do
ourselves. A logical investigation of the case will show that
we possess the mental capacity to discover every truth toe need,
whether it be scientific, moral, or religious; and such exercise
furnishes the only means to keep the mind in a healthy con-
dition. And thus the problem is proved again.
CHAPTER XXXIV.
PEIMEVAL INNOCENCY OF MAN NOT TEUE.
The tradition so universally prevalent among the disciples of
all the Oriental S}Tstems of religious faith, as well as those of a
more modern origin, and which is still a conspicuous element
of the Christian system, —that man commenced his career in a
|l state of moral perfection,—is so obviously at war with every
j principle of anthropology, and every page of human history
'A tending to demonstrate the moral character of the primitive
220
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
inhabitants of the earth, that I shall employ but little time and
space in exposing its absurdity and falsity.
1. All the organic remains of the earliest types of the human
species that have been found demonstrate conclusively that
man started on the animal plane with animal feelings, propen-
sities, and habits, almost totally devoid of moral feelings, and
consequently a victim to his passions, propensities, and lusts.
Where, then, were his moral purity and angelic holiness? The
idea is a mere chimera.
2. It is now a settled problem in mental science that the
character of ever}r species of animate being corresponds with
its organization ; that the organic structure of the being, whether
dead or alive, always indicates its true character. If it pos-
sesses the form and type of the tiger, it will alwa}Ts be found
with the disposition and habits of the tiger; or, if it is a sheep
in form, it will be a sheep in character. There is no deviation
from this rule. Hence, when we find the bones of the early types
of the human species resembling those of the lower order of
animals, there is no escaping the conclusion that they possessed
an analogous character.
3. Look, then, at the fact that the skulls and facial bones of
human beings, found embedded in the rocks of Gibraltar, be-
longing to a race which naturalists have decided existed upon
the earth sixty-five thousand }’ears ago, closely approximate
those of an animal. They possessed retreating foreheads, prog-
nathous jaws, extrcmety coarse features, and skulls nearty an
inch in thickness; hands resembling those of a monkey, feet
resembling those of a bear, and cranial receptacle showing a
very small amount of moral brain. Now, it is evident that this
early race, with such a gross, brutal organization, could not
have possessed fine moral sensibilities and lofty virtue, purity,
and perfection.
4. And we find that nations whose organizations indicate a
higher moral character are of more modern origin, as shown b}T
th'‘ir organic remains being found in more recently formed
strata, — the tertiary formation. It is thus scientifically demon-
strated that man’s tendenc}T toward moral perfection is inversely
to the remoteness of time,—that, the nearer we retrace his
PRIMEVAL INNOCENCT OF MAN NOT TRUE. 221
history to his origin, the lower position he occupies in the scale
of morals.
5. We will cite one more historical fact to establish this
theory. The existence of a tribe of negroes has been traced
(as stated in Chap. 16.) to near the date of Noah’s flood,
whose organization indicates a very near approach to the animal;
thus showing, that, if they are descendants of Adam, he himself
must have possessed an inferior or defective moral organization
and character.
6. Let the reader, after noting these facts, read the history
of the practical lives of the earliest races or nations whose
deeds have been recorded, and he will find they sustain the
same proportion; that their defective moral character corre-
sponds (ceteris paribus) to the remoteness of the era in which
they lived. The history of the Jews themselves illustrates and
corroborates the proposition, as the character of the modern
Jews is far superior to those of the era of Abraham and
Moses.
7. Once more: The fact that the moral character of nearly
all nations is constantly improving, proves beyond question that
man once occupied a much lower plane, and that, instead of
falling from a state of moral purity, he is constantly ascending
toward that condition.
8. The current belief of man’s primitive moral perfection is
easily traced to its origin. Nearly all the Oriental nations had
a tradition of a u golden age,” when the most sublime and
unalloyed bliss was the lot and enj^maent of the genus homo.
But the serpent that beguiled Eve to eat of the forbidden fruit
in Eden, the serpent who stole the recipe of immortal life in As-
s}Tia, the entering of Typhon into the golden paradise of Osirus
in Egypt, the opening of Pandora’s box in Greece, the piercing
of the evil egg b}7 Ahrimanes in Chaldea, the machinations of
the snake in India, of the lizard in Persia, and the demon in
Mexico, seem to have all had an agency in defeating the omni-
scient designs of Deity, and placing the reins of government in
| the hands of the world’s omnipresent, omnipotent, and omni-
i scient evil genius, thus prostrating for ever the great and glorious
j plans of Infinite Wisdom.
I
i
<
222
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XXXV.
ORIGINAL SIN AND FALL OF IAN.
Haying shown that man commenced his earthly career on a
low moral and intellectual plane, and that therefore the as-
sumption of his original moral perfection is a fallacy, the cor-
relative dogma of his fall into a state of moral depravity falls to
the ground of its own weight. It would be a work of superero-
gation to attempt to show that man never fell in a moral sense,
after having shown that he never occupied an elevated moral
position to fall from. It is self-evident that he could not fall
if there was no lower position for him to fall to ; and this has
been shown. Nevertheless we will expose its absurdhy from
other logical stand-points. According to the Westminster Cate-
chism, u God placed man in the garden of Eden, and forbade
him to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge; and, because
he disobe}Td, he became the victim of God’s eternal wrath, an
accursed and totally depraved being.” Such doctrine is not only
morally revolting, but replete with logical absurdities. We will
recount some of them : —
1. God formed and fashioned man, according to the Bible,
after his own image, the product of his infinite wisdom ; and if
he had not possessed infinite wisdom, which must enable him to
do cveiy thing to perfection, he had had an cternitjr to study
the matter, and get it fulty matured, so as to make every thing
work in harmony, and endow every sentient being with hap-
piness.
2. And, as happiness is the highest end and aim of every
living being, it is hence evident that, where there is a want of
happiness, there is a want-of perfection in the being who estab-
lished such a state of things; and such a being could not by
any possibility be infinitely good and infinitely wise.
OBIGINAL SIN AND FALL OF MAN
223
3. A few points considered will show very clearljy that, if
man sinned and fell, God has to sustain the responsibility of it.
We are told that God made man ; and, being all-wise, he would,
of course, endow him with exactly such faculties and inclina-
tions and appetites as were best adapted to his situation, and
calculated to make him happy. But, according to orthodoxy,
God had planted a tree near the spot where he placed Adam,
and furnished it with some beautiful and luscious fruit, and
implanted in man an appetite and relish for it, and, as if to
tantalize him with perpetual hunger, forbade him to eat the
fruit; and apparently, for fear Adam would obey his command
and abstain from eating the fruit, he created a serpent-devil to
persuade him (or rather his wife) with bland smiles (assuming
that a snake can smile, which is rather doubtful) to partake of
the fruit, and satisfy their appetites. All this appears to have
been the work of their Creator, and not theirs. But the con-
spicuous features of the absurdity do not stop here.
4. We are told that the prohibition to eat the fruit was issued
to Adam before Eve was released from her imprisonment in
Adam’s side, or from performing the functions of a rib-bone,
before she became a woman and a wife ; and it is not even im-
plied that it was intended to extend to her. Why, then, in the
name of God, should such curses be heaped upon her devoted
head for eating the fruit when she had not been forbidden to
do so ? And it does not appear to have been wrong in any
sense, only that Jehovah had issued an order forbidding it.
5. Jehovah professed great sympathy for Adam’s lonely con-
dition, and made a help meet for him; and yet the first meat
she helped him to, it would seem, damned him and his posterity
for ever.. In view of this fact, it is probable Adam would have
preferred to let her remain a bone in his side.
6. Here let it be noted that Adam and Eve were ignorant and
inexperienced beings. They had had no experience in any
thing, and hence could not know that such an act, or any other
act, was wrong and sinful.
7. Nor could Adam know what the word u die ” meant when
Jehovah told him he would die the day he ate the fruit, as he
? had seen nothing die.
224
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
8. It may here be said in repl}T, that they should, in their
ignorance, have obeyed the command which was given them.
To this we reply, they did obey the command of one being.
God told them not to eat, and the serpent told them to eat, the
fruit; and, not having lived with or had any experience with
either of those omnipresent beings, how could they know what
would be the consequence of obeying or disobeying either of
them? This question of itself is sufficient to settle the matter.
They could not possibly know, with no experience in either
case, that the consequence would be more serious or more fatal
in disobeying Jehovah than the serpent.
9. And as they got their eyes open by eating the fruit, and
did not die as Jehovah told them they would (while the serpent
told them they would not), it is not to be wondered at that
ever after they and their posterity should be more inclined to
serve the serp'ent-devil than Jehovah, seeing that all the happy
consequences which the former predicted as the result of eating
the fruit were realized, while those of Jehovah were falsified.
For proof see chap. 58.
10. The most artful sophistry can not disguise the fact that
the doctrine of moral depravity is a slanderous imputation upon
divine mercy, goodness, and justice, and challenges not only
his goodness, but his good sense.
11. And every page of history and every principle of science
demonstrate it to be both false and demoralizing.
Man fell up, and not down.
CHAPTER XXXVI.
THE I0KAL DEPRAVITY OF MAN A DELUSION.
It is alleged by the orthodox world that man’s moral nature
and reasoning faculties both became depraved by the fall.
“Totally depraved” has been the doctrine; but the gradual
expansion and enlightenment of the mind by progressive science
have modified the doctrine with some of the churches, and they
have substituted “moral depravity” for “total depravity.” •
THE MORAL DEPRAVITY OF MAN A DELUSION 225
But neither assumption can be scientifically or logically sus-
tained. The assumption that our reason is depraved is made
the pretext for urging the superiority of revelation, and making
reason subordinate to it. We are told, that, as our reason is
depraved, we can not safely rely upon it to judge and criticise
the Bible, or the doctrine of the churches. Mr. Moody recently
exclaimed, in a religious controversy, u I never reason on re-
ligion. None but the disciples of devils reason. It is danger-
ous to reason on religion.’9 Unconscious of his ignorance, Mr.
Moody assumed a very ludicrous position. By the- exercise of
his reason on religion, Mr. Moody came to the conclusion that
it is wrong to reason on religion, thus committing the very sin
he condemns in others. He reasons on religion to convince
people that it is wrong to reason on religion, and thus violates
his own principles. His case is analogous to that of the town
council which attempted to keep the prisoners of the county in
the old jail while they erected a new jail with the timbers of the
old one,—rather a difficult task to achieve, but not more so
than Mr. Moody’s attempt to keep his reason in chains while
he is trying to exercise it. Or, rather, he insults his auditors by
saying to them virtually, u I will use my reason on matters of
religion, but you must not use yours." As a reasoning being
he reasons with reasonable beings, and addresses their reason
to convince them the}" ought not to reason on certain subjects.
He uses logic to prove that logic is dangerous, and should not be
used. By reasoning against reason he pulls both ivays, like the
Scotchman who attempted to lift himself by his ears. He com-
mits logical suicide when he attempts to show there is an}" case
in which reason should not be used. The truth is, a person
can not think on the subject of religion without beginning to
reason on it, because his reasoning faculties and his thinking
faculties are both one. He thinks with*his intellect, and he
reasons with his intellect; and, the very moment he begins to
think, he begins to reason. And therefore, if it is ivrong to
reason on religion, it is ivrong to have any religion. We should
not allow it to occupy our thoughts for a single moment, and
thus we would banish religion from the world ; which, however,
would be no great loss if it is too absurd to bear the test of
226
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
reason. And, if it is wrong to reason on religion, it is wrong
to reason on any subject. The more important the subject, the
more necessary to use reason upon it, that we may make no mis-
takes in regard to it. The truth is, reason is the only faculty
with which a man can comprehend religion, revelation, or the
Bible. This would prove again that it is wrong to have any
religion, if it is wrong to submit it to the judgment, and test it
by our reasoning faculties. Reason is the principal faculty
which distinguishes us from the brute ; and, therefore, to discard
it is to approximate to the condition of the brute. What a pity
Mr. Moody had not been consulted in his creation that he might
have had his reasoning faculties left out 1 then he would not be
under the necessity of sinning daily by exercising his reason in
his attempts to stop its exercise. And then there arc other
serious difficulties growing out of the reverend gentleman’s
position. Ilis reason being “depraved,” we can place no con-
fidence in its exercise or decision in this case, so as to assume
that his judgment and conclusions are correct when he declares
against reason. If he reaches his conclusions through a de-
praved reason, they can be of no account. The verdict can not
transcend the judge or court which makes it. The reasoner
being depraved, his reasoning and decision in the case must be
depraved also, and therefore worthless. Verily the gentleman
is in a bad position, and rather a serious quandary; and every
struggle to got out only sinks him deeper. lie is in the predica-
ment of a dog running round after his tail. And then we
should like to ask the gentleman, If our reason is not to be
depended upon in matters of religion, how is it to be depended
upon in any case? And how docs he know, or how can he
know, but that, his reason being depraved, it has lead him off
the track, in this case, in his attempts to put it in chains?
Will the reverend gentleman furnish a rule by which we can
know in what case our reason can be trusted, and in what cases
we are to doff our moral manhood, and lie prostrate in the dust
with the brute? And then the rule, being the product of a de-
praved reason, could not be relied upon. Really the reverend
gentleman is in an inextricable quandary. The case furnishes
an illustrative proof of the extent a man can make a fool of
FREE AGENCY AND MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY. 227
himself when he attempts to shipwreck his reason, and a proof
that orthodoxy is a conglomeration of absurdities, and is entirely
out of place in an age of progressive thought, and an age of
reason and science. The only evidence we have ever had of
the truth of the depravity of human reason is found in the fact
that men professing to have common sense and reason can be-
lieve it to be true. And the fact that our moral sense instinc-
tivel}7 repels the doctrine of total depravity or moral depravity,
and our reason rises up in rebellion against it, is proof positive
of its absurdity.
The thought is here suggested, that, if God could not get along
without the adoption of an expedient calculated to corrupt our
moral nature and deprave our reason, he should not and would
not have implanted in us such an instinctive horror to the doc-
trine. This natural feeling of repugnance is alone sufficient to
condemn it, and prove that it is a slander upon Infinite Wisdom,
and a libel upon human nature, to assume its existence. And
such doctrine is evidently calculated to demoralize society.
An old Roman proverb teaches us, u Call a man a dog, and he
will be a dog.” Call a child depraved, and it will feel depraved ;
and, feeling so, it will act so. On the other hand, teach the child
he possesses the grand principle and feeling of an inherent no-
bility, and he will rise to the dignity of moral manhood. Such
is the difference in the moral value of the two doctrines.
CHAPTER XXXVII.
FREE AGENCY AND MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY.
One of the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith is the
free agency of man; but the very term is a logical contradic-
tion. An agent must act in, accordance with the will and
wishes of his employer, or he will be called to account, and
perhaps dismissed. Where, then, is his moral freedom? It
may be assumed that his employer licenses him to take his
own course ; but this must be with certain conditions, or else
he will act for himself, and be no agent at all. Certain, alterna-
228
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
tives are placed before an agent, which he is privileged to choose ;
but that does not make him free in any rational or practical
sense. If he does not act as required or desired, he will be
either punished or dismissed. That is a singular kind of free-
dom. It is the freedom of a slave, which is no freedom at all;
and this is exactly the kind of freedom orthodoxy grants to
the sinner, and to the whole human race. It marks out the
road to heaven, and says, u This is the road to eternal bliss ; and
you must walk in it, or eternal misery will be your portion.”
And, to escape such a terrible doom, millions tremblingly travel
the road impelled and propelled by fear. And this painful
alternative Christians are pleased to term free agency, or moral
freedom. It is simply the freedom of a slave to clank his chains.
It is a perversion of language to apply the term “ free agency ”
to such a case. The orthodox give us our choice to accept their
terms of salvation or reject them ; but they attach to the conse-
quence of rejecting them the most awful penalties. We will
illustrate: A father says to his son some sabbath morning,
“ John, I am going to leave you free to-day either to go to
church or go a-fishing.” He instantly darts away to the river
or the lake with the glee of a humming-bird, and is seen no
more until nightfall. As he approaches the door, his father says
to him, “ John, where have you been to-day? ” — u Why, father,
I have been fishing, to be sure.” — u Well now, John, I am
going to give you one of the most terrible floggings you ever
had in your life for not going to church.” — “ Why, father, you
told me I might take my choice, and go either to church, or go
a-fishing.” — u That is true, John ; but it was with the implied
understanding that, if you did not choose to go to church, I
would give you an unmerciful whipping.” This is free agency
indeed! It is the free agency of orthodox}' illustrated, and
applied to practice. Free agency coupled with a penalty is
moral slavery and moral tyranny. There is no moral freedom
about it. You are simply free to take your choice between two
systems of slavery and two systems of punishment or suffering.
A hare pursued by a hound enjoys a similar kind of freedom,—
the freedom to stand and be caught, or the freedom to run.
Of all the absurdities that ever entered the brain of a human
FREE AGENCY AND MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY. 229
being, that of setting God and the Devil both after man, as
orthodoxy does, and then call him a free agent, is not excelled. "
We are told that we can not think a thought of ourselves. All
our good thoughts and actions are prompted by a good being;
and all our bad thoughts and actions by a bad being (God and
the Devil). Where, then, is our moral freedom or our moral
accountability, if neither our thoughts nor our actions are our
own, as the}" can not be if they are prompted by other beings?
When a man performs a good act, it is assumed that God is the
author of it; and he is told that he must give God praise for
it. On the other hand, all wicked actions are assigned to the
Devil. He is thus a target between these two cross-fires. Such
an assumption sweeps away the last vestige of free agency and
moral accountability. Some Christian professors accept the
doctrine of free agenc}- to escape the dreaded alternative of as-
suming man to be a mere machine, which they call fatality.
But here you have fatality to repletion. If to place man be-
tween two all-powerful beings, and have them both trying to
direct his actions at once, xlon’t make him a machine, then we
have no use for the word. It is strange that Christian pro-
fessors have never discovered that, according to the teachings
of the Bible, God himself is not a free agent. A free agent is
one who can have things as he wills or wishes, so far as he has
the power to make them so. Look, then, at the fact that,
according to their own Bible, God himself does not enjoy this
desirable boon. It is declared by that book that u God wills not
the death (destruction) of the sinner, but that all shall be
saved.” And it is elsewhere declared that u strait is the gate,
and narrow is the way, that leadeth unto life ; and few there be
that find it.” According to the first text, God desires to save
all; but, according to the second, he succeeds in saving but
very few. Hence, not having things as he desires or wishes
them to be, it is evident he is not a free agent, according to
the orthodox or technical sense of that term. Why, then, talk
of men being free agents, if a being with infinite power can not
be a free agent ?
To make man a free agent strictly or truly, he should have
been consulted beforehand as to how, when, and where he
230
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
would be born, or whether he would be born at all or not.
Douglas Jerrold significantly remarks that, u if I had foreknown
that a portion of mankind would be born to be damned, I’ll be
d-----d if I would have been born at all.” This expression,
although profane, contains a good moral. Certainly nothing
could be more preposterous or unreasonable than to hold one
being accountable to another when the former had no agency in
creating his mind or originating his inclinations, out of which
all his actions grow. True accountability can only appertain
to beings who created their own natural inclinations, or con-
sented to receive those they are in possession of. This is clear
and unanswerable logic. If man was made by God, or Infinite
Wisdom, as Christians affirm, then common sense would teach
that God alone is accountable for his actions. The man would
be a fool who should blame a watch for not running right,
knowing that the maker conferred upon it all the properties
and powers it possessed. The maker of the watch alone is held
responsible for all its perfections and imperfections. And, if
man has a maker, it is a very clear case that that maker is
equally responsible for his running wrong. There is no resist-
ing this conclusion. The true assumption in the case is, that
man has no creator in the orthodox sense, and is only responsi-
ble to himself, and to society so far as he is a voluntary mem-
ber of it. But orthodoxy makes his salvation depend not only
upon his resisting the natural inclinations implanted in his
system, but also upon the position of his birth. As an argu-
ment in favor of sending the Bible to the heathen, they declare
that millions perish every year because they have not the oppor-
tunity of reading that “Holy Book,” and learning the name
of Jesus. This makes their salvation depend upon the locality
of their birth ; as some sections furnish the opportunity, and
others do not, of becoming acquainted with their Bible, and the
name of their Savior.
We must imagine, therefore, in u the da}" of judgment ” every
human being will have a geographical question to answer.
After being interrogated as to their conduct and practical lives,
the next question will be, “ Where were you born?” If the
answer is, “ In Arabia,” the reply of the judge will be, “ Oh,
THE DOCTRINE OF REPENTANCE ERRONEOUS. 231
yes! you are a Maliomedan. Our religion only saves those
born in Christian countries. I must therefore set you aside
among the goats.’’ If the applicant is from India, he will be
rejected from the kingdom, and consigned to perdition, because
he is a “ heathen.” And thus Christianity is shown to be a
geographical system of salvation, and makes a man’s eternal
destiny depend upon whether he is born in this country or that
countiy, which strips it of all claim to either justice, impar-
tiality, or good sense. The doctrine of free agency and moral
accountability is one in a long list of theological absurdities,
which originated in an age of scientific ignorance, when noth-
ing was known of the natural powers, or the philosophy of the
human mind, or the laws which control its action.
Moral Accountability.—What is it? and where is it? It is
certainly one of the greatest moral puzzles ever submitted to a
philosopher, as to how a being, forced into existence by an
omnipotent creative power, without his consultation or consent,
j can be responsible to that creative power for his conduct, when
| he had no agency and no volition in his own creation, and no
^ power of resisting it, or in shaping its conditions. If God pos-
t sesses omnipotent power and infinite wisdom, and is a creator,
he could and should have made man to act just as he wished
him to act; and, if he did not do so, common sense would sug-
gest that it was his own fault. It will be seen from the force
of this logic, that Christians must either give up the doctrine
« of a voluntary personal creator, or that of moral accountability.
i The two doctrines can not be made to harmonize together.
j CHAPTER XXXVIII.
I| REPENTANCE,— THE DOCTRINE ERRONEOUS.
Having treated this subject somewhat lengthily and critically
i in u The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” we shall devote but
| a brief space to its elucidation here. Nearly all religious na-
tions have attached great importance to the act of repentance ;
j but such an act does not repair the injury or wrong repented of.
il
232
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
The repentance of a murderer does not restore his murdered
victim to life; nor does the repentance and tears of the incen-
diary rebuild the dwelling he has destroyed by fire. What,
then, is its practical value?
We would ask, also, what moral value or merit can attach
to an act of repentance when it is not claimed to be an act of
the sinner, but “ the power of God upon the soul ’’ ? (Luther.)
It appears then, according to orthodox logic,—1. That God
won’t save the sinner unless he repents. 2. That he can’t re-
pent only as God moves him to do so. This places him in a
bad predicament. Hence, when he does repent, it is an act of
God. 3. And then God saves him because he makes him re-
pent. Here is a jumble of logical incongruities and moral con-
tradictions that can find no lodgment in a scientific mind. A
few brief questions will set the doctrine of repentance in its true
light.
4. Repentance consists in merety a revival of early impres-
sions, that may be either right or wrong, true or false, and
almost as likely to be one as the other.
5. Who ever knew a person to embrace more rational doc-
trines, or become more intelligent, or have a stronger taste for
scientific pursuits, b}r repentance?
6. Is it not a fact that repentance usualty causes a person to
cling more tenaciously to the errors and superstitions in which
he was educated ?
7. Who ever knew a person by repenting, either in health or
sickness, to condemn one wrong act which he had erroneously
been taught to believe was right? If not, does it not prove
that repentance always conforms to education, whether that
education is right or wrong, and hence does nothing toward
enlightening the convert or aiybodjr else ?
8. On the contraiy, when a man repents with his mind full
of religious errors, is it not evident that the act of repentance
will have the effect to rivet these errors more strong^ upon his
mind, and thus effect a moral injury instead of a moral benefit?
0. If a man ma}' abandon some of his immoral habits, which
he has been taught to believe are wrong, by an act of repent-
ance, are not the good effects to some extent counterbalanced
by his clinging more strongly to his religious errors ?
THE DOCTRINE OF REPENTANCE ERRONEOUS. 233
10. Who ever knew a person to abandon a false religion by
repentance? Does a Hindoo or Mahomedan ever embrace
Christianity by repenting ?
11. Who ever knew a Roman Catholic to become a Protes-
tant, or a Protestant a Catholic, by repentance? And yet ortho-
dox Christians will cite the belief and testimony of a dying
man as an evidence of the truth of their doctrines.
12. How can an act of repentance do any thing toward prov-
ing what is right and what is wrong in any case, when one
person repents for doing what another repents for not doing ?
We have such cases recorded in history.
We have known a Campbellite to leave his dying testimon}rin
favor of water baptism, and a Quaker to leave his dying testi-
? mony against it. Does one case prove it to be wrong, and the
j other right? If not, why do Christians cite such cases? What
do they prove ?
1 For a further illustration of this subject, see “ The World’s
I Sixteen Crucified Saviors.”
i
Death-Bed Repentance.
If there is any class of people who need to repent for mis-
spent time, and for leading false and foolish lives, it is the
colporteurs who travel over the country distributing pious tracts,
containing doleful accounts of death-bed repentance, which,
j whether right or wrong, prove nothing.
I Such cases of repentance as are reported do not appertain to
the moral conduct, but to the religious belief, of the sinner. It
is the abandonment and condemnation of his past creeds, and
not of his past conduct, which makes the tract so valuable,
j Such a case contains no moral instruction whatever.
y If his early education was Mahomedan, his repentance will
establish that religion again in his mind; but, if Mormonism
was the religion of his childhood, he would again have full faith
in that religion. What nonsense !
J Who ever knew repentance to divorce or emancipate a man
j from all or any of the religious errors of his past life, and plant
< in his soul a better and more rational religion, or lead him to
i advocate any religion only that in which he had been educated ?
234
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Such repentance is worth nothing, and absolutely foolish. Let
us assume that the numerous cases of death-bed repentance
published in religious tracts are all true; and what would it
prove ? Why, simply this : that the converts had all been edu-
cated to believe in Christianity, and had gone back to that
religion. Had Budhism or Mahomedanism been their early
religion, they would have returned to that. It is merely old
errors and old truths revived and re-established in the mind.
But many facts afterwards gathered by honest investigation,
appertaining to some of these cases, show that they have either
been manufactured or greatly exaggerated. As for example,
the case of Thomas Paine is proved to be without foundation.
His close was calm and peaceful. Many times has it been de-
clared, in the pulpit and elsewhere, that44 Tom Paine repented,
and died a miserable death.” And yet we have the testimony
of those Christian professors who were present with him almost
constantly during his last illness, that he never manifested the
least compunction of conscience, or the least disposition to
condemn any thing he had said or written in opposition to
Christianity or the Bible. Take, for example, the testimony of
Willet Ilicks, a reliable Quaker preacher. On being interro-
gated by a neighbor of the author of this work as to the truth
of the statement that he repented, he replied, 4b I was with
Paine every day during the latter part of his sickness, and can
affirm that he did not express any regret for having wTitten
4 The Age of Reason,’ as has been reported, nor for any thing
he had said or written in opposition to the Bible, nor ask for-
giveness of God. He died as easy as an}r one I ever saw die ;
and I have seen a great many die.” And yet this Mr. Ilicks
was in hopes he would repent. Other similar testimon}’ might
be adduced ; but this is sufficient. The story of Ethan Allen’s
daughter calling upon her father during her last illness, and
asking him if lie would recommend her to die in his religious
belief, and his feeling so conscience-smitten b}T the question,
that he exclaimed, 44 No: die in the belief of your mother! ”
(who was a Christian) has gone the rounds of the Christian
pulpits. And yet we have the statement of his nephew, Col.
Hitchcock, that he had no daughter to die during his lifetime.
THE DOCTRINE OF REPENTANCE ERRONEOUS. 235
There is not one word of truth in the report. These two cases
furnish samples of the manner in which a djdng cause will grasp
at straws.
We will subjoin here the testimony of a clergyman, in proof
that infidels are not more likely to die in a state of mental dis-
tress than Christians: The Rev. Theodore Clap, in his autobi-
ography, sa3^s, u In all my experience I never saw an unbeliever
die in fear. I have seen them expire without ai^ hope or ex-
pectation of the future, but never in agitation from dread or
misgiving as to what might befall them hereafter. We know
that the idea is prevalent that this final event passes with some
dreadful terror or agony of soul. It is imagined, that, in the
infidel’s case, the pangs of dissolution are greatly augmented
by the upbraidings of a guilty conscience, and by the reluctance
of the spirit to be torn from its mortal tenement, and hurried
into the presence of an avenging Judge; but this is all a su-
perstitious fancy. It is a superstitious fear, from a false educa-
I tion, that causes any one to die in fear.”
j The Rev. W. H. Spenser, of the First Parish Church (Massa-
* chusetts), says, u Some of the men most bitterly stigmatized as
| infidels have been among the most brilliant and useful minds the
| world has ever known, and, when dying and suffering from cal-
umn}T and scorn, have only to wait for time to do them justice,
and place them in history with the world’s benefactors or sa-
viors. There is not to be found on record one purety infidel
1 man, in the sense now referred to, whose death-bed was at-
tended by recantations and remorse.” Thus testifies a clergy-
man.
We will now show from reliable authority that the most ardent
faith in Christ and the Bible, and the most rigid and conscien-
tious observance of their doctrines and precepts, do not guaran-
tee permanent acquiescence or satisfaction, or protect the mind
from the most violent mental perturbation in the hour of death.
John Calvin stood in the first ranks of the Church militant in
\\ Ms time, and was considered by many the leading clergyman
in Christendom. Hear what Martin Luther, his co-laborer, says
with respect to his mortal exit: u He died forlorn and forsaken
J of God, blaspheming to the very end. ... He died of scarlet-
236
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
fever, overrun and eaten up by ulcerous abscesses, the stench of
which drove every person away. He gave up the ghost, despair-
ing of salvation, and evoking devils from the abyss, and uttering
oaths most horrible, and blasphemies most frightful.’’ Then
tell us no more about infidels recanting and dying unhappy,
after reading this case. Yet all the cases and evidences cited
above only tend to show that no forms of religious belief have
any thing specially to do with the condition of mind in the
hour of mortal dissolution, except so far as that belief has been
invested with groundless, superstitious fears. Hence persons
who distribute death-bed tracts are in rather small business.
We like the answer of a liberal-minded man, who, when in his
dying moments he was asked by a priest if he had made his
peace with his God, replied, “ We have*never had any unfriend-
ly words.” We don’t believe there can be a case found in all
Christendom of an infidel repenting whose parents were unbe-
lievers, so that he was not educated and biased in favor of any
form of religious faith or belief.
CHAPTER XXXIX.
FORGIVENESS FOR SIN, AN IMMORAL DOCTRINE.
The doctrine of divine forgiveness for sin is another illogical
and immoral doctrine of the orthodox school, as well as that
of heathen nations, which a logical anatysis and the practical
experience of nearly all religious countries show has been per-
nicious in its effects upon the morals of society. A little reflec-
tion must convince any unbiased mind that* while men and
women are taught to believe that the consequences of sin or
crime can be arrested or mitigated by an act of forgiveness by
the divine Law-maker, they will feel the less restrained from
the commission of crime and wickedness. They naturally look
upon it as a sort of license for the indulgence of their passions
and propensities. They are taught that none of the evil conse-
quences of wrong-doing can follow them to another world if
they repent in time, and ask forgiveness. This they accept as a
FORGIVENESS FOR SIN, AN IMMORAL DOCTRINE. 237
broad license to take their swing in vice and villainy. And thus
they are partially demoralized by the doctrine. Much more ra-
tional is the doctrine of the Swedenborgians and Harmonialists,
that every sin or wrong act we commit makes its impress upon
the soul, or immortal spirit, which will be carried with it to the
life eternal, and will there long operate to impair the happiness,
and retard the spiritual growth, of every person who in this life
indulges in crime or immoral conduct. They teach us that the
character w~e form for ourselves on this plane of existence will
be carried with us to the spirit-world ; that our character under-
goes no radical change by merely passing through the gates of
death. Hence, whatever defective moral qualities we permit to
be incorporated into our characters here will operate to sink us
to a lower plane of happiness in the after-death world. This is a
plausible and rational doctrine, to say the least, and can have no
effect to demoralize the community, as the sentiments breathed
forth by some of the orthodox hymns have evidently done.
“ There is a fountain filled with blood,
Drawn from Immanuel’s veins;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
Lose all their guilty stains.”
Could any doctrine be more demoralizing than that here set
forth, — that the deep-dyed stains of a life of crime, debauch-
ery, and wickedness can all be wiped out by the simple act of
plunging into a pool of blood, or rather by believing that the
atoning blood of Christ will cleanse from all sin ? The same
idea is incorporated into Watts’s well-known hymn, —
“ While the lamp holds out to bum,
The vilest sinner may return.”
The idea here set forth is shocking to the moralist, as well as
demoralizing in its effects on the community. u The vilest sin-
ner ” must feel very little concern about “ returning ” to the path
of virtue, or abandoning his wicked deeds, while the conviction
is established in his mind that he is losing nothing by leading
such a life, and will have nothing to do at the end of a long life
of the most shocking crimes, villainies, and vices, to escape
entirely their legitimate punitive consequences, but to take a dip
233
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
in “the blood of Jesus.” Every scientific moralist can see
very plainly that the world can never be reformed while such
license for sin and wickedness is issued from the Christian
pulpit. Practically speaking, God could not forgive a sin. An
act of forgiveness implies that the legitimate consequence of
the evil deed or sinful act can be set aside, and escaped. The
principles of moral science teach us that this is impossible. It
demonstrates that the moral law is a part of our being; and,
consequently, an act of forgiveness for the violation of that
law could not suspend its operation, or stop the infliction of its
penalty upon the perpetrator. It could then, of course, effect
nothing. Hence it will be seen that no sin can be forgiven, but
must work out its legitimate consequences. Scientifically speak-
ing, the law is the cause, and the penalty the effect: when the
cause is set in operation, the effect must follow. It would be as
easy to arrest the thunderbolt in its descent from the clouds as
to evade the penalty of this law. God could not if he would,
and would not if he could, forgive the violation of his laws. He
could not, because he has wisety arranged those laws to operate
without his interference. On the other hand, he would not if he
could, because it would encourage their future and further viola-
tion. And then a God who would confer on us an inclination to
commit certain acts, and then require us to ask his forgiveness
for committing them, would not be a veiy consistent being. For-
giveness is, theologically speaking, “a free ticket to Heaven.”
Bujt a through ticket of the priest, and you can go on “the
strait-line” road, direct to the orthodox “house of many
mansions,” without haring to switch off at any station to un-
load your burden of sins. “ All is well that ends well ” is their
motto. The orthodox clerg}’ tell the most vile and debauched
villain and blood}T assassin, after he has inhumanly butchered
and murdered his innocent and virtuous wife, can, by an act
of repentance and forgiveness, swing from the end of the
hangman’s rope directly into a heaven of pure and unalloyed
bliss, and, with his fingers all dripping with human blood, join
the white-robed saints in shouting, “Glory hallelujah to the
Lord God and the Lamb for ever and ever!” Spare me, oh,
spare me, from ever believing in such a demoralizing religion as
this!
CAN COD BE SUBJECT TO ANGEBf
239
CHAPTER XL.
GAN GOD BE SUBJECT TO ANGER?
All Bibles, and nearly every religious nation known to history,
have taught that God often gets angry at the creatures of his
own creation. But, in the light of modern science, nothing
could be more transcendent^ absurd, or more absolutely impos-
sible, than that a being possessing all knowledge — a being
infinite in power, infinite in wisdom, and filling all space through-
out the boundless universe — should be a victim to the weakness
and ungovernable impulse of passion. The very idea is revolt-
ing and blasphemous, and presents to every reflecting and un-
biased mind a self-evident impossibility. The emotion of anger
can only be the weakness of finite and imperfect beings. It is
self-evidently impossible for a being possessing infinite perfec-
tion, and consequently infinite self-government, to cherish the
feeling of anger for a moment, as the following consideration
will show: —
1. The modern study of mental philosophy has demonstrated
anger to be a species of moral weakness; and hence it could
not, for a single moment, occupy a mind possessing infinite
perfection. A being, therefore, who is assumed to possess such
a weakness is self-evidently not a God, but merely an imagi-
nary being, fit only to be worshiped by ignorant slaves.
2. The practical experience of every person demonstrates
anger to be a species of unhappiness, and often of absolute
misery; and the indulgence of this passion not only makes
the possessor unhappy, but destroys the happiness of every one
around him. If, therefore, God were an angry being, instead
of heaven being a place or state of happiness, it would be the
most miserable place imaginable ; for God is represented by
the Christian Bible as getting angry every day (see Ps. vii. 11),
240
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
and so angry that the “fury conies up in his face.” As a
Yankee would say, “ He gets mad all over.” I frankly confess
I don’t 'want to live in such a heaven, or with such a God.
Indeed, it would be no heaven at all for anybody; for heaven
is a state of happiness.
3. In the third place, the modern study of the science of phi-
losophy has discovered that anger is a species of disease, which
may result in mental and even physical suicide if carried far
enough. It produces a congested state of the blood-vessels of
the brain, which, if not arrested in its progress, will produce
death. Dr. Gunn, in his work on domestic medicine, reports
several cases in which an inquest was held over a dead body by a
coroner’s jury, and the verdict rendered, “ Came to his death in
a fit of anger.” However irreverent, the thought forces itself
upon us, that such a verdict might be given over the dead body
of Jehovah if we were compelled to believe all we read of his
getting angry; for it is a scientific deduction that can not be
resisted, that, if anger can produce death in one being, it may
in all beings subject to its influence.
4. Again: as the result of the study of mental philosoph}7,
anger is now known to be a species of insanity. It deranges,
more or less, all the faculties of the mind, and often disqualifies
the possessor for doing any thing right, or acting rationally,
while under its influence. It often causes him to act without
reason or judgment, and is liable to drive him to the commis-
sion of crime. As well think of entering the cage of a tiger as
to take up our abode in a heaven ruled by such a God, — a
heaven controlled by a God bereft of reason by the ungoverna-
ble action of his own passions. We could not be happy in
such a heaven: we should be constantly under the influence
of fear and apprehension, lest he should become enraged, and
his vengeance fall upon us. Where there is fear there is no
heaven or happiness. If, as the Bible tells us, he is liable to
repent, he might experience this mental perturbation at any
time, and repent for having admitted us into the heavenly
kingdom, and consequently expel us. Under such circum-
stances our motives would be very much weakened for laboring
to reach such a heaven, not knowing that w^e should be per-
CAN GOB BE SUBJECT TO ANGER?
241
mitted to remain there a single hour. How supremely ridicu-
lous, when logically analyzed, is the conception of an angry
God! It is entirely behind the age, and adapted only to the
lowest stages of barbarism; and yet thousands of Christian
clergymen preach this demoralizing doctrine from the pulpit
every sabbath day. It is demoralizing, because no person can
believe in an angry, sin-punishing God, without cherishing such
feelings in his own bosom. It is impossible for him to avoid it.
Indeed, he has no motives for trying to avoid it; but, on the
contrary, he possesses the strongest motives for cultivating such
feelings. For Archbishop Whately sa}'s, “ Religious people
always try to be like the God they worship.” They consider
it not only their privilege, but their duty, to imitate him.
Hence, if they believe he gets mad occasionally, and pours out
his vengeance upon his offending children (his disobedient sub-
jects) , they will naturally feel like following his example, and
be cruel and revengeful to those who excite their anger. This
preaching the doctrine of an angry God has a tendency to
foster vengeful and vindictive feelings amongst the people;
when, if the clergy would preach only a God of infinite love,
infinite goodness, infinite perfection in all his attributes, we
should soon see a marked change in society. Kindness, love,
and good-will would be manifested between man and man ; and
cruel, vengeful, and vindictive feelings would gradually die out,
and be numbered amongst the things which have been and are
not. Then would the kingdom of peace be established on
earth, and the millennium be ushered in. But we can not expect
the priests to be better than their God, nor the people to be
better than their priests. “Like God like priest, and like
priest like people.” The priest deals out damnation upon
the people to be like his God ; and the people follow in his foot-
steps, and exercise cruel and revengeful feelings toward each
other. It seems astonishing that such an immoral and blas-
phemous doctrine should have been so long and so extensively
tolerated in professedly enlightened countries, as it is evident it
must have had a bad effect; and past experience proves it has
had a demoralizing effect upon the people where the doctrine
has been preached. It furnishes an illustration of the omnipo-
tent power of custom.
242
TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER XLI.
ATONEMENT FOR SIN, AN IMMORAL DOCTRINE.
Haying appropriated a portion of two chapters in “The
World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors ” to an exposition of the
doctrine of the atonement, we shall treat the subject but briefly
in this work. |
1. It is shown in the work above mentioned, that the doctrine '
of the atonement is of heathen origin, and that it is predicated
upon the assumption that no sin can be fully expiated without
the shedding of blood. In the language of Paul, “ Without the
shedding of blood, there can be no remission for sin.” A bar-
barous and bloody doctrine truly! But this doctrine was almost ,
universally prevalent amongst the Orientals long before Paul’s
time.
2. Christians predicate the dogma of atonement for sin upon
the assumption that Christ’s death and sufferings were a substi-
tute for Adam’s death, incurred by the fall. But as Adam’s ;
sentence was death, and he suffered that penalty, this assump-
tion can not be true.
3. If the penalty for sin was death, as taught in Gen. iii., and
Christ suffered that penalty for man, then man should not die;
but, as lie does, it makes the doctrine preposterous. It could
not have meant spiritual death, as some argue, because a part
of the penalty was that of being doomed to return to dust (Gen.
iii. 19).
4. If crucifixion was indispensabty necessary as a penalty,
then the punishment should have been inflicted either upon the
instigator or perpetrator of the deed : either the serpent or j
Adam should have been nailed to the cross. I
5. We are told in reply, that, as an infinite sin was committed, ,
it required an infinite sacrifice. But Adam, being a finite being,
ATONEMENT, AN IMMORAL DOCTRINE.
243
could not commit an infinite sin; and Christ’s sacrifice and
sufferings could not be infinite, unless he had continued to suffer
to all eternity. Therefore the assumption is false. *
6. An all-wise God would not let things get into such a con-
dition as to require the murder of his only son from any consid-
eration whatever.
7. And no father, cherishing a proper regard and love for his
son, could have required him to be, or consented to have him,
put to death in a cruel manner; for the claims of mercy and
paternal affection are as imperative as justice.
8. To put an intelligent and innocent being to death for any
purpose is a violation of the moral law, and as great a sin as
1 that for which he died. Hecatombs of victims can not atone for
I the infraction of the moral law which is engraven upon our
\\ souls.
i 9. If it were necessary for Christ to be put to death, then
* Judas is entitled to one-half the merit of it for inaugurating the
H act, as it could not have taken place without his aid; and no
I\ one who took part in it should be censured, but praised,
i 10. It is evident, that, if everybody had been Quakers, no
I atonement would have been made, as their religion is opposed to
i bloodshed.
11. The atonement is either one God putting another to
i* death, or God putting himself to death to appease his own
| wrath; but both assumptions are monstrous absurdities, which
no person distinguished for science or reason can indorse.
! 12. Anger and murder are the two principal features in the
,] doctrine of the atonement; and both are repugnant to our
* moral sense and feelings of refinement, and indicate a barbar-
1 ous and heathen origin.
! 13. The atonement punishes the innocent for the guilty;
which is a double or twofold crime, and a reversal of the spirit
of justice. If a father should catch four of his children steal-
ing, and the fifth one standing by and remonstrating against the
!j act, and should seize on the innocent one and administer a
; severe flagellation, he would commit a double crime : 1st, that
I of punishing an innocent child; 2d, that of exonerating and
j encouraging the four guilty children in the commission of crime.
| The atonement involves the same principle.
7
244
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
14. No person with true moral manhood would consent to be
saved on any such terms ; but would prefer to suffer for his own
sins, rather than let an innocent being suffer for them. And the
man who would accept salvation upon such terms must be a
sneak and a coward, with a soul not worth saving.
15. Who that possesses any sense of justice would want to
swim through blood to get to the heavenly mansion ? I want
neither animals, men, nor Gods murdered to save my soul.
16. If there is any virtue in the atonement in the way
of expiating crime, then there is now another atonement de-
manded by the principles of moral justice to cancel the sin
committed by the first atonement, — that of murdering an inno-
cent being, u in whose mouth was no guile ; ” and then another
atonement to wipe out the sin of this atonement, and so on.
And thus it would be atonement after atonement, murder after
murder, ad infinitum. What shocking consequences and ab-
surdities are involved in this ancient heathen superstition !
17. It seems strange that any person can cherish the thought
for a moment that the Infinite Father would require a sacrificial
offering for the trifling act of eating a little fruit, and require
no atonement for the infinitely greater sin of murdering “ his
only-begotten son.” Another monstrous absurdity !
18. The advocates of the atonement tell us that man stands
toward his Creator in the relation of a debtor; and the atone-
ment cancels the debt. To be sure ! How does it do it? We
will illustrate : A man says to his neighbor, u I owe }X>u a thou-
sand dollars; but I won’t pay it.” — “Very well,” says the
creditor, u I will tell you what I will do : I will forgive the debt
by seizing on my own son, strip him of all he has, and then put
him to death. The claims of justice will then be satisfied.” A
monstrous idea of justice !
-
10. The Jewish and Chaldean law of atonement required the
offender to place his hand on the head of the beast while being
consumed in sacrifice; and this was accepted as an atonement
for his transgressions. Such a conception is both senseless and
demoralizing, lie was thereby taught that he would escape the
legitimate consequences of his crime. And the Christian atone-
ment is no better. The sin-atoning offering of Christ furnishes
ATONEMENT, AN IMMORAL DOCTRINE.
245
an open door through which the sinner escapes the just punish-
ment of law. It is at least a partial liquidation of his sins.
When one being is punished for another, this is, to the latter,
an immunity from punishment; and the ends of justice are thus
completely thwarted, and the moral law broken and trampled
under foot. If a culprit were sentenced to the penalty of death
for murder, and the punishment of another man were accepted
in his stead, every court in the civilized world would decide that
two wrongs were committed, — the punishment of the innocent,
and the pardon of the guilty. Such doctrines are repugnant to
all ideas of justice, and are most certainly demoralizing.
20. The wrong-doer should be taught that he is just as guilty,
and just as certain of punishment for his crime, as if all the
Gods in heaven were put to death to atone for his sin; the
penalty being inseparable from the act.
21. What would be thought of the government that should
punish the law-maker instead of the law-breaker? This is
exactly what the atonement amounts to ; so that the law-maker
falls a victim to the penalty of his own laws. It is God the
law-maker dying for man the law-breaker. Such ideas and
such doctrines are monstrous, and completely overthrow every
principle of civil jurisprudence.
22. A God who could resort to such desperate expedients to
appease his anger, and satisfy the demands of justice, is not a
God, but merely an imaginary being which was conjured up in
an age of ignorance and superstition. The belief in such a
God is, nevertheless, demoralizing.
We will here relate an anecdote, showing that such ideas of
the Supreme Being are repulsive even to the unenlightened
heathen: In Smith’s “ Gulf of Guinea” it is stated, that, as
a Christian missionary was presenting the doctrine of the Chris-
tian religion to Pepples, King of Bonny, and told him that God
gave his only-begotten son to die for us,—to be put to death
for our sins, —the king stopped him by saying, “ Do you think
me a fool to believe such palaver as that, —that God would kill
his own son to please himself; get mad at man, and then kill
his own son, instead of killing him? Never! never can I be-
lieve such fool palaver as that. It is big fool lie.” “ I tried,”
246
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
says the missionary, 44 to impress upon his mind that nothing
would satisfy divine justice but such a sacrifice; but he cut me
short by exclaiming, 4 That will do; that will do: I have got
enough of such fool palaver.’ ” Quite a sensible 44 heathen ”
was King Pepples.
CHAPTER XLII.
SPECIAL PROVIDENCE, AN ERRONEOUS DOCTRINE.
All the holy books, and nearly all holy men who have figured 1
in the world, have cherished a belief in what is termed u special
providences,” —a doctrine which teaches that God individually
and personally superintends the affairs, not only of all nations,
but of each individual human being, now amounting in number
to about fourteen hundred millions. It seems strange that the j
striking absurdity of such an assumption has not struck every 1
mind possessing the power to reflect or investigate. The
thought of his looking after the affairs and happiness of fourteen
hundred millions of human beings at a time, besides running
several thousand millions of worlds, far excels any of the 1
astounding feats of the evil genii of Gulliver. In the sublimity
of its absurdity and impossibility, it stands without a rival.
It expands beyond the utmost stretch of human credulity.
Like all the other doctrines of the popular creed, it sprang up
in an age of the world when the human mind accepted every
thing presented to it without investigation, —when nothing was
rejected on the ground of its being too absurd to be believed.
And an absurdity, when once established, no matter how mon-
strous or how stultifying to the intellectual or reasoning facul- .
tics, can bid defiance to the efforts of the few men‘of the world
whose minds arc too much expanded and enlightened to accept
such gross absurdities. There are several objections to the
doctrine of 44 special providences,” both of a logical or scien-
tific character, and also upon moral grounds, which shows that
it should have no place in an age of scientific intelligence.
One of these objections is the one just brought to notice, —?
SPECIAL PBOVIDENCE.
247
«
? I
Jn
!i
II
i
,1
i
ii
that of its extreme absurdity and practical impossibilty. It
does not require a great mind, but only a reflecting one, to see
that no rational conception of the Supreme Being could render
it practicable for one mind, however boundless in knowledge
and infinite in power, to be so divided as to look after the
interest of each individual of a countless number, scattered
over a world of more than a hundred and seventy-five thou-
sand millions of miles in extent. A scientific investigation
of the operations of nature has settled the conviction in every
scientific mind that the life, actions, and destiny of every
human being are under the control of fixed and immutable
laws, which need only to be studied and observed to guard him
effectually from personal accidents, and those physical disasters
to which he often falls a victim through ignorance of the proper
means of avoiding them. It is now patent to all critical ob-
servers that the serious disasters and numerous causes of phys-
ical suffering to which the larger portion of the human family
were so frequently subjected in past ages, have largely dimin-
ished, and are constantly decreasing as the march of science
dispels the ignorance of the people, — such as the sinking of
ships, attributable to imperfect mechanical construction ; pesti-
lential diseases, caused by the general ignorance of the causes
of and means of preventing; the explosion of steam-boilers on
rivers, railroads, &c. And, from the present rates of improve-
ment in these respects, we may reasonably calculate that the
time is not far in the future when such disasters will be un-
known. Then we will have no need of 44 special providence” to
save the people from the fatal consequences of their ignorance.
The conviction seems now to be generally established in the
public mind, that when a boat is wrecked, or a locomotive
strap’s from the track, and a few persons escape with their lives
from the general wreck and ruin, it is to be ascribed to the
interposition of the hand of Providence. But common sense
would suggest, that, if Providence had any thing to do with it,
he should have commenced a little sooner, and put some more
brains or common sense into the heads of the managers of these
cargoes of human-beings, or kept the whiskey out of their
stomachs till they reached their point of destination. In the
248
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
thousands of cases annually reported of Providence interposing
his aid to save some reckless mariners, or some heedless pas-
sengers on a pleasure-boat, from a watery grave, or rescuing a
few persons from the wreck of a railroad bridge, or some similar
calamity, the disasters might all have been avoided b}T Provi-
dence simpty acting upon the wisdom of the proverb, “An
ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” It would be
considered an act of criminal neglect on the part of a father
who could stand by and see his children, from ignorance of the
danger of such a situation, fall from a precipice, and get crip-
pled : for which his diligence in taking care of them, and trying
to heal their bruises, would by no means excuse him, as he
should have commenced sooner, and prevented the accident
from taking place. And nearly all the cases of providential
interposition are liable to the same objection: the assistance is
too long delayed. A collision of two ships recently occurred
on the Atlantic, b}r which both vessels were reduced almost to
wrecks ; but4 4 providentially but few lives were lost,9 9 though most
of the passengers were injured. Now the question naturally
arises, Why did not God, when he perceived the vessels were
approaching each other, interpose his providential care, and
prevent the disaster? He either could not, or would not; and,
in either case, he is not infinite in all his attributes, according
to the general ideas of the matter. If he could not, he is cither
not omnipresent or not infinite in power; and, if he could and
would not, he is not infinite in kindness and benevolence, or he
would have put forth his hand, and saved his children from such
a terrible fate. It is time mankind would learn that God
governs the universe by general laws, fixed and unalterable,
and ever harmonious, and that lie never interferes immediately
or personally in the affairs of men.
That finite human spirits do, in many cases, aid in human
affairs by warning of danger, &c., is fully believed by many
persons. If this be true, their interposition would be liable to
be mistaken for that of the Infinite Spirit. But that any being
can perform millions of finite acts at once, or that God should
suspend the operation of his laws, which control the universe, for
the purpose of attending personally to the wants and prayers of
SPECIAL PROVIDENCE.
249
each and every individual the world over, —many of the petitions
running counter to, or in direct conflict with, each other, —
is an idea too absurd to find lodgment in any truly enlightened
mind. But we entertain the pleasing thought that men are
beginning to learn that God governs by general laws, and not
b}T personal or special agency. These laws are so perfect in
their operations that no special laws or personal interference is
necessary in any case. A critical investigation of any case of
special providences would satisfy any scientific investigator that
it was governed entirely by natural causes ; but such scrutiniz-
ing investigations are seldom made.
The great mass of pious people in all past ages have been so
ignorant, and so little accustomed to reasoning or observation,
I that they have never observed, that, although many cases are
*J reported of Providence interfering to save the life of a child
who fell from the window of a basement-story, none are re-
( corded of his saving a child that fell from the fifth story. Why
| is this ? Does not this fact suggest a scientific lesson ? But
\ the heads of the great mass of the people have been so filled
J with creeds and catechisms that they have no room for science.
' | It will be time enough to talk about special providences after a
i case is known of a man escaping with his life after a cannon-
ball has passed through his head, or a bullet through his heart.
The belief in special providences is calculated to paralyze hu-
man effort in times of danger, and thus suffer the consequences
to be more frequently fatal. Let a man believe, while a ship
I is being wrecked in a storm, dashing against rocks and billows,
and her deck overflowed with water, that there is a Providence
in the case, and he will naturally labor with less zeal and effort
I to save the vessel. If the case is in the hands of God, and it
\ is his good pleasure that they should be lost, it is of but little
use to work the pumps ; and, if it is his will that they should be
saved, they will be saved without much effort on their part.
There can be no doubt but that millions of pious people have
l! been restrained on various occasions from putting forth their
i | strongest efforts to arrest a threatening disaster, from the con-
j viction that the hand of God was in it, and that no human
' efforts could change the fate he had decreed for them. And
250
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
thus the doctrine, in its practical consequences, has been per-
nicious. But, in this age of reason and scientific illumination,
men are beginning to learn, that, in cases of threatening dan-
ger and destruction, muscle is more necessary than “Provi-
dence ; ” that, when a ship is sinking in mid-ocean, pumps are
more efficacious than prayers ; and, when a building is on fire,
they can better do without the assistance of Providence than
without water, firemen, and engines.
CHAPTER XLIII.
FAITH AND BELIEF, BIBLE ERRORS RESPECTING.
“ Faith ” and “belief” seem to be among the most important
words in the Christian New Testament. No words are much
more frequently used. They occur in nearly every chapter, and
are used more than two hundred times. The following is a
specimen of the manner in which these words are used : —
c ‘ He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ; but he
that believeth not shall be damned.’’ This text, and the senti-
ment it contains, have caused more misery, cruelty, and more
butchery than all the edicts of an}’ king that ever sat on the
throne of England. Never did a more delusive and fatal error
find lodgment in the human mind than the idea couched in this
text. Terrible have been the denunciations, punishments, and
cruelties poured upon the unbelievers in the popular creed,
though that creed has been one thing one day, and something
else the next. No matter how honest, how upright, how benev-
olent, or how righteous a man proved himself in his practical
life, he was doomed to the dungeon, the fagot, and the halter,
if his creed was not conformable to the orthodox faith then in
power. Men and women have been condemned and punished
for assuming the right to doubt the truth of any doctrine of the
popular creed, — an egregious mistake, showing a profound igno-
rance of the nature of the human mind. All persons versed in
the science of mental philosophy now know that a man has no
more control over his doubts and beliefs than he has over the
BIBLE ERRORS RESPECTING FAITH AND BELIEF. 251
blood that courses through his veins: for, without evidence, he
can not believe; and, with it, he can not disbelieve, as every
one will find who will examine this matter critically. Conse-
quently it is as unreasonable to condemn a man for his belief
or disbelief, as to condemn him for the color of his hair.
Doubt, so far from being restrained, should be cultivated, as
being the first step toward the attainment of knowledge and
progress ; for a man never makes any advancement or im-
provement in his views on any subject till he begins to doubt
the correctness of his present views, or, at least, doubts their
being perfect, or being incapable of improvement.
Who, then, can not see that to threaten a man for disbelief
is tyranny and injustice, inasmuch as it has a tendency to make
him a slave, and to repress the growth of his mind? Con-
demning a man for disbelief is virtually offering a premium
for hypocrisy, as it has the effect to make thousands profess to
believe doctrines which they do not, and which their consciences
really condemn, in order to avoid the frowns and ill-will of their
neighbors. And, as hypocrisy is a greater evil in its practical
effects upon society than unbelief, it can be seen that the prac-
tice of erecting a standard for belief and disbelief is wrong,
and mischievous in its effects.
The Bible declares that u faith is the gift of God.” It is
evident, that, if this be true, no responsibility can attach to faith
or religious belief; but all responsibility rests with the being
who gives it.
Two great blunders have been committed by faith-dealers:
First, in assuming that belief is of the nature of a coat, which
can be put on and off at pleasure, —i.e., that a man can believe
what he pleases or wishes to believe. The second is, that
knowledge and belief are synonymous terms, which is very far
from being true. Knowledge begins where faith and belief end.
Belief is that uncertain state of the mind which is experienced
in the absence of knowledge; and, when that knowledge is
obtained, the belief may prove to have been entirely erroneous.
Belief implies uncertainty; knowledge implies certainty. There
is this wide difference between them. We believe a thing when
we do not know whether it is so or not; consequently the
252
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
belief may be true or false. How egregious, then, the blunder
of the orthodox world in condemning for disbelief! Belief,
then, is a state of guessing. We will illustrate the position
of orthodox Christendom: A bo}" throws up a copper coin, and
cries, “ Heads, or tails ?” A by-stander, believing from its
construction that “ heads ” will come up, cries out, “ Heads !”
Now, according to the logic of the orthodox, if he guesses
wrong, he should be damned eternally for it.
When you sa}- to a man, “You shall believe this, or you
shall believe that,” you bind his soul in chains, and reverse
the wheels of his progress, and push him toward the “ dark
ages.”
The fear that it would be a sin to doubt, causes religious
ignorance; and a man will never abandon his religious errors
and superstitions while he fears to doubt their truth. A man’s
belief and creed grow shorter as his knowledge increases.
And the time is not far distant when philosophers and men of
science will have no religious belief: all will be knowledge.
It can be seen from the above exposition, that it is folly and
consummate ignorance to attach so much importance to re-
ligious belief, inasmuch as it is impossible to know whether it
is right or wrong.
As the doctrine that belief is a virtue, and unbelief a crime
has inundated the world with persecution, misery, and blood,
it is time to abandon it.
Those Christians who assume that belief is under the control
of the will can settle the matter bjT trying the following experi-
ment upon themselves: Let them try to believe, for only five
minutes, that Mahomet was a true prophet, and Jesus Christ
w’as an impostor. If the}r can do this, it wfill settle the ques-
tion, and prove that man is responsible for his belief: other-
wise he is not.
Some persons adhere to the Bible upon the plea that “it is
safest to believe it, and unsafe to disbelieve it.” But lie who
can believe an error or absurdity, or, rather, profess to believe
it because he is afraid to disbelieve it, has not a soul big
enough to be saved, and will be certain to miss it; or, if he
could be saved, no man of sense would want to live in a heaven
A PERSONAL GOD IMPOSSIBLE.
253
made up of such moral cowards and moral dwarfs. And, be-
sides, the only way to make a safe thing of being saved on this
ground, is to swallow all the two thousand systems of religion
in the world, — six hundred Christian creeds, and fourteen
hundred heathen traditions ; and, to do this, a person must have
a very capacious stomach.
CHAPTER XLIY.
A PEESONAL GOD IMPOSSIBLE.
l | Most of the Bibles, and nearly all the religious teachers of
f the world, have represented God as being a personal being, and,
l at the same time, an infinite spirit. But that is another of the
“thousand and one” absurdities that have been taught and
IK believed in the name of religion. A personal being must, in
all cases, be an organized being. This is so self-evident as to
need no argument; and that an organized being can not be
fc an infinite being is almost equally self-evident. An organized
[being must be a finite being. The word 44 finite ” is used to ex-
“ press the opposite of “infinite.” To assume, therefore, that a
finite being, or a being with a finite body, can also be infinite,
is equivalent to assuming that a thing can be white and black,
large and small, long and short, light and heavy, &c., at the
same time ; which is a self-evident absurdity. A personal being
must be constituted of different parts, or members, — as a head,
heart, bod}r, feet, &c.; and, if such a being could be infinite,
then each member must be infinite. But as it is self-evident that
a being to be infinite must fill all space, and that nothing can
be infinite unless it does occupy all space, it can be seen at
once, that, if one member were infinite, it would occupy all
space, which would preclude the possibility of another member
being infinite. Thus we are completely swamped at the first
I step toward making a personal God infinite. Here let it be
noted that the God of the Bible is represented as possessing
all the members of the human body,—eyes (1 Pet. iii. 12),
l(
254
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
ears (Ibid.), nose (Isa. 65, 5), mouth (Isa. xlv. 23), feet
(Rev. i. 15), arms (Isa. xxx. 30), hands (Exod. xiii. 3), fingers
(Exod. viii. 19), head (Dan. vii. 9), heart (Isa. lxiii. 4),
lips (Ps. xvii. 4), &c. Now, it is evidently impossible that
such a being could be infinite. We may be told that these
members are all to be taken in a spiritual sense. Granted, and
the thing is equally impossible ; for they must still be separate
members. There could be no possible sense in appljfing all
these terms to the whole being. They must apply to separate
parts ; and, the moment we use terms which imply the existence
of more than one part, we concede the impossibility of such a
God being infinite : for only one part, one being, or one thing
can be infinite. There can not be two infinite beings, — self-
evidently not.
And there are other logical difficulties in the way of admitting
the existence of an infinite personal God. If there could be
such a thing as an infinite personality or organized being, it is
evident that only one such being could exist. What, then,
becomes of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and also the
Devil ? They are all spoken of in the Bible as being omnipres-
ent. Hence they must all be infinite, which is another self-
evident impossibilit}^. We could as easily conceive of two
heads wearing the same hat at the same time, as two such
beings being infinite. If one of them is infinite, the others can
not be; and yet each is represented as being omnipresent,
which would make them infinite. And thus we fail in every
attempt to make a personal God infinite. David, in speaking
of the God Jehovah, says, u If I descend into hell, behold thou
art there.” Then lie would not find the Devil there; for two
infinite beings could not be found there. And, if God’s dwell-
ing-place is in hell as well as in heaven, it can make but little
difference which of the two places we go to, as we are told our
happiness will consist in being in his presence.
The defenders of a personal God sometimes have recourse
to an illustrative argument. They tell us that the sun is a local,
circumscribed body, and yet shines to a boundless extent. It is
here assumed that the rays of the sun are a part of the sun ; but
this is not true. The}' once constituted a part of the sun, it
NATURAL AND MORAL EVIL EXPLAINED.
255
is true; but to assume that they are still a part of the sun,
after the}7 have left it, is as absurd as to assume that the breath
is still a part of the human body after it has escaped from the
mouth. Thus every argument and every illustration fail to es-
tablish the self-evident absurdity of a personal God of the or-
thodox world being an infinite being; or, in other words, of
their conception of a God conforming to the teachings of science
and good sense.
Those who assume the existence of a personal God must hold
him accountable for all the crime and all the misery existing in
, the world. For such a God could not be controlled or circum-
i scribed in his actions by any arbitrary laws; and hence could
1 and should, by personal interference, put a stop to all the
| crime, misery, suffering, and wrong of every description exist-
1 ing on earth ; and the fact that he does not do it we hold to be
prima-facie evidence that there is no personal God, but that
every thing is governed by fixed, immutable laws, which control
God himself, and which no God can alter.
INote.—We have shown in the twelve preceding chapters that all the leading doc-
trines of Christianity are wrong,—from that of a belief in divine revelation to that of
the conception of a personal G-od. Hence a better religion is needed for this age.
I CHAPTER XLV.
EVIL, NATURAL AND MORAL, EXPLAINED.
The problem of the origin of evil has been the great theo-
! logical puzzle to all theologians and with all religious systems,
j and has turned the heads of more good people, and sent more
?J devout Christians to the lunatic asylum, than any other theo-
| logical question, excepting that of endless punishment; and
yet modern science, which furnishes the principles for solving
all the u holy mysteries” and miracles embodied in the reli-
gious creeds and Bibles of the past ages, shows the question to
j be quite simple and easily understood. The true signification
] of the word evil, in a moral sense, can be expressed in a few
j words. It is only another name for imperfection or negation.
J
i
i
256
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
It is the negative pole of the great moral battery; and with-
out it the battery could not be run. And without it there
could be no moralit}7, no moral principle or accountability, while
man exists upon the present animal plane. In fact, morality
without evil would be an unmeaning word. Evil is a state of
imperfection running through every vein of nature, from the
igneous rock to the brain of man. Some writers attempt to
discriminate between natural and moral evil; but there is no
dividing line. Moral evil is as natural as any phenomenon in
nature, and is, strictly speaking, the phenomenal action of the
brain. Moral evil is governed as rigidly by natural laws as
physical evil; because (as science demonstrates) it has its basis
in man’s moral nature. And, practically speaking, there will
be neither natural nor moral evil when nature (now in a crude
state) grows to a state of maturity. Evil or imperfection,
which now characterizes every thing, diminishes in its ratio to
goodness or perfection as we ascend from inanimate matter to
man,—the crowning work of nature. The theological world
assumes that man alone bears the impress of imperfection, and
that his imperfection is restricted principally to his moral
action. “ Man alone is imperfect: all else bears the mark
of divine perfection.” So says Archbishop TVhately. But the
converse assumption is nearer true: Man is the crowning work
of nature, and his moral attributes constitute the keystone of
the arch. He is occasionally erratic, and often wicked, but not
universally and continually so, like some of the lower animal
tribes. The hyena will murder at all times when opportunity
offers ; but man only occasionally, and when driven to it b}T the
pressure of circumstances. All monkeys are thieves ; but only
a small portion of the genus homo are such. Man derives all
liis propensity to evil and wickedness from the lower animals.
Ilis propensity to rob is exhibited in the eagle; his inclination
to steal, in the monkey ; his disposition to murder, in the hyena,
alligator, rattlesnake, &c. ; his disposition to enslave, in the red
ant, which makes a slave of the black ant, as has often been
observed by naturalists. Such was the wickedness among the
lower animals in their earlier stage of development, that, by
theft, robbery, and murder, they effected the entire extinction
NATURAL AND MORAL EVIL EXPLAINED. 257
of many species of animals. And if we descend still lower, and
learn the practical history of the mineral kingdom, we shall find
that its operations are marked by a still more ruinous and de-
structive form of evil. The hideous and devouring earthquake ;
the heaving and overflowing volcano, burying whole cities beneath
its deep and merciless waves of running fire; the roaring and
furious tornado, destroying hundreds of dwellings, and dooming
the inmates to a terrible death; and the swift-sped lightning,
which, with no note of warning, strikes down hundreds of peo-
ple every year, — all these violent operations of nature are the
manifestation of evil, and a proof that imperfection exists
ever}~where. And man is the last and least manifestation of
this multifarious destructive outburst of nature; and he will
never outgrow it, and escape its operation entirely, till all
nature arrives at manhood. While nature is imperfect, man
will be imperfect; for he is a child of nature, and all things
move forward in correlated order. He can, however (and it is
a necessity of his nature that he should), battle with opposing
forces, and modify the circumstances around him. His nature
impels him to this as naturally as it urges him to eat food when
hungry; but, as at present constituted and situated, it will be
the work of time to rid the earth of moral evil. The only way
to accomplish the extinction of evil is to labor for the elevation
of the whole race. We are only rowing against the current in
attempting to put down evil with our present system of moral
ethics, which treats the criminal as a wicked being instead of
an unfortunate, sin-sick brother. He should be sent to a moral
hospital instead of to the gallows, the jail, and the dungeon.
He should be treated as an unfortunate brother, rather than as
a being to be spurned from society as a viper. He should be
treated kindly, not cruelly; fed, and not starved. His moral
nature should be warmed by affection, and not congealed by
frowns. His instinctive respect for virtue should be developed
by a sound moral education, and not crushed by pursuing him
with a malignant spirit. Moral evils must be treated as the
fruits of the imperfections of our nature, and not as the product
of sin-punishing devils, who first originate and stimulate crimes,
and then join with God in punishing the criminal with fiendish
258
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
cruelty; thus applying a remedy which is a thousand times worse
than the disease.
The science of phrenology explains most beautifully the cause
and nature of sin or crime, and demonstrates that it is simply
the perverted or unbalanced action of the natural faculties of the
mind. Combativeness, when excessively developed or unduly
excited, prompts to quarrels and fighting ; destructiveness,
under similar circumstances, leads to war and bloodshed;
amativeness, when not properly restrained, leads to the various
forms of licentiousness; over-active acquisitiveness is the
main-spring in most cases of theft and robbery, and all crimes
committed for the acquisition of property or money. And other
crimes are prompted by the over-active condition of these and
other mental faculties unrestrained by the moral faculties.
Every act and every species of crime are in this way most satis-
factorily accounted for by this now generally received and
thoroughly established science of mental philosophy ; so that
“ the mystery of godliness/’ comprehended in the word sin,
which for ages perplexed the student of theology, is now unrav-
eled and understood by the scientific men of the age, and
known to have a natural basis and natural origin. And this
all-important discovery has driven the old orthodox Devil from
the arena of human action. He no longer walks uto and fro in
the earth, seeking whom he may devour.” He is dead —
dead,—killed by the sledge-hammer of science. And yet the
fifty thousand clergymen who still “ defend the faith once deliv-
ered to the saints ” are (many of them) so far behind the march
of human progress that the news of the mortal exit of his Sa-
tanic Majesty seems not yet to have reached them; or, if it
has, it is because they are unwilling to lose the services of a
long-cherished and highly valued friend that they refuse to
credit the report of his demise. Take away their Devil, and
their whole theological scaffolding falls to the ground. Revivals
could no more be carried on without his aid, than a watch could
be kept running without a main-spring. And with the de-
parture of the Devil must go “ salvation by Christ,” as there is
then nothing, in a theological sense, to be saved from. It is
an important fact, of which the clergy seem to be ignorant, that
NATURAL AND MORAL EVIL EXPLAINED. 259
-
the march of science has exploded all their old theological dog-
mas. Phrenology has banished the Devil; physiology explains
the modus operandi of repentance ; psychology, the process of
u getting religion ;” philosophy analyzes their Bible miracles ;
geology has expanded their six da}^s of creation into six thousand
years; astronomy has displaced Moses’ theory of creation,
and demolished St. John’s little eight-by-ten heaven. (See
Rev. chap. 21.) And yet the orthodox clergy refuse to shorten
their creeds by leaving out these old, exploded dogmas. Like
moles, they continue rooting and digging away among their
must}T creeds, dogmas, and catechisms, seemingly unconscious
that the sun of science is now shining with dazzling brilliancy in
the moral heavens. Some of them manifest a tenacity in hold-
ing on to musty and antiquated dogmas equal to that of the but-
cher’s dog in the army which seized a slaughtered ox by the
caudal appendange, with the intention of monopolizing the meat,
and held on with a u manly grip ” till limb after limb had been
torn off, and piece after piece had been cut away from the body
by the hungry soldiers, and nothing was left but the tail and
the backbone ; and then his canine majesty growled at passers-
by, as much as to say, u I am master of the situation.” The
fossilized clergy are “ masters of the situation,” while the old
orthodox carcass is now minus every part but the tail and naked
backbone, to which they cling with a deathly grasp worthy of a
better cause. They remind us of the hotel-keeper in Vermont,
who, in answer to the interrogatories of some travelers, stated
that he did not keep any kind of food for either men or horses.
“TThat in the name of God, then, do you keep?” inquired
one of the hungry guests. He replied, “I keep Union Hotel.”
The stand-still clergy still keep the old theological hotel minus
any' spiritual food, or supplied only with old salt junk handed
down from the camp of Moses or Father Abraham.
A word more with respect to the origin of evil: Is it not
strange that Christians should den}T their God to be the author
of evil, when it is expressly so declared in their Bible? UI
make peace, and I create evil. I Jehovah do all these things.”
Here is the positive declaration that God is the author of evil;
and, if it were not thus unequivocally taught, we could prove
260
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
that the Bible teaches this doctrine indirectly by various texts.
If u God made every thing that was made,” then he either
made evil or the author of evil, whether that was a devil or a
serpent or a fallen angel; and this is substantially the same
thing as originating evil, —to originate the author of evil. We
challenge refutation of the proposition. But a philosophical
analysis of the question will show there is no such thing as evil
in either the abstract or absolute sense. Good and evil are but
relative terms, like heat and cold, light and darkness, &c.
There is no distinct line of demarkation between any of these
correlative terms. It is impossible to tell where one ends, and
the other begins. And then there is no act but that may
become either right or wrong under different circumstances.
The Bible says, “ Thou shalt not kill.” But the man who
should see an assassin pointing a pistol to the head of his wife,
or a dagger to her breast, and refrain from killing him as the
only means of saving her life, would be virtually* himself a mur-
derer. u Thou shalt not steal ” (Exod. xx.) ; and yet stealing
would become a moral right, as well as a physical necessity, to
avoid starvation. And so of all other acts called crime and
sin : they may become absolute virtues. How foolish, there-
fore, to erect inflexible standards for human action or conduct!
And then it should be noted that what is regarded as sin in one
age or country ma}T be imposed as a moral or religious duty in
another. It is a sin to disbelieve the Koran in Arabia, and a
sin to believe it in America. It is a sinful act to disbelieve the
Christian Bible in this country, and a moral and religious duty
in Japan. It is blasphenty and atheism to disbelieve in Jehovah
and Jesus Christ in this countiy, but a still greater blasphemy
and sin to believe in them in Arabia. And thus all human
actions are modified bjr the circumstances under which, and the
locality in which, they are committed.
TRUE SALVATION.
261
CHAPTER XLVI.
TEUE SALVATION, OE THE EATIONAL VIEW OE SIN.
We will now attempt to show what reason, science, and
God’s eternal Bible teach as the nature of sin and its conse-
quences. The orthodox world represents sin to be a personal
affront against a personal God. But we take a broader, and,
we think, a more rational view of the matter. We believe that
no act of ours, whether good or bad, can possibly affect an infi-
nite, omnipresent, and impersonal Deity in any way whatever.
Nothing we can do can either offend or gratify such a being.
He is infinitely too far removed from our little narrow sphere
of action. But every thing we do can and does affect ourselves,
and generally our friends and all connected with us. Every
wrong act we perform inflicts an injury upon our moral con-
sciousness, and a wound upon our sense of right, and inflicts a
lasting injury upon our moral dignity, if it does not create
a painful sense of wrong. And, when once committed, no re-
pentance, no forgiveness, no prayer, no atonement, no. pardon,
can do any thing toward arresting the baneful effects, or toward
healing the wound it has inflicted upon our moral consciousness,
or the injury it has inflicted upon others. Hence we never ask
for forgiveness, nor rely upon any atonement by men, animals,
or Gods to cancel the effects, or mitigate the wrong, or alleviate
the injury in the case. When you put your finger into fire, and
burn it, you violate one of God’s laws written upon your own
constitution,—the law of self-preservation; and it inflicts a
wound which the longest and loudest prayer ever uttered can
do nothing towards healing. The effect will remain until healed
by the working of nature’s inherent laws. A similar effect is
produced by every wrong act you inflict upon yourself'or your
fellow-beings. It inflicts a wound which is beyond the reach of
262
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
prayer, pardon, repentance, or forgiveness. It must work its
natural cure, as in the case of ply’sical injury. All bodily |
suffering comes through the mind, and hence affects the mind
as well as the bod}T; and every moral wrong we commit in-
flicts punishment or suffering upon the moral feelings. Hence
it will be seen that sin does not have to wait for God to point
out the penalty or punishment, but contains its own punish- |
ment, which no power in heaven or earth can arrest, avert,
or set aside. This is evidently the only true doctrine respecting
the punishment for sin; and it is the only doctrine that can
stop the commission of crime, and the only doctrine that
can ever reform the world; for, while the people are taught
that sin can be atoned for by anjr power in heaven or earth, they
will the more easily yield to the temptations to commit sin. <
They will feel that this doctrine is a kind of license for sin: at
least it weakens the motive for abstaining from sin. For if a j
man may lead a life of crime, sin, wickedness, and debauchee, i
destitute of all moral principle, for ninety-nine }’ears, as ortho- '
doxy teaches, and then have the effect entirety canceled, and I
the sin entirety erased from his soul, by one short hour of prayer
and repentance and forgiveness, and by acknowledging his faith
in the atoning blood of Christ, and then stand before God
without a moral blot upon his soul, all purified and read}’ to
join the pure in heart — the white-robed angels who lived a life
of self-denial and purity—in shouting gloiy to God, where 1
is the motive for leading a virtuous life? It is entirety too weak 1
to restrain from the commission of crime while the temptation
is as strong as we usualty find it in all countries, especially as
there is apparentty a large premium offered to sinners. Christ
says, “There is more joy in heaven over one sinner that repent-
eth than over ninety and nine just persons who need no re-
pentance” (Luke xv. 7). No wonder that sin abounds in all
Christian countries; and it alwaj’s will abound while people are
taught such pernicious doctrines. Therefore we hold the doc-
trines of repentance, atonement, forgiveness, &c., to be all
wrong. They are subversive of the first principles of moral
justice, and pernicious in their effects upon society. Let the
wrong-doer, instead of being taught these pernicious doctrines,
TBTJE SALVATION.
263
be instructed in the true system of salvation, which will teach
him there is no possibility of evading or escaping the punitive
effects of wrong-doing; that every wrong act he commits will
inevitably drive the iron into his soul, — the two-edged sword
of moral conviction ; and that the blood of no goats or no Gods
can do any thing toward washing away the sin, or mitigating the
punishment. And let him be rescued also from the pernicious
error of the churches, that u sin is a sweet morsel to be rolled
under the tongue,” or that 66 there is a pleasure in the commis-
sion of sin.” We hold no such views ; we believe in no such
doctrines. We do not believe there is any real pleasure in the
commission of a moral wrong of any kind. We believe that only
a life of virtue is productive of real happiness. Let the wrong-
doer be taught this moral lesson ; and let him be also taught that
every humane and virtuous act of this life will expand his soul,
and elevate him to a higher plane of happiness, and bring him
one step nearer the door of the heavenly kingdom. Let the
world of mankind all be taught these beautiful and soul-elevating
doctrines, which many mow know by experience to be golden
truths; and we will soon witness a great moral revolution and
renovation in society by the propagation of these doctrines. We
shall soon see the proof that our system of faith, embracing these
beautiful, philosophical, and elevating doctrines, is much better
calculated to moralize and reform the world than the morally
weak and unjust doctrines of repentance, atonement, and par-
don now daily preached from the Christian pulpits. Many cases
could be cited to show that they do have a pernicious influence.
I will adduce one example : When that Christian emperor, Con-
stantine, had murdered his wife, son, nephew, and several other
relatives, he raised his hands toward heaven, and exclaimed,
u The blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin.” Here is an ex-
ample of the pernicious and demoralizing effect of the Christian
doctrines of atonement and forgiveness. We repeat, then, that
such doctrines are demoralizing, as they must operate to retard
the progress of truth and true religion, and the moral reforma-
tion of the world. People should be taught that it is as impossi-
ble to escape the penalty for sin or wrong-doing as it is to escape
the darts of death; and that any act of forgiveness or atonement
2G4
TTIE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
by some other being is only calculated to aggravate the wrong,
and augment the sin, and open the door for a future commission
of the act. All should understand that there is no one to par-
don sins, and no savior but themselves. u The new religion,”
as it is sometimes called, — though it is the oldest religion in the
world, being founded in the moral and religious nature of man,
and an outgrowth of lii3 moral, religious, and spiritual ele-
ments,— this religion, which is the religion of all the truly
enlightened and scientific minds of the age, teaches that every
person must be his own savior; that every man and woman
must work out their own salvation, not with fear and trembling,
however, but with joy and rejoicing. Hence we ask no bleed-
ing saviors, no atonements, no acquittals by pardon or forgive-
ness. We offer no such bribery for crime or sin,—no such
allurements and inducements for leading a life of vice; for
many can testif}', from their own experience, that they were more
casity tempted from the path of virtue when they believed in these
old heathenish, morally deformed, and morally dwarfing doc-
trines. On the other hand, they have felt much more strongly
wedded to a life of virtue, and more powerfully restrained from
wrong-doing since they abandoned these pernicious doctrines,
and embraced the healthful, beautiful, and elevating doctrines
of the u Ilarmonial Philosophy.” This system teaches we have
to suffer the penalty in full for every wrong act we commit; that
we can not escape in any case by either repentance, atonement,
or pardon ; that we can not swim off to heaven through the
blood of a murdered or crucified God, and leave our sins behind
unpunished, or pack them on the back of a savior as the Jews
did theirs on the back of a goat. It teaches us that the penalty
is as certain as the commission of the crime ; because one is the
cause, and the other the effect. Hence we could as easily replace
a lost arm, torn off in the field of battle, by prayer, or stop the
descending lightning from splintering yonder tree into a
thousand fragments, as to avert or set aside the penalty for
crime by 4c supplicating the throne of grace.” We hold that
every wrong act we commit, if it does not destroy our happiness
at the time, and operate as a barbed arrow sticking in the soul,
will at least weaken our capacity for happiness in the future,
TRUE SALVATION.
205
weaken onr moral strength and resolution to abstain from
crime, weaken our natural detestation of crime, and weaken our
moral ability to resist the temptation to commit the same and
other crimes in the future, and finally destroy our moral manhood
and true dignity. Now, here is a series of powerful motives for
eschewing evil, and leading a life of virtue, which will operate
to arrest that river of crime and iniquity now flowing through
all Christian countries as soon as the people are taught these
rational and beautiful doctrines in lieu of those weak and foolish
incentives to virtue which arc taught them from the Christian
pulpit. They possess a much greater moral force than the fear
of angry Gods and horned Devils. Header ponder these maxims.
The True Theory of Reform.—It requires but a few words
to show what kind of moral teaching is required to reform the
world. As happiness is the predominant desire and inalienable
right of every human being, all aim to pursue that course best
I calculated to attain it; but, as men arc now organized and cir-
| cumstanced, they often pursue a course of life which infringes
| upon and destroys the happiness of others: and some of them
^ commit acts known as crimes, which are simply trespasses upon
] the rights, peace, and happiness of their neighbors. If, in thus
pursuing happiness, they must destroy the happiness of others,
1 then it follows that the happiness of others is incompatible with
their own. If so, then God has made a serious blunder in
j making one man’s happiness depend upon destrojlng the hap-
4 pincss of others; and, as their happiness would depend equally
upon destroying his, the happiness of all would thus be de-
ll stroj’ed. Hence the theor}" won’t work. It follows, then, that
men lead a life of crime calculated to destroy the happiness
-
I of others, because they are ignorant of the fact that they can
pursue a course of life that will secure their own happiness
without destroying that of others. All that is necessary to
reform them, therefore, is to convince them of this fact. This
is the true theory, and the whole theory, of reform. And when
H people become acquainted with the modern discovery in moral
$ philosoph}”, which teaches us that we can not attain to complete
] happiness without consulting the happiness of others in every
j act which affects them, there will be a double motive for leading
266
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
a virtuous and honorable life. Even Christian professors will
profit by it when they find that the grasping avarice which
prompts them to try to monopolize wealth, and thus withhold
the means of comfort and happiness from their neighbors, is i
not the way to attain real happiness for themselves. When the '
glorious era arrives that men will daily look after the happiness i
of others as well as their own, then we shall have a true reli- !
gion, and a true state of society, and a happy world. (
CHAPTER XLVII.
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS EVERY SPECIES OF CRIME.
“ Be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Matt. •
v. 48). All Christian professors admit that this perfection is to i
be attained by following his practical example, and that the way |
to become acquainted with this practical example is to read
the Bible. Let us see, then, where a practical compliance with
this precept, as thus understood, will lead us. If the God of
the Bible is to be accepted as our “heavenly Father/’ then a
compliance with this precept will leave no crime uncommitted, !l
and no sin not perpetrated ; for he is represented as either
committing or sanctioning every species of crime, wickedness,
and immoralit}" known to society in the age in which the Bible
w’as written. That the truth of this statement may not be
called in question, we will proceed to bring forward evidence to
prove it.
I. The Bible sanctions Murder. :
We find a scriptural warrant for the highest crime known to
the law,—that of murder. God is represented as saying to
his hol}r people, “ Go ye out and slay every man his brother,
every man his companion, and every man his neighbor” (Exod.
xxxii. 27). And, relative to the dissenter from the faith, lie
is represented as saying, “Ye shall stone him with stones that
he die.” Now, if such texts arc not calculated to foster the
spirit of murder, and to extinguish the natural repugnance to
cruelty and bloodshed in the human mind, we can conceive
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS MUBDER.
267
of no language that would have such an effect, especially when
it is taken in connection with Christ’s injunction, 66 He that hath
not a sword, let him sell his coat, and buy one.”
And the practical lives of Christian professors, from the
. earliest establishment of the Church, furnishes proof of the
, demoralizing influence of such texts as these upon the readers
of the Bible. These injunctions to murder and slaughter have
been faithfully obeyed; and the effect has been to submerge
Christendom in a sea of blood. Look, for proof, at the war
among the churches for many years about the doctrine of the
Eucharist, which resulted in the destruction of three hundred
thousand lives ; the fight about images, in which fifty thousand
men, women, and children were murdered; the war of a dozen
| churches against the sect of the Manicheans in the ninth cen-
tury (A.D. 845) about some trivial doctrine of the Christian
s creed, and which left on the battle-field no less than a hundred
^ thousand murdered human beings; the Church schism, in the
time of John Huss and Jerome of Prague, followed by the war
*1 of the Hussites, which resulted in a bloody slaughter of a hun-
dred and fifty thousand fellow-Christians; the war known as
uThe Holy Inquisition,” established in the year 1208, made a
^ record in its history of human butchery of two hundred thou-
)4 sand Christian professors, who had to atone in blood for assum-
9 ing the liberty to differ from the popular creed; and, finally,
|j the Thirty Years’ war which strewed the earth with bloody
‘ corpses to the frightful number of five millions of human be-
i ings. The whole makes a sum total of eighteen millions, a
I large portion of which were Christian professors, — all the work
I of Christian hands and Christian churches, professed followers
i of the u Prince of peace.” But, if the text quoted above
j means any thing (requiring his followers to buy swords), he
, appears also to have been the Prince of war. All the bloody
tragedies cited above, which form but a small number of the
cases which indelibly stain the records of the Christian Church,
, show how faithfully Christian professors have lived out the
j demoralizing injunctions of their Bible, and prove that the
\ Book has been a powerful lever for evil as well as for good.
j| Even the shocking cruelties displayed in the execution of these
II
4
268 THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
bloody tragedies finds a warrant in the Bible. In their efforts
to carry out the Bible injunction to exterminate heretics, no
species of cruelty was left untried as a punishment for the 1
honest dissenter from the faith. The sword of the Church was
unsheathed, and plunged with a fierce and relentless ferocity !
into the bosoms and bowels of their neighbors and fellow- !
Christian professors, whose only offense was that of believing 1
and worshiping God according to the dictates of their con-
sciences. With a burning hatred for heretics, stimulated by
reading the Bible injunction to put them to death in a cruel
manner, they leaped upon them with the ferocity of tigers, and
tortured them to death with every species of cruelty their in-
genuity could invent. They tied them to the whipping-post, or
chained them to the fiery fagot; lacerated their bodies ; cut
their tongues from their mouths; tore their flesh from their
bones with iron hooks, tongs, and pincers; cut off their lips,
and tore out their tongues, so that their piercing cries and
heart-rending agonies could convey no intelligible sound; tore
their nails from their fingers, and thrust needles into the bleed-
ing wounds; melted red-hot metal, and poured it down their
throats; plucked out their eyes, and threw them to beasts;
and, in some cases, their bodies were stretched upon the rack,
and flayed alive, or torn limb from limb. But I forbear: the
picture is too shocking. Oh that the waves of oblivion could
roll over and cover such deeds of cruelty for ever! I rejoice
that the age for such atrocities is passed, and, I trust, can
never return. I hope the churches will never again hold the
reins of government, and shape all the laws of the country.
The reason we do not witness,, such horrible scenes now is, that
man}r church-members have’outgrown their Bible ; and, if there
are any who have not, they are restrained by laws enacted by
liberal minds of too \nuch good feeling and good sense to permit
the churches to thus cruelly persecute each other, or those who
conscientiously differ from them. I have stated that the shock- i,
ing cruelties and barbarities practiced by Christians upon each j
other in past ages, find a warrant in the Bible. The act of
David, “ the man after God’s own heart,” in placing the children ,
of Ammon under saws and harrows of iron, is scarcely equaled
• i
\
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS MUBDER.
2G9
in atrocity by any act recorded in the history of the Fiji can-
nibals. It is revolting to every impulse of benevolence, every
feeling of humanity, and all ideas of mercy or justice. And his
wicked prayer, contained in the one hundred and ninth Psalm,
breathes forth the same spirit. It is a series of fiendish impre-
cations poured out upon the heads of those who differed from
his creed, and worshiped a different God. We will quote some
of his language : u Set thou a wicked man over him. Let there
be none to extend mercy unto him ; let his children be father-
less, and his wife a widow ; let his children be continually vaga-
bonds, and beg; let his posterity be cut off, and their name
blotted out; let the extortioner get all that he hath; let his
prayer become sin ; let the stranger spoil his land; let not the
sin of his mother be blotted out.55
Here is a series of most malignant imprecations issuing from
a mind rankling and burning with a feeling of implacable re-
venge, which is shocking to contemplate. It is murderous in
its intent, and demoralizing in its effect upon those who accept
it as being in accordance with the will of God. No person can
contemplate the cruelties practiced by this “man of God55
upon his unoffending neighbors, or read his vengeful prayer,
and accept it as emanating from “ the man after God’s own
heart,55 without having his moral strength and resolution weak-
ened, his moral standard lowered, and his ideas of the moral
perfection of Deity degraded. And it was by deriving their
conceptions of God from such a source that the Christian world
has come to entertain such low, belittling, and dishonorable
viewrs of u the Suprehie Ruler of the universe,55 as is shown in
their preaching and their writings ; and it furnishes their chil-
dren with a low and imperfect standard of morality. And this
must always be the condition of things while the Bible, with its
numerous bad examples and bad morality, is accepted as a guide
by those teachers and preachers wrho mold the moral sentiments
of the people. It will be observed, that “ the man after God’s
own heart5 5 invokes the divine vengeance upon innocent chil-
dren, and prays that the}’ may beg and starve, merely because
their father was not a worshiper of the savage Jewish Jehovah;
which exhibits a mind devoid of all idea of justice or humanity.
270
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
And this is a part of the religion of the Christian’s u Holy
Bible,” claimed as the product of divine inspiration. Now,
who can not see that such a religion as this is calculated to en-
gender bad feelings, bad ideas, and bad morals, and to repress
the lofty moral emotions of the human mind ?
II. The Bible sanctions Theft or Robbery.
Robbery, practiced under the false pretense of borrowing, is
another crime claiming the sanction of God’s “ Holy Word” and
that “ Holy Being ” whose morality we are taught to imitate by
the injunction, “ Be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is
perfect.” We are told (in Exod. xii.) that the Jews, or He-
brews, when leaving Egypt, robbed or stole from the inhabitants
to such an extent, that “ they spoiled the Egyptians,” which
leads to the conclusion that the robbery must have been very
extensive: and for this merciless, wholesale robbery, they
claimed the sanction of a just and righteous God ; for we are
told he sanctioned or commanded the act. And this is a part
of the code of morals u the Evangelical Christian Union”
would have us incorporate into the Constitution of the United
States ; but it is evident, from the facts already presented, that
such an act would be a step towards barbarism.
III. The Bible sanctions War.
Another immoral feature of the Christian Bible, and one
which proves it to be a relic or record of barbarism, and a very
unsuitable book to “constitute the fountain of our laws, and
the supreme rule of our conduct” (as recommended and urged
by the Evangelical Christian Union), is found in its frequent
sanction of human butchery; and a just and righteous God is
represented as leaving his throne “ in the heavens” to come
down to take a part in their savage and bloody battles with
different nations about their religious creeds. He is represented
as standing in the front ranks during every battle fought by his
“holy people.” And, by long experience on the field of human
butchery, he came to receive the military title of “ God of War,”
“ A Man of War,” “ The Lord of Hosts,” &c. ; and his success
in destroying human beings won for him the reputation of a great
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS WAR.
271
and skillful general, and placed him above other Gods in valor
in his own estimation. He is represented as becoming so
excited with anger, so blood-thirsty and revengeful in spirit,
that he commanded his holy people to strike down every living
creature with the sword, whether men or animals. The word
of command was 4 4 to spare nothing; ” 44 save nothing alive
that breathes.” He is even represented as commanding the
slaughter of innocent babes. The order was, so says Samuel
(1 Sam. xv. 3), 44 Spare them not, but slay both men and
women, infants and sucklings.” Now, of all the blood-dyed
mandates that ever issued from human lips, or was heard on the
plains of human butchery, none ever excelled it in cruelty and
malignant barbarity, claimed as coming from the mouth of a
s God of infinite justice and infinite benevolence. Think of the
J murder, in cold blood, of thousands of little innocent, prattling
i babies, who never lisped an evil word, or conceived an evil
thought, in their lives! and this by command of the loving
1 Father of the human family! Who believes it? Who can
believe it? Ay, who dare believe it, if he would escape the
ij charge of blasphemy? Neither Nero nor Caligula was ever
} guilty of any thing so ruthless, so fiendish, so cruel, and so
* vindictive. And this is the God the Evangelical Union tell us
the Constitution of the United States should recognize as the
| Supreme Ruler of nations. This is the Bible which they tell us
i should become 44 the fountain of our laws, and the suprerhe
{ rule of our conduct.” This is the religion which they are
trying to revive and fasten upon us in this enlightened nine-
'll teenth century. This is the religion we are required to believe
Icame from a God of infinite justice, infinite mercy, and loving
kindness, or be denounced as infidels, and be eternally damned.
But could a person be more damned than to believe in such a
religion? Now, those who have studied the philosophy and
impressibility of the human mind know that no extortion or
contortion of the language of the text, no symbolical or spirit-
ual construction that can be forced upon it, can prevent the
reading and believing a book from producing pernicious effects,
! which represents such barbarous deeds as having the divine
s sanction. Nothing can prevent it from exercising a demoral-
272
TUE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
izing influence upon a Christian community. The sooner, there-
fore, it can cease to be placed in the hands of the heathen and
the young people of Christian lands, and cease to constitute the
basis of our religion, the better for the progress of true morality,
and a virtuous system of religion.
IV. The Bible sanctions the Evil of Intemperance.
There arc a number of texts in the Bible, which, if human
language can mean any thing, most unquestionabty furnish a
warrant for drunkenness, whatever might have been the intention
of the writer; and that they have had the effect to sustain
and promote this evil, the practical history of Christian coun-
tries furnish proof that can not be gainsaid. That teacher
of Bible morality — that wise man who is said to have received
his wisdom direct^ from God, and must consequent^ be con-
sidered good authority—is represented as saying, u Give to him
that is athirst, and wine to those of heavy heart. Let him drink,
and forget his poverty, and remember his misciy no morc.,,
Here we are virtually recommended to drown our sorrows, and
benumb the pangs of poverty, by becoming dead drunk ; for it
is only after the inebriate has quaffed the contents of the intox-
icating bowl, or swung the bottle to his lips till he becomes
stupefied and insensible (i.e., u dead drunk’’), that he can
“forget his poverty, and remember his misciy no more.”
Wt* dare not deny, then, that Solomon recommended a state
of beastly intoxication as a means of drowning our troubles;
for no other meaning can be forced upon the text than that
which we have assigned it, without assuming an unwarrantable
use of language. Awa}', then, with such a book as “the
source of moral and religious instruction for the heathen,” or
as a reading-book for youth and children ! The question is not
what the Bible can be made to teach ; but what is it naturally
understood to teach, and what are the moral consequences of so
understanding it?
And we find in Exodus a still more explicit license, not only
for drinking, but for buying and selling, intoxicating drinks.
It is proclaimed, upon the authorit}’of Jehovah, “Thou shalt
spend thy monejr for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for
TUB BIBLE SANCTIONS INTEMPEBANCE.
273
strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after” (Deut.
xiv. 2G). We are sometimes told, but without reliable authority,
that the wine here referred to did not possess very intoxicating
properties. But it will be observed that the text did not stop at
wine, but 44 strong drink ; ” thus leaving no doubt upon the mind
of the reader but that they used strong liquors, even if we were
warranted in assuming the wine was not of this character,
which, however, we are not, and which we know is not true:
for, although like the wine of the grape in other countries, it
would not intoxicate while new, yet in that warm climate, as
travelers affirm, it will ferment in a few hours. It is evident,
then, that wine was one of their intoxicating beverages in
addition to 44 strong drinks.” And here we find a license for
buying and selling and using both in a book which the ortho-
dox churches would have us adopt as 4 4 the fountain of our
laws, and the supreme rule of our conduct,” ostensibly for the
improvement of the morals of the people ; when it is known to
unbiased investigators of the subject that these and similar
texts have been a stumbling-block in the progress of the tem-
perance reform among that class of people who take the Bible
as it reads without studying the art of extracting the old mean-
ing with the clerical force-pump, and coining a new meaning
of their own especially adapted to the occasion, — an art
studied and practiced by the spiritually blinded devotees of
all 44 the Holy Bibles” which God is assumed to have inspired
for the salvation of the human race. I will cite one case in
proof of the statement that a Bible containing such texts as I
have cited is calculated to do much mischief in the way of
retarding the temperance reform by furnishing the plainest
authority for drinking and trafficking in intoxicating liquors. A
friend, upon whom I can rely, related to me the following case:
A man addicted to intemperate habits was converted to religion,
and induced to sign the temperance pledge, parity by the influ-
ence of a speaker who quoted from 44 the word of God” such
texts as these: 44 Woe unto him who holds the bottle to his
neighbor’s mouth” (Ilab. ii. 15) ; 44 Wine is a mocker, and
strong drink is raging” (Prov. xx. 1). But a few days after
his conversion, as he was turning the leaves of the Bible, his
274
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
eye accidentally caught sight of one of the texts I have quoted, —
“ Thou shalt spend thy money for strong drink,” &c. Here
he discovered that his Bible and his God both declared that
buying and drinking intoxicating beverages was all right. It
was enough. His resolution gave wajr; his firmness was un-
manned, his moral manhood prostrated, his pledge overruled;
and, in less than two hours, he was again lying in the ditch
“dead drunk.” Here is a proof of the mischief that can be
wrought by one single text upon those who have accepted the
Bible as “ the supreme rule of their conduct.” You may pro-
claim the evil of intemperance with the tongue of a Cicero, or
paint it with the pencil of a Raphael, and muster all the texts
you can find in the book condemning the practice, yet one such
text as I have quoted will poison the moral force of it all while
the Bible is read and adored as “the rule of their conduct.”
As one drop of belladonna or prussic acid will poison a whole
pint of water, in like manner will one immoral text, when found
in a book accepted by the people as their highest authority in
practical morals, have the effect to neutralize the moral force of
every sound precept that may be found in the book. It is use-
less, and labor comparatively lost, for a book or a moral teacher
to inculcate good precepts, while it is known thejT are morallj’
capable of teaching or preaching bad ones. One spark of fire
is sufficient to explode a powder-magazine. Bad precepts and
bad examples are both veiy contagious in a moralty undeveloped
and unenlightened age; and their pernicious effects can not be
wholly counteracted or prevented by any number of precepts of
an opposite character.
But we are told the precepts above quoted are in the Old
Testament, and not the New, which is now accepted as higher
authority. But then it should be borne in mind, that the Old
Testament is still being printed and bound with the New as
a part of “ the Holy Bible,” and “ God’s perfect revelation to
man” for “the guidance of his moral conduct.” It is still
circulated both in Christian and heathen countries by the mil-
lion with the New, and as of equal authority with the New Tes-
tament. It takes both to make “ the Holy Bible.” It will be
in vain, then, to plead any extenuation or apology for the immo-
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS CBIME.
275
ralities of the Old Testament on this ground. They will both
stand or fall together. The “new dispensation” could not
stand a day without the Old Testament as a basis. And then,
when we push our investigations a step further, we find the
New Testament lending its sanction to most of the evils and
crimes wliicli are supported by the Old Testament; and among
this number is that under review, —the vice or sin of intemper-
ance. Paul, one of the principal founders and expounders of
the religion of the New Testament, and one of the leading
examples and teachers of its morals, in his letter of exhortation
to Timothy, advises him to u drink no longer water, but take a
, little wine for the stomach’s sake ” (1 Tim. v. 23). As for the
plea or purpose for which the intoxicating beverage was to be
used on this occasion “ for the stomach’s sake,” it is the same
that dram-drinkers and drunkards have always had recourse to
to justify the use of strong drink. It is always drunk for “ the
stomach’s sake.” And, when we find Christ himself converting
a large quantity of water into wine (see John ii.), we must con-
clude that the New Testament does not teach a system of
morals calculated to arrest the sin of intemperance. Those,
then, who wish still to continue floundering in the cesspool of
drunkenness, can find in the New Testament, as well as the Old,
a justification for this sin.
-
V. The Creme of Slave-holding sanctioned bt the Bible.
The Bible contains a warrant for the perpetual enslavement
of men, women, and children. It is well known to the pioneer-
laborers in the antislavery reform, that this book constituted a
strong bulwark in support of the system; that it was one of
the principal obstacles in the way of effecting its extermination.
Its defenders quoted such texts as the following: “ Of the
heathen round about you, shall ye buy bondmen and bond-
maids, and they shall be }7our possession for ever” (Lev. xxv.
44). Among Christian professors, such positive and explicit
license for the practice of slave-holding was hard to be set
aside; and it undoubtedly had an influence to perpetuate the
accursed system of slavery.
276
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
YI. The Bible sanctions Polygamy.
The practice of polygamy is indorsed by the Christian Bible.
It is frequently sanctioned in the Old Testament, both b}r pre-
cept and example, while it is nowhere condemned by the Book,
either in the Old or New Testament. This fact makes Mor-
monisrn an impregnable institution; and this is the reason it
bids defiance to the efforts of a Christian nation to put it down.
It is a Bible institution. Hence a Bible-believing nation dare
not attack it. The hand of the government is powerless to put
it down, because it is justified by the u Holy Book.” Hence
it continues to exist, a stigma upon the nation. Were it as ex-
plicitly and strongly condemned by the Bible as idolatry is, it
would have been banished from the country long ago.
VII. Licentiousness is sanctioned by the Bible.
It can hardly be wondered at that so many Christian profess-
ors fall victims to licentious habits, as is evident from reports
almost daily published in the periodicals, from which one trav-
eler has collected more than two thousand cases of priests, the
professed teachers of morality, who have fallen victims to the
vice of illegal sexual intercourse within a few years ; and prob-
ably the number whose deeds are never brought to fight is much
greater. As we have already remarked, this licentiousness
among Bible believers and Bible teachers is no cause of wonder
when we reflect that it is taught in their Bible, both b}’ example
and precept, and even, we are told, commanded by Jehovah
himself. In the thirty-first chapter of Numbers it is written,
that the Lord commanded Moses to slay all the Midianites,
except the women and girls who “ had never known man.”
amounting to about thirty thousand. They were even ordered
to kill every male among the little ones ; and it is declared the}r
left “nothing alive that breathes,” except the thirty thousand
maids saved to gratify the lust of those murderous libertines.
Who that has any mercy, justice, or refinement in their nature,
can believe that such cruelty and licentiousness was the work
of a righteous God? Christian professors contemplate these
revolting pictures with an anxious desire to save the credit of
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS CHIME.
277
the Book, until, by dint of determination to believe (for they
are afraid even to doubt), they finally persuade themselves, that, -
somehow or other, they must be right, notwithstanding their
revolting nature. The}’ conclude they don’t understand them,
or that it is our fine moral sensibilities, and our natural love of
virtue, that is at fault. And thus our moral manhood is dead-
ened and sacrificed to our barbarous religion. It is an evident
fact, and a sorrowful truth, that the moral sensibilities of all
Christendom are more or less blunted and seared in this way,
? and their standard of virtue lowered. Such is the demoralizing
influence of the 44 Holy Book ” when idolized and regarded as
1 the source of our morals, and 44 the supreme rule of our con-
duct.” It is evident we never can reach that elevated standard
| of morals and true refinement which is the natural outgrowth
j of civilization till the Bible is lowered to a more subordinate
position, and is no longer allowed to shape our morals, and
\ mold our religion, and retard our civilization. The texts I
*| have cited are but samples of many similar passages which
I evince a sickly, licentious state of morals amongst 44 the Lord’s
^ holy people.” By the moral code of Moses and Jehovah, a
^ Jew was authorized to seize a beautiful woman (if he should
see one amongst the captives taken in war), and take her to
) his house for his wife ; but, if he finds upon trial that she don’t
suit him, then he can turn her out, and let her go whither she
j will. He was licensed to turn her adrift upon the cold charities
| of the world. “If it shall be that thou find no delight in her,
j . then thou slialt let her go whither she will” (Deut. xxi. 14).
j It does not appear that her wishes were consulted in any case.
! She was a captive at first, and a slave to the end. And these
j hard-hearted, licentious men were 44 God’s holy people.” Those
I pious and devout Christians who are so inveterately opposed to,
1 and horrified at,44Free-Lovism ’’should not let it be known the}’
believe in the Bible, lest they should get into the same difficult}’
1 the Bev. Mr. Hitchkiss did while in Arabia. Having stated to
i a Mahomedan that there was a class of people in America
j known as 44 Free-Lovers,” and that they were infidels and Spir-
itualists, the disciple of the Koran remarked, in reply, 44 I sup-
j pose you are a Free-Lover also.” —44 What makes you entertain
J
i
I
I
278
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
that supposition? ” asked the reverend. u Because/’ said the
Mussulman, “you are a believer in the Christian Bible; and I
have observed, by reading it, that its leading men were practical
4 Free-Lovers.’ The wise Solomon was so highly esteemed by
God, that he opened to him the fountain of wisdom; and
hence he must have been looked up to by the Jews as a leading
authorit}’ in matters of religion and morals, and an example to
be followed in practical life; and he practiced 4 Free-Lovism/
or licentiousness, on a very large scale. His subjects and vic-
tims were numbered b}’ the thousand; and with three hundred
of them he maintained no legal relation. Hence they were
what are now called prostitutes. And his father David, 4 the
man after God’s own heart,’ was also a 4 Free-Lover,’ and indi-
rectly committed murder in order to increase his number of
victims; and Abraham, the father and founder of the Jewish
nation, also belonged to that class. I suppose, therefore, }’ou
consider it all right.” The reverend gentleman replied, 441
believe it was right for them, but would not be right for us.”
44 Then,” said the Mahomedan, 44 you believe that moral prin-
ciples change,—that what is right to day may be wrong to-
morrow, and vice versa. Now, it is evident, that, if thc}T can
change once, they can change again, and ma}T thus be perpetu-
ally changing; so that it would be impossible to know what
true morality is, for it would be one thing to-day and another to-
morrow. I hold that the principles of moralit}T are perfect, and
hence can not change without becoming immorality.” Thus
reasoned the 44 unconverted heathen ; ” and thus closed his con- .
trovers}’ with the Christian missionary. The reader can judge
which had the better end of the argument.
VIII. Tiie Biiile sanctions Wife-Catching.
In the Book of Judges (Judges xxi. 20) we learn that the Israel-
ites of the tribe of Benjamin were instructed in the art of wife-
catching. 4'Go and lie in wait in the vincj’ards ; and behold,
if the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in dances, then
come ye out of the vincj’ards, and catch jtou every man a wife ”
(Judges xxi. 21). 44 And they did so.” Now it was certainly
rather shameful business for God’s oracles to be engaged in, —
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS CRIME.
279
that of advising rude and lustful men to hide in ambush in the
vinej'ards, and, when they saw the young maidens approaching,
to pounce upon them while dancing, and cany or drag them
off without a moment’s warning. It was called catching a
wife ; but, in this age of a higher moral development, it would
not be designated b}" such respectful language, but would be
placed in the list of crimes, and punished as a State-prison
offense.
IX. The Crimes of Treachery and Assassination.
In the fourth chapter of Judges we find a case of barbarity
related, comprising the double crime of treachery and murder,
for which a parallel can scarcely be found in the annals of any
j heathen nation, and which appears to have received the approval
1 of the Jewish Jehovah. It is exhibited in the history of Jael,
the wife of Heber the Kenite. We read, that as a poor fugi-
I tive by the name of Sisera was fleeing from “ the Lord’s holy
i people,” who were pursuing him with uplifted swords with the
{ determination to kill him, not for any crime whatever, but
because he professed a different religion, and refused to wor-
ship their cruel God (for they seemed to consider themselves
authorized by their God to exterminate all nations who dissented
i| from their creed), — as this fugitive was flying from the swords
of the worshipers of Jehovah, Jael went out to meet him
| (Sisera), and said unto him, u Turn in, my lord; turn in to
I me. Fear not.” And, when he had turned in unto her in the
tent, she covered him with a mantle, and feigned much pity for
j him; and, when he asked for a little water, she gave him milk :
^ but, as soon as he had fallen asleep, u she took a nail of the
tent and a hammer, and went softly unto him, and smote the nail
| into his temple, and fastened it into the ground.” Who can read
I this deed of treacher}^ and cruelty without emotions of horror,
and thrilling chilly sensations at the heart? And yet Jehovah,
the God of Israel, is represented as saying, u Blessed above
, women shall Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, be ” (Judg. v.
I 24). Now, what is this but a premium offered for treachery and
j cold-blooded murder? I believe, with Lord Bacon, that u it is
j better to believe in no God than to believe in one possessing
280
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
dishonorable traits of character;” and I can not see how it
would be possible to ascribe more dishonorable traits of charac-
ter to any being than are ascribed to the Jewish Jehovah. And
this is the God the orthodox world wants put into the Constitu-
tion of the United States ; but most unfortunate for our progress
in morals and civilization would it be to adopt such a measure.
And this is the book which the churches are constantly appealing
to the people for aid to circulate among the heathen as neces-
saiy to improve their morals, and save their souls ; but no other
book could be put into their hands so complete^ calculated to
deaden and obliterate every feeling of humanity, every natural
impulse of justice and merc}r, and kindle feelings of murder and
revenge. Such a book should not be admitted into their families
to corrupt their natural sense of right and justice.
I will cite another case evincing the same spirit, and teaching
the same kind of moral lesson. We are told in Judges (chap,
iii.) that the Lord sent a man by the name of Ehud to murder
Eglon, King of Moab, and s.ent him with a lie upon his lips.
As he came near to the king, he said unto him, “ I have a
message from God unto thee” (Judg. iii. 20, 21). And, while
conversing with him under the guise of a friend, he drew out
a dagger which he had concealed under his garments, and
plunged it into his bod}T, and killed him. And the Lord, “ the
God of Israel,” is represented as raising up the blood3'-minded
Ehud for the special purpose of perpetrating this shocking deed
of murder. To circulate a book among the heathen, detailing
such revolting deeds of cruelty as consistent with sound morality,
and approved by a just and righteous God, is an evil of no
small magnitude.
I will cite one other case illustrative of Bible intolerance. It
is found in the history of the godly Phinehas, related in the
twenty-fifth chapter of Numbers. lie was one of u The Lord’s
peculiar people,” who were such violent sectarians that the}'
showed no mercy towards any nation or any individual who
dissented from their creed, lienee, when it was reported to
Moses and his God that Zimri and his wife Cozbi had become
converts to the Baal-pcor religion, they sent Phinehas after them
with deadly weapons to slay them for heresy; and he chased
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS CRIME.
281
them into their tents, and slew them with a javelin upon their
own hearthstone for no crime whatever against the moral
law, but for simpfy exercising their God-given right to worship
God according to the dictates of their consciences. It was a
feeling of sectarianism, intolerance, and bitter animosity which
prompted the act. We can not wonder, therefore, that Chris-
tian Bible believers, who have chosen this book as “ the supreme
rule of their conduct,” should have written their histoiy in
blood, and that the whole pathway of their pilgrimage is strewn
with the bones of them murdered victims, whe were slain for
r being true to their consciences, and for believing in and wor-
shiping God according to their comictions of right and duty.
In addition to the long list of crimes already enumerated as
' being sanctioned by the Bible, we will name a few others : —
Lying.—We find that nearly all the leading characters who
figure in Bible historj", and who are* held up as moral exem
\ plars of the human race, were guilty of lying either directly or
1 indirectly. We will cite a few cases : —
It is shown that Abraham and his wife (Gen. xx.), and Isaac
• (Gen. xxvi.), and Jacob (Gen. xxxi.), were all guilty of false-
*| hood; also Rachel, Jacob’s wife (Gen. xxxi.), Jacob’s sons
(Gen. xxxvii.), and Samson (Judg. xvi.), and Elisha (2
1 Kings), and four hundred prophets (1 Kings xxii.). And
' Jeremiah makes out all the prophets were virtual liars (Jer.
vi. 13). Peter lied three times in about seventy-five minutes
? (Luke xxii.). And Paul justifies lying (Rom. iii-7). With
so many examples of lying by u inspired and holy men of old,”
the custom became popular among the early Christians, and was
upheld and justified by them, as stated by the popular Christian
i writer, Mosheim. And some of “the heathen nations,” for
* this reason, were accustomed to calling the Jews “ the sons
I of falsehood.” Now, we appeal to the moral consciousness of
every honest reader to decide in . his own mind whether it is
possible for a book containing such defective moral inculcations
* to be calculated to promote true virtue, or a love of truth, in
! either Christian or heathen nations, and whether it should not,
on this account, be kept out of the hands of the heathen, as
being calculated to weaken their natural appreciation of truth.
i
I
282
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Swearing. —Let the reader turn to his Bible concordance, and
observe the hundreds of cases in which God and his people are
represented as swearing. He can then understand why pro-
fanity is now more prevalent in Christian than in heathen coun-
tries. God himself is several times represented as swearing in
his wrath (Ps. xcv. 11). It should therefore be expected to be
prevalent amongst Christian Bible believers.
As a Christian missionaiy was recently returning from India
on board a British vessel, observing a Christian professor fre-
quently swearing, he stepped to him, and observed, u Here, sir,
is my son, twenty-one years old, born and raised in a heathen
land, and to-da}T is the first time he ever heard a profane oath.”
Rather a withering lesson for a Christian professor. There are
obviously two causes for the great prevalency of profane & rear-
ing in all Christian countries. One is its frequent indor ement
in the Bible, and the other is the common custom of the priest-
hood apparently indulging in the practice in the pulpit. In
their godly zeal to convert sinners, they exclaim, “God will
damn you." The bo}Ts in the congregation catch the refrain,
run into the street, and repeat the oath (dropping one word),
“ God damn you.” Before we can expect this foolish and
demoralizing practice to be abandoned, we must have a different
Bible and different religious teachers; and also before we can
prevent the heathen who read our Bible from imitating our
example in swearing, or using profane language.
Cursing. — The numerous cases of cursing recorded in the
Bible from Jehovah to Elisha, who cursed the sportive, £auey
boys, and then destined them with bears, are calculated to en-
gender and foster the worst and most malignant passions of
the human mind. The veiy name of the Jews’ God, Jehovah
(Elohim), is derived from a root which signifies “ to curse and
to swear.” And the immoral practice of cursing is continued
from the Old Testament through the New.
Murder.—AYe have spoken of murders perpetrated by the
Jews under the authority of a theocratic government. AAre will
now cite some cases of a more private character: Cain, the
first man born into the world, was a murderer; and, instead
of being punished for it, he appears to have been honored. He
THE BIBLE SANCTIONS CRIME.
283
went into the land of Nod, and built a great cit}^ “ The man
after God's own heart" (David) indirectly killed Uriah; Ju-
dith cut off the head of Holofernes while in bed with him, — a
most shocking case; Jehoiada, the priest, murdered his queen
at the high gate in cold blood; Jael, the wife of Heber, mur-
dered the flying fugitive Sisera by driving a nail though his
head; Ehud murdered the King of Eglon under the guise of
friendship ; Absalom murdered Ammon; Joab murdered Absa-
lom ; Solomon murdered his brother Adonijah; Baasha mur-
dered Nadab ; Zimri murdered Elah; Omri murdered Zimri;
Ahab murdered Naboth; Jehu murdered Ahab and Joram;
Shallum murdered Zachariah ; Hoshea murdered Pekah. Nu-
i merous other cases might be cited. * Some of these murderers
were leading men among the Jews, —men whose life and char-
i acter exercised great influence ; and consequently such examples
were very pernicious, and the moral lesson they impart to Bible
i readers must be corrupting to their moral feelings, if not their
111 moral conduct.
j Flogging. —The practice of flogging is regarded as a relic of
barbarism by all modern writers on moral ethics. We find it was
prescribed by law under the Hebrew monarchy. Forty lashes,
in some cases, while the victim was tied or held down, was
the penalty for certain crimes. (See Deut. xxv.) If they were
i schooled in the councils of infinite wisdom as they claimed to
be, their God should have taught them a less severe and more
enlightened method of treating offenders.
J Witchcraft. — “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" (Exod.
,] xxii. 18) has been the watchword and the authority for the
* slaughter of great numbers of human beings. Figures can not
j compute the tortures, the shocking cruelties, and the heart-
! crushing sufferings which have been endured as the legitimate
fruit of this superstitious, barbarous law of “God’s holy
people." It was continued in force to a late period, and has
been more extensively practiced by Christians than by Jews.
H The number of victims in Christian England alone amounts to
| hundreds of thousands. A large portion of them were tied hand
! and foot, and thrown into the water. If they sank; that termin-
al ated the case, guilty or not guilty ; if they swam or floated, that
284
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
was regarded as an evidence of guilt, and they were taken out,
and burned or hanged. During its reign in England, thirty
thousand harmless women were burned as witches, mostly poor
women who had no means of self-defense.
Even the learned Sir Matthew Hale, one of England’s most
enlightened Christian jurists, sentenced a number of poor women
to be hanged in 1664 as witches; and the reason he assigned
for it was, that u the Bible leaves no doubt as to the reality of
witchcraft, and the duty of putting its subjects to death.”
Thus we have an illustration of the enormous evils which have
grown out of Bible superstitions, perpetuated by those who were
so ignorant as to accept the book as authority. Witchcraft,
which was believed by Bible writers and Bible Christians to be
the work of the Devil or of evil spirits, is now well understood
in the light of modern science as to its causes, of which Bible
revelation was ignorant.
As the want of space will permit no further exposition or
enumeration of Bible crimes, we will sum up the whole thus:
Murder, theft, robbery, war, slavery, intemperance, polygamy,
concubinage, fornication, rape, piracy, tying, assassination,
treachery, tyranny, revenge, persecution for religious opinions,
vagabondism, degradation and enslavement of women, hypoc-
risy, breach of faith, suicide, vulgarity or obscenity, witchcraft,
flogging, cursing, swearing, &c.
We have cited texts and examples in proof of the statement
that all these crimes, and others not here enumerated, are sanc-
tioned by God’s “ hoty word,” and were perpetrated by God’s
ct hoty people,” as the}' arc called. And yet a Christian writer
declares, u The Lord kept his people pure, hoty, and upright
through every period of their history.” A statement could
hardly be made that would be farther from the truth. It is
another evidence of the blinding effect of a false religion.
Again we ask, should a book, lending its sanction to the long
catalogue of crimes herein enumerated, and which represents
them as being in accordance with the will of a hoty and a right-
eous God, be placed in the hands of the illiterate and credulous
heathen as a guide for their moral conduct ? Most certainty it
must have a deleterious cllcct upon their morals ; and yet him-
IMMORAL INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE.
285
dreds of thousands are distributed amongst them every year by
the Christian churches and missionary societies. And then
think of making such a book “ the fountain of our laws, and
the supreme rule of our conduct/ ’ as urged by the Evangelical
Alliance and the orthodox churches. We almost tremble at the
thought of such a step toward barbarism and demoralization.
CHAPTER XLYIII.
IMMORAL INFLUENCE OF THE BIBLE.
With the characteristic moral teaching of the Christian Bible,
presented in the preceding chapter and throughout "this work,
we see not how to escape the conviction that the Bible has
inflicted, and must necessarily inflict, a demoralizing influence
on society wherever it is read and believed. It is morally im-
possible for any person to read and believe a book sanction-
ing, or appearing to sanction, so many species of crime and
immorality without sustaining more or less moral and mental
injury by it. For whatever views he may entertain with respect
to the numerous crimes therein reported as having been com-
mitted with the approval, and often at the command, of a just
God, it must naturally and inevitably have the tendency to
weaken his detestation of those crimes, and also weaken his
zeal and effort to extinguish them and other similar crimes now
existing in society. It must also lower his conception of the
moral attributes of Deity. However honest, and however natu-
rally opposed to such immoralities at the outset, it is impossible
for him to entertain the belief that they were once approved, or
even connived at, by a morally7 perfect being, without becoming
unconsciously weakened in his feelings of opposition to, and his
hatred of, such deeds. It may be alleged that these practices
are at war with those precepts which enjoin us to do unto others
as we would have them do unto us; and that of loving our
neighbors as ourselves, &c. This is true ; but reason and expe-
rience both teach us, as an important lesson in moral and mental
philosophy, that, when a book which is accepted as a guide for
286
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
the conduct and moral actions of men contains contradictory
precepts, the people will seize on and reduce to practice those
most consonant with their natures, and most congenial to their
natural feelings and inclinations. Hence it can easily be seen,
that as the animal feelings and propensities which lead to the
commission of crime, when unduty exercised, have always been
stronger with the masses or the populace than the moral feel-
ings, they have consequently always been more disposed to yield
a compliance with those precepts which sanction, or appear to
sanction, the commission of crime, than those which are con-
demnatory of crime. All persons in whose minds the animal
propensities are the strongest will seize with eagerness the
least authority, or appearance of authority, for committing those
crimes which they are naturally inclined to commit, and for
which they are glad to find a license or encouragement to com-
mit. Under such circumstances the}' will ignore the virtuous
precepts, and yield a compliance with those of an opposite char-
acter. Therefore Christian professors who expect the Bible to
exert a moral influence in reforming the world and freeing it
from crime, because it contains some beautiful and sound moral
precepts, will be disappointed; for those precepts will be neu-
tralized, and their effects destroyed, by those of an opposite char-
acter. A majority of the people in all countries have always
possessed a strong inclination for committing those crimes
which, we have shown, the Christian Bible appears to sanction.
Hence the Bible, with all its counteracting precepts, will only
add fuel to the fire, for the reason already pointed out. Those
who do not know this must be ignorant of the most important
principles of moral science, and the elements of human nature
Bight here is where Christians commit a serious mistake. They
scatter their Bibles among the heathen by the thousand, assum-
ing that it will have the effect to moralize and civilize them,
while they can find a warrant in it (as shown in the preceding
chapter) for every species of crime they have been in the habit
of committing. This is a solemn error they have been commit-
ting for ages, lienee their missionary labors, instead of reform-
ing the heathen, have only tended to demoralize them, where
they have not been counteracted by the more rational religion
THE BIBLE AT WAR WITH SCIENCES.
287
of science and nature, as they have been in many cases. Many
facts could be adduced to prove this statement, some of which
may be found in Chapter 50. (“Bible a Moral Necessity ”).
Wherever the Bible has been introduced, without the arts and
sciences to counteract its influence (as in Abyssinia and the
Samoan Islands), crime has increased. History proves that
wherever the Bible has been circulated without any counter-
acting influences, both in Christian and heathen nations, it has
had the effect to weaken the moral strength of the people, lower
their natural appreciation of virtue and a true moral life, and
has had a tendency to popularize crime by making it more
respectable. It is therefore an unsuitable book to circulate as
a guide for the moral conduct of man in any country.
CHAPTER XLIX.
THE BIBLE AT WAR WITH EIGHTEEN SCIENCES.
The word “ science” is from the Latin scire (“to know”).
Hence ever}' statement incompatible with the teachings and
principles of science is simply ignorance arrayed against knowl-
edge. It may surprise some who have been taught that the
Bible contains “a perfect embodiment of truth,” or who be-
lieve, with the redoubtable Dr. Cheever, that “the Bible does
not contain the shadow of a shade of error from Genesis to
Revelations,” —it will doubtless surprise all such persons to be
told, that, so far from Dr. Cheever’s statement being correct,
“ the Holy Book,” by a fair estimate, is found to contain more
than nine thousand scientific errors alone; i.e., more than
nine thousand statements and assumptions which conflict with
the\established principles of modern science^besides errors in
morals, history, &c. It is believed there is not one chapter in
the book wThich does not contain several errors of this charac-
ter. This, perhaps, should not be a matter of surprise to any
person after viewing the character and condition of philosophy
and the wide-spread scientific ignorance which reigned over the
world at that period. Let it be borne in mind that science was
288
TIIE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
but just budding into life, and philosophy had attained but a
feeble growth amongst that portion of the earth’s inhabitants
who constituted the representatives of the Jewish and Christian
religion. Not only does their history and their writings show
that they were, for the most part, ignorant of what little sci-
ence there was in the world, —which was small compared with
the present period,—but they opposed it whenever they came
in contact with it. Every thing was ascribed to supernatural
power. The word “ science ” only occurs twice in the Bible, —
once in the Old Testament, and once in the New; and, in the
latter case, it was used for the purpose of condemning it. Paul
advises Timothy to “beware of the babblings of science” (1
Tim. vi. 20). The word “ philosoph}" ” is used but once in
the Bible, and then not to recommend it; but Paul uses it
to condemn it, as he does science, or at least to discourage it:
“ Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and
vain conceit” (Col. ii. 8). It will be observed, then, that
there is apparently a veto placed upon the study of science
and philosophy in the only two instances in which reference
is made to them in the Bible. We can not wonder, there-
fore, that its devout disciples have in all ages, until a very
recent period, set themselves squarety against the propagation
of science and philosophy. It was but carrying out the spirit
of their Bible. The earl}' Christians, almost to a man, dis-
couraged the study of science, and condemned and persecuted
those who attempted to propagate its principles, and even put
some of them to death. Copernicus was persecuted for setting
forth principles of astronomy which conflicted with the teach-
ings of the Bible; Galileo was sentenced to death because ho
taught the rotundity and revolution of the earth in opposition
to the Bible, which declares, “The earth lias foundations, and
can not be removed” (Ps. civ. 5) ; and Bruno suffered the
penalty of death for teaching substantially the same doctrine.
And every discoverer in science was condemned and persecuted.
Much was written by the early fathers in acknowledgment of
the incompatibility of science with religion and the teachings
of the Bible, and to warn the pious disciple of the danger
of occcupying his mind in the investigation and study of sei-
THE BIBLE AT WAB WITH SCIENCE.
289
-
ence. Even Eusebius, the popular ecclesiastical writer of the
third century, and one of the most intelligent Christians of that
age, acknowledged he had a contempt for 44 the useless baubles
of the philosophers : ” 44 We think little of these matters, turning
our souls to the exercise of better things.” And Lactantius, a
Christian of the same century, pronounced the study of physical
causes of natural things 44 empty and false.” And St. Augus-
tine, 44 a shining light of the Church,” treated with contempt
the notion that the earth is round, as 44 trees on the other
side would hang with their tops down, and the men there
would have their feet higher than their heads.” He condemns
it as false, 44 because no such race is recorded in Scripture
among the descendants of Adam.” What profound reasoning !
Martin Luther utters his malediction against astronomy in the
following language : 4 4 This false Copernicus will turn the whole
art of astronomy upside down; but the Scripture teacheth
another lesson, when Joshua commanded the sun to stand still,
and not the earth.” Of course Joshua’s order for the sun
to stop knocks the science of astronomy on the head, and
extinguishes it for ever with all true Bible believers ; and men
have had to outgrow their Bibles before they could accept the
teachings of astronomy. When we take into consideration
the almost boundless acquisitions that have been made in the
field of science since the invention of the printing art, and
the many discoveries evolved in every department of science
and art, now classified into a long list of new sciences, and
which throw a flood of light on almost every thing taught by
the ancients in morals, religion, or science, we should not be
surprised to find more or less error in every thing they taught.
Let us look for a moment at the long list of sciences now
taught in our schools, most of which were unknown two hun-
dred years ago : Astronomy, geolog}’, chemistry, mineral-
ogy, meteorology, pneumatics, hydrostatics, mechanics, psy-
chology, paleontology, anthropology, ethnology, archaeology,
biology, history, chronology, botany, zoology, philosophy,
physiology, ornithology, geography, mathematics, optics, acous-
tics, phrenology, animal magnetism, &c. The facts and prin-
ciples now comprised in these several branches of science have
290
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
mostly been developed within a comparatively recent period |
of time ; and almost every department of science here enu- I
merated embraces facts and discoveries which reveal important I
errors in the religious creeds of the ancient representatives of |
the Christian faith. To illustrate this statement, we will cite
some examples : — V
1. Astronomy. —More than forty errors in astronomy will be j
found exposed in Chapter 15, treating on the Mosaic account
of creation; and here may be added a few more to the num-
ber. Several texts in the Bible speak of the stars falling to the 1
earth, or traveling in some lawless direction. Even Christ I
committed this error. (See Mark xiii. 25.) How ridiculous |
is this, conception when viewed in connection with the fact that
these stars are many of them larger than the earth! Saturn
is about a thousand times larger, and Jupiter twelve hundred
times larger, than our planet. John speaks of one-third of the
stars falling at once (Rev. xii. 4). If these twro large planets
(Jupiter and Saturn) should be of the number, our little earth •
would fare rather badly, though it is evident they could not all
have room to strike it. If the}" should strike it from opposite
sides, the}T would effectually grind it to powder. The inspired
writers of the Bible seem to have had their minds so filled with
heavenly things, that there was but little room left for scientific
knowledge appertaining to the earth. The idea of the sun
being made “ to rule by day, and the moon and stars to rule by
night,” as taught in Gen. i. 1G, discloses still further the igno- {
ranee of Bible writers on astronomy.
2. Geological Errors. —The story of the creation in Genesis
(as exposed in Chapter 15 of this work) contains many geo-
logical errors. Almost every statement, in fact, conflicts with 1
the teachings of geology, and especially the assumption that
the earth, with the retinue of worlds which roll through infinite
space, was brought into existence by a fiat of Omnipotence, and
only about six thousand years ago ; while many facts in geological
science1 disprove its creation, and prove that it existed hundreds
of thousands, if not millions, of years ago. For the numerous
Bible errors under this head, sec Chapter 15.
3. Errors in Geography. —The language applied to the earth
THE BIBLE AT WAR WITH SCIENCE.
291
by various writers of the Bible show quite plainly that they
entertained very erroneous conceptions of its form and size,
and the laws that govern it. Such language as “the founda-
tions of the earth ” (Ps. civ. 5 ; Job xxxviii. 4), u the ends of
earth,” “the corners of the earth,” “the pillars of the
earth” (1 Sam. ii. 8), clearl}- indicate that Bible writers enter-
tained the common, erroneous conceptions of that age, that the
earth is a flat, square, angular figure, only inhabited on one
side. Matthew, who represents Christ as seeing all the king-
doms of the earth from the top of a mountain, plainly discloses
the same error.
4. Errors in Ethnology.—The Bible assumption of the ori-
gin of man within a period of six thousand }Tears, and the
descent of the whole race from a single pair, is direct^ at vari-
ance with the teachings of ethnological science, which discloses
the true history of man, and proves, according to Agassiz and
other modern naturalists, that the human race has descended
from at least five pairs of original progenitors. See a work
entitled “ T}rpes of Mankind,” compiled from the writings
of the ablest naturalists of the* age.
5. Archaeology, which treats of antiquity, presents us with
nearty the same series of scientific facts to disprove the Bible
histor}’ of man. It presents us with many facts in the history
of the ancient empires of India, Eg}rpt, Greece, China, and
Persia, which directly contradict many statements found in the
Christian Bible, which the want of space compels us to omit any
notice of here. (See chapters on Bibles.)
| 6. Biology.—The Bible statements which make a son two
I years older than his father (2 Chron. xxi. and xxii.), a girl only
three years old when she married, and two millions of people
spring from seventy persons in two hundred and fifteen years,
are all at variance with the teachings of biology.
7. Botany. —The origin of thorns and thistles, and the pre-
servation of the whole vegetable kingdom during Noah’s flood,
as inferential^ taught by the Christian Bible, conflict with the
| present established principles of botany.
] 8. Zoology.—This science, which discloses the true history
of animal life, completely disproves some statements of the
\
i
292
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Bible relative to the animal kingdom. The hare is pronounced
unclean in Leviticus, u because he cheweth the cud, but divideth
not the hoof” (Lev. xi. 6). Here are three incorrect state-
ments. The hare does not chew the cud, and does divide the
hoof, and is not unclean (i.e;, not unsuitable for food).
9. Ornithology. —The writer who represents God as shower-
ing down nine hundred square miles of quails, three feet thick,
around the Jewish camp to serve as food (see Numb. xi. 32),
must have been ignorant of the size of this bird, if not of the
whole feathered tribe.
10. Physiology.—The apostle James must have been igno-
rant of the science of physiology when he declares the praj^ers
of the elders of the Church would heal the sick (Jas. v. 15).
It is not denied but that the presence of the ciders could
exercise a healing influence on the sick; but it should be
ascribed to their magnetism, and not to their prayers. The
numerous cases in which disease is represented by Christ and
his disciples as being produced by devils or evil spirits, and a
cure effected by ejecting the diabolical intruder, shows them to
have been ignorant of plysiolog}’; as does also the story of the
sons of God cohabiting with the daughters of men (Gen. vi. 4),
and producing a race of giants which, according to the Book
of Enoch, were three hundred cubits high. Bather tall speci-
mens of humanit}’. Their heads would be above the clouds, so
that they could not see which wa}’ the}’ were traveling. This
stoiy finds a parallel in the traditions of India, which once pro-
duced a race of giants so tall that they could neither sit down
in the house, nor stand up out of doors. Their eyes were so
far from the ground that the}r could not see their feet. All
these stories originated m an age which was destitute of a
knowledge of physiolog}’; and, as this amalgamation of Gods
with human beings did nothing to improve the race, the story is
destitute ot* a moral, and proves (if it proves aiy thing) that
the Gods were no better than men.
11. Mental i$“icncp.—The two hundred texts which repre-
sent the heart as being the seat of the mind or soul furnish
conclusive evidence that the writers were ignorant of the first
principles of mental science, u My heart uttereth understand-
THE BIBLE AT WAB WITH SCIENCE.
293
mg,” and ua pure heart,” are examples. “ An upright
liver,” or “ a pure liver,” would be just as sensible language.
There is not one text in the book that implies a knowledge
of the brain as being the organ of the mind, which is a scien-
tific fact now well established.
12. Animal Magnetism.—The exposition of this science by
Mesmer, Deluse, Townsend, and other writers, renders it clearly
evident that the phenomena of witchcraft, trance, and manjr
cases of spiritual vision, were nothing more nor less than the
products of animal magnetism superinduced by the action of
mind on mind, or the control of the mind by. magnetic sub-
stances, — the science of magnetism being entirety unknown in
that era of the world. Every case reported of restoring life to
a dead person by Christ, Elijah, Elisha, and other God-men, ^
if they had any foundation in truth, are explained by the prin-
ciples of this science. Similar cases have been witnessed in
modern times.
13. Philosophy.—The science of philosophy, in its matured
aspect, is of modern origin, and furnishes the true explana-
tion for many of the “ mysteries of godliness,” and other
mysteries of the Christian Bible, which, by the illiterate
writers of that age, were ascribed to the direct manifestation
of deific powers. They are now known to be natural occur-
i rences, instead of supernatural, as assumed by the writers. The
Bible story of the rainbow furnishes one example. Moses
| must have been ignorant of philosophy when he selected the
rainbow as an evidence there should be no rain in the future in
i sufficient quantities to inundate the earth again, when it is
known that the rainbow is a certain evidence of rain, as it is
produced by the rain in the act of falling. This is but one
I of many errors which the ignorant, illiterate Bible writers
have made for want of knowledge on scientific subjects, such
as the history of creation, the story of the flood, &c. The
several cases in which thunder is spoken of as being the voice
of God disclose great ignorance of philosophy; and several
instances in which God promises to take away the sickness
of the people evince an entire ignorance of the natural laws
which control health and disease. (See Exod. xxiii. 25 ; Deut.
vii. 15.)
294
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
14. Mathematics. —The Bible is deficient in man}" cases with
respect to the correct observance of the rules and principles
of mathematics. Its assumption that there can be but one
God, and at the same time acknowledging three, furnishes a
striking proof of this. Its enumeration of the families and
tribes furnishes another evidence of this. Its calculation of
numbers rarely coincides with the names. For example : Luke,
in his gospel, states there are forty-two generations from David
to Joseph ; but his list of names only makes forty-one. And
Matthew says, 4 4 From Adam to David are fourteen generations ;
but, by counting his list of names, we find but thirteen. The
date of Methuselah’s birth and his age, when compared to-
gether, extend his age ten months beyond the inauguration
of the flood. How he sustained life, and avoided drowning
during that time, must be one of the mysteries of godliness.”
These are a few specimens of Bible mathematics.
15. Chemistry.—A specimen of Bible chemistry is found in
the story of u fire and brimstone descending from heaven to-
gether” without a coalescence, or the chemical combination
and product which usually result from a contact of these two
elements. Another specimen is presented in the process of
manufacturing a golden calf by merely casting gold ear-rings,
finger-rings, &c., into the fire; and also Moses’ invention for
grinding the same gold into powder, and sprinkling it oil the
water, and compelling the people to drink it. No process is
known in modern times by which gold can be ground to powder,
nor for holding it in solution if ground and thrown into water.
The specific gravity of all gold now in use causes it to sink
to the bottom as soon as it is thrown into water. Bible chem-
istry seems to differ from natural chemistry.
1(5. Pneumatics. — Ilad Jehovah been acquainted with this
science, he could not have become alarmed about having his
kingdom invaded by the builders of Babel; for we learn, by
an acquaintance with the principles of this science, that the air
becomes so rarefied as we ascend, that we soon reach a point
where human life must cease. Hence it was unnecessary to
confound the language of the people in order to arrest the com-
pletion of the tower. They would have been compelled to
desist before they had got mail}" miles from the earth.
THE BIBLE AT WAB WITH SCIENCE.
295
17. Acoustics'.—Moses must have been ignorant of this sci-
ence, or presumed his readers would be, when he related the
numerous cases of himself and Joshua and others reading and
talking to two millions of people, some of whom must have been
several miles distant. JNTo human voice in modern times could
reach one-half of such an audience.
18. Hydrostatics. —This science teaches us that several cases
reported in the Bible of the waters of rivers and seas being
separated and erected in perpendicular columns so as to form
embankments, are contradicted by all the laws governing fluids,
and hence are wholty incredible. The sciences of optics, mete-
orology, philology, and psychology might also be included in
the above list as being ignored and practical^ set aside by Bible
writers. And yet, in the face of all these facts, Dr. Cheever
says, “There is a beautiful harmony between the principles
of science and the teachings of the Bible throughout the whole
book.” And this seems to have been the universal conviction
of the disciples of the Christian faith before the progress of
scientific discovery in modern times laid bare the errors of the
Hoi}' Book. Since that juncture in biblical theology culminated,
a new theory has been set on foot to dispose of the scientific
errors of the Bible. Yvre are told, as an apology for these
errors, that “the Bible was designed to teach religion and
morality, and not science.” This is too true ; but a true system
of religion must be based on the principles of science. The plea
also discloses a scientific ignorance on the part of the objector
in not knowing “ there is science in every thing.” Hence it is
impossible to write on any subject without coming in contact
with the principles of science, which you must either conform
to or violate. Persons destitute of scientific knowledge, as were
Bible writers, are liable, in their ignorance, to stumble into
scientific errors in writing on any subject.
296
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
CHAPTER L.
THE BIBLE AS A MORAL NECESSITY.
The question is frequently asked by Bible adherents, What
would be the moral condition of society without the Bible?
Would it not again relapse into barbarism? Such questions
manifest an ignorance of history and the moral instincts of the
human mind, and are easily met and answered by other ques-
tions indicating broader views. We ask, then, what was the
moral condition of the world, or that portion of it included
in the Jewish nation, during the two thousand years which
elapsed before any part of our Bible was written? Was
it any worse than the next two thousand years after it
was written ? And what is the moral condition of five-
sixths of the human famity now, who never had our Bible?
Facts in history prove that the morals of some of the na-
tions included in this class are superior to that of any Bible
nation, either now existing, or figuring in past history. Take,
for example, the Japanese. We will present the testimony
of an English officer. Col. Ilall. Reporting his own observa-
tions and experience, lie says, “During more than a 3'earis
residence in Japan, I never saw a quarrel among young or old.
I have never seen an angry blow struck, and have scarcely
heard an angry word. I have seen the children at their sports,
flying their kites on the hill; and no amount of entangled strings,
or kites lodged in the trees, provoked angry words or impa-
tience. In their games of jaekstones and marbles, I have
never seen an approach to a quarrel among them. The}' arc
taught implicit obedience to their parents; but I have never
seen one of them chastised. Respect and reverence for the
aged is universal. A ciying child is seldom seen. We have
nothing to teach them out of the abundance of our civilization.’’
THE BIBLE AS A MOBAL NECESSITY.
297
And a description of this nation by Dr. Oliphant fully confirms
the above. He says, “ Universal testimony assures us, that, in
their domestic relations, the men are gentle and forbearing ; the
women, obedient and virtuous. Every department of crime
is less in proportion to the population than in Christian coun-
tries. The native tribunals prove their competency to deal
with criminals by giving general satisfaction. Unlike any
Christian country, locks and keys are never used ; yet theft and
robber}’ are almost unknown. Although we had the most
tempting curiosities with us, and left them laying about our
lodgings for months, not one of them was carried off, though
our room was sometimes crowded with people. During the
whole of our stay in Yeddo, we never heard a scolding woman,
nor saw a disturbance in the streets, nor a child struck or oth-
erwise maltreated. In case of disputes between neighbors,
their children are often selected as arbiters, and always give
satisfaction. And parents in their old age often give their
property and the entire management of their affairs into the
hands of their children, who never betray their trust.” Xow,
it must be evident to every reader, that no such a moral picture
of society can be presented of any Christian country. And
yet the Christian Bible is not only scarcely known among them,
but they have resisted the most determined efforts of the Chris-
tian missionaries, for more than two hundred years, to introduce
it and circulate it amongst them, and have kept it out by posi-
tive prohibition most of the time. Do such facts tend to
confirm the statement often made by devout Chrisitans, that
u the Bible must be introduced and read by the people before
they can have good morals in any country’ ’ ? As a still further
proof of the erroneousness of this statement, we will now con-
trast the state of morals in the most religious Christian coun-
tries with that of the heathen nation just referred to. And this
moral picture of our country, is from the. pen of a Christian
writer, the celebrated Parson Brownlow. He tells us, -‘The
gospel is preached to the people regularly ail over the country.
. . . And yet, notwithstanding all this, rascality abounds in
all classes of society. . . . Cheating and misrepresentation are
the order of the day. In politics there is very little patriotism
298
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
or love of country. In religion there is more hypocrisy than
grace; and the biggest scoundrels living, crowd the church with
a view to hide their rascally designs, and more effectually serve
the Devil. Pious villains, as sanctified as the moral law, are
keeping false accounts, and resort to them for the sake of gain.
. . . In a word, rascality abounds among all classes.” Now
look on this picture, and then on that. We will now present
another contrast. We will look at another specimen of morality
among the heathen. The portraiture is furnished us by the
celebrated Christian missionary, Dr. Livingstone. Speaking of
some of the African tribes he encountered in his travels, he says,
u The inhabitants have many wise laws and politic institutions,
which would not discredit an}’ nation in Europe. They are not
a warlike people, but appear to hold martial achievements in great
contempt or abhorrence. They have such a nice sense of justice
and equity, that they will by no means make any encroach-
ments on the territory of their neighbors. Their dealings with
each other are characterized by mutual confidence, which Chris-
tians would do well to imitate.” No man is afraid of being
cheated. No precautions are used to prevent theft and rob-
bery ; and yet no theft and robbery are committed. Their goods
to be sold are stored in an open bazaar, left without any attend-
ants, and the purchaser fixes his own price, and leaves what he
considers a fair equivalent in its stead ; and all parties are sat-
isfied. It would seem, then, that, while in Christian countries
u it requires two to make a bargain,” in heathen countries it
lequires but one. Here, then, we have the morals of a heathen
nation, who not only knew nothing of Christianity, but would not
condescend to talk with the missionary on the subject, but put
him off with the plea, It makes no difference what a man’s
religion is, if his morals and practical life are right.” Sensible
reasoning. We will now turn another leaf in Christian history
with the inquiry, Is every country honored with the name
of Christian distinguished for morality, and every nation stig-
matized as heathen practically immoral? We will present
another specimen of Christian morality from the pen of that
popular Christian writer, Mr. Goodrich. Speaking of the moral
condition of one of the oldest Christian nations now existing
THE BIBLE AS A MORAL NECESSITY.
299
(the Abyssinians), he says, 44 They are restless, savage, and
brutal, almost beyond any known tribes of men. The Scotch
traveler, Mr. Bruce, was at Gondar, the capital; and he tells us
that he seldom went out without seeing dead human bodies
lying in the streets, left to be devoured by the dogs and hyenas.
Alnaiy, who lived there some years since, says he was invited
to a feast, where, amongst the dishes he Was offered, was flesh
with warm blood. We are told the people eat the flesh from
the cattle while alive; and sometimes, after a large piece has
been cut out, the skin is drawn over it, and the bleeding b'east
driven on its wa}r. Sometimes, when a party is assembled for
a feast, and are seated, the oxen are brought to the door, the
flesh is cut off the living animal, and the meat devoured while
the agonized brutes are filling the air with their bellowings. . . .
And the manners of the people in other respects are horrible in
the extreme. Yet, strange to say, they profess Christianity,
and have numerous churches. Their saints are almost innu-
merable, and surpass in miraculous power those of the Romish
Church. The clerg}’ do not attempt to prevent divorces, nor
even polygamy.” In confirmation of the above graphic picture,
we will quote also from an English geography by Guthrie and Fer-
guson, F.R.S. (p. 923) : 44 The inhabitants of Abyssinia consist
of Christians. Some ecclesiastical writers would persuade us
that the conversion of Abyssinia to Christianity happened in the
time of the apostles ; but others state that this was after,—in
the year 333. There is no such thing as marriage in Abyssinia,
and no distinction made between legitimate and illegitimate
children, from the king to the beggar.” Here, then, is 44 Chris-
tian” morality, and here is a specimen of Christian 44 free-lov-
ism ” too, in a country where the Christian Bible has been
circulated by the thousand, and read and adored for at least
ffteen hundred years. Such facts furnish a complete refutation
of the popular Christian assumption that 4 4 true and pure
morality is inseparable from Christianity and the Bible.”
The truth is, the Bible alone has never done any thing to advance
the cause of either morality or civilization in any country,
because it is interdicted from improvement. It may be asked
here, Why is it, then, that both religion and morality prosper
300
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
in most countries where the Bible has been introduced? The
answer to this question is found in the important fact, overlooked
by tlie Christian world, that the arts and sciences generally
accompany, or soon follow, the introduction of the Bible; but,
where this has not been the case, and the Bible has been circu-
lated alone, as in the case of Abyssinia, no progress whatever
has been made towards the establishment of true morality or a
rational religion, or any of the adjuncts of civilization, thus
proving that the causes for the moral growth and improvement
of society are outside of, and independent of, the Bible, and,
we will add (in view of the many immoral lessons taught in
the book), in spite of the Bible. A little rational reflection
must convince any unbiased person that Bibles, in the very
nature of things, must retard the moral and intellectual ad-
vancement and prosperity of society in every respect, not-
withstanding they contain many good and beautiful precepts,
for representing, as they do, the imperfect state of morals in
the age and country in which the}’ were written; while their
teachings are assumed to be a finality in moral and religious
progress, and hence are not allowed to be transcended in pre-
cept or practice. The consequence is, society would be pinned
down iinmovabty and perpetualty to the same barbarous religion
and morals of that age, if it were not pushed forward by the
irresistible influences of the arts and sciences. Hence we owe
our advancement and prosperity not to Bibles, but to causes
adequate to counteract and overcome their adverse influences.
Tiie Moral Benefits of Infidelity.
An additional argument to prove the Bible is not a moral
necessity to teach the practical duties of life is the fact that that
class of persons known as “infidels,” who entirely reject the
book as a guide or as a moral instructor on account of its very
defective and contradictory s}Tstem of morals, are admitted by
leading orthodox journals and representative men in the nation
to possess bettor moral characters and habits, and to lead better
moral lives, than Bible believers. As a proof of this statement,
we will here present the most wonderful and humiliating conces-
sions of that leading religious journal of the nation, “The*
THE BIBLE AS A MORAL NECESSITY.
301
New-York Evangelist.” On this subject it speaks thus : “ To
the shame of the Church it must be confessed that the foremost
men in all our philanthropic movements, in the interpretation of
the spirit of the age, in the practical application of genuine
Christianity, in the reformation of abuses in high and in low
places, in the vindication of the rights of man and in practi-
cally redressing his wrongs, in the moral and intellectual regen-
eration of the race, are the so-called infidels in our land. The
Church has pusillanimously left not only the working oar, but the
very reins of salutary reform, in the hands of men she denounces
as inimical to Christianity, and who are doing with all their
might, for humanity's sake, that which the Church ought to be
doing for Christ's sake ; and if they succeed, as succeed they will,
in abolishing slavery, banishing rum, restraining licentiousness,
reforming abuses, and elevating the masses, then must the
recoil upon Christianity be disastrous in the extreme. Woe!
woe! woe to Christianity when infidels, by force of nature or
the tendencies of the age, get ahead of the Church in morals,
and in the practical work of Christianity. In some instances
they are already far in advance. In the vindication of truth,
righteousness, and liberty, they are the pioneers beckoning
to a sluggish Church to follow in the rear.” To this we
will add the testimony of another orthodox writer (the eminent
Catherine Beecher) as to the superior practical morality of
infidels as compared with that of Christians. She says, in her
u Appeal to the People ” (p. 319), “It has come to pass that
the world has been improving in practical virtue, while the
Church has been deteriorating. The writer, in her very exten-
sive travels and intercourse with the religious world, has had
unusual opportunity to notice how surely and how extensively
this fact has been observed and acknowledged b}r the best class
of clerg3nnen and laymen.” She says one of the most labori-
ous Episcopal bishops of the Western States declares, thatthe
world is growing better, and the Church is growing worse.”
She next cites the testimony of an eminent lawyer and church-
member who is carrying on an extensive financial business
throughout the country, and who makes the remarkable state-
ment, that “ the better class of worldly men are more honorable
302
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
and reliable in business than the majority of church-members.”
(Let the reader mark this statement.) And this declaration
was concurred in by another eminent hrayer, banker, and
church-member, who is doing a more extensive business in the
North-western States than any other man. And he states that
the most extensive business-man in Central New York has
arrived at the same conclusion as the result of his observation.
And the greatest business-man in Boston is also referred to,
whose experience led him to this conclusion. And other busi-
ness-men in different parts of the country testify to the same
effect. We may, then, set it down as the universal testimonjy of
business-men that infidels and “outsiders” are more honest,
more reliable, more truthful, and more honorable than church-
members. What a fatal argument these facts furnish against
the religion and morality of the Christian Bible ! The}r indicate
that the religion and morality of nature and science are supe-
rior.
Burning the World’s Benefactors as Infidels.
It will be perceived, from the preceding orthodox testimonies,
that the class of people usually stigmatized as infidels are the
true exemplars in practical morality, and the true benefactors
of society. And Christian countries owe them a debt of grati-
tude for all the reforms and improvements which have proved
such signal blessings to society within the last few hundred
years, and for their own elevation out of the groveling igno-
rance of barbarism into the glorious sunlight of civilization.
What withering self-reproach, what shameful mortification and
self-condemnation, they ought therefore to feel in view of having
committed so many of them to the flames, or otherwise mal-
treated and killed them! For, according to the above Christian
testimonies, they were the world’s real benefactors ; and the fol-
lowing list will show that those victims perished at the hands
of Christians as infidel martyrs: In 1511 Herman of Ityswiek
was burned for heresy; in 154G Aonius Polearius was hung,
and then burned for skepticism; in 1574 Geofroi Yallie was
burned for publishing a heretical book ; in 1546 Stephen Dolet,
a printer and bookseller, was burned at Paris for atheism; in
SEND NO MOBE BIBLES TO THE HEATHEN. 303
1579 Matthew Hamont had his ears cut off, and was then
burned alive, in England, for denying that Christ is God; in
1583 John Lewes was burned at Norwich, Eng., for “ denying
the Godhead of Christ; ” in 1589 Francis Kett, a member of a
college in Cambridge, Eng., was burned for holding “divers
detestable opinions against Christ, our Savior;” in 1611 Bar-
tholomew Legate was burned to ashes at Smithfield for deny-
ing that Christ was God; in 1644 Edward Wightman was
burned at Litchfield for denying the divinity of Christ; in
1619 Lucilio Yanini, an Italian, was burned for atheistical opin-
ions ; in 1574 John Gonganelle was poisoned for his infidelity
by the Holy Sacrament; in 1629 Alexander Leighton had his
nose slit and his ears cut off, and was imprisoned for eleven
years for publishing a work against miracles. To make the
matter short, without extending the list, it has been estimated
that forty thousand perished at the hands of Christians in forty
years for infidelity, heresy, or other opinions deemed unsound
by orthodox. And thus it will be perceived that infidelity has
had its martyrs as well as Christianity; and that Christians, in
putting these men to death, were robbing the world (according
to “ The New-York Evangelist ”) of its real benefactors. Oh,
shame ! Christianity, where is thy blush ?
CHAPTER LI.
SEND NO MOKE BIBLES TO THE HEATHEN.
A recent work by a Christian writer states that there are now
employed in the work of converting the heathen to Christianity
fifteen thousand missionaries, and that they succeed in convert-
ing about ten thousand a year. From this statement, it appears
that ten thousand missionaries make annually one convert apiece,
while five thousand make none. And the cost the writer esti-
mates to be about twenty thousand dollars for each convert.
Col. Wiseman estimated it, about thirty years ago, to be ten
thousand dollars apiece. And, while these ten thousand con-
verts were made, the heathen population increased in numbers
304
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
five millions. Thus it appears they increase two hundred times
faster than they are converted. How long will it take, at such
rates, to effect the entire conversion of the world? and what will
be the cost ? All the gold ever dug from the mines of Golconda
and California would be but a drop in the bucket compared with
the requisite amount. The question naturally arises here, Do
the results justify such an enormous expenditure of time and
treasure, say nothing of the loss of health on the part of the
missionaries? A learned Hindoo stated, in a speech made in
London in 1876, that the conversions made in India are con-
fined principally to the low, ignorant, superstitious class, who
do not possess sufficient sense and intelligence to know the dif-
ference between the religion they are converted to and the
religion they are converted from. Are such converts worth
ten thousand or twenty thousand dollars apiece? The case
suggests the story of the Hibernian who stated his horse had
but two faults : u First, he is hard to catch ; second, he is no
account when caught.” The heathen must be hard to convert
if it requires an expense of ten thousand dollars apiece, and of
but little account when converted if they know nothing about
the nature of the religion they are converted to. There are
various considerations which go to prove that the hundreds of
millions of dollars expended annually in this enterprise are
worse than wasted : —
1. One missionary, becoming discouraged at the prospect,
once made the statement that nine-tenths of the converts have
not sense enough to understand the Christian religion, nor
moral principle enough to live up to its precepts, and that a
considerable portion of them relapsed into heathenism. It
should 1)0 borne in mind that it is not the most intelligent nor
the most moral portion of the heathen who profess to embrace
Christianity, but generally the credulous, ignorant, and fickle-
minded class, who are ready for any change that may be offered.
2. No real good seems to be accomplished by the introduc-
tion of the Christian llible among the heathen, but much evil.
Its thousands of bad moral precepts and bad moral examples,
and its sanction of every species of crime, must inevitably have
the effect to weaken then* moral resolutions, and deepen them in
SEND NO MORE BIBLES TO THE HEATHEN. 305
the commission of crime. And hence, as missionaries them-
selves indirectly confess, crime has increased in almost every
nation where missions have been established. It is true, that, in
those nations where the arts and sciences have been cultivated,
they have operated to some extent in counteracting the bad
moral lessons they learn by reading the Bible; and in some
cases, in this way, some improvement has been made. But no
instance can be found in the history of the missionary enterprise
where any improvement has been made in the morals of the
people, where their instruction has been confined to the Bible,
without the arts and sciences. On the contrary, their morals
have grown worse, or remained unimproved, as in Abyssinia and
the Samoan Islands, where, after more than a thousand years’
instruction in Bible religion, without the arts and sciences, they
are still in the lowest stages of barbarism. (See Chapter 50.)
u The Bible as a Moral Necessity.”
3. It is a policy that must be deplored by every true philan-
thropist, that the Christian world expends millions of dollars
every year to convert the heathen to a religion that can neither
improve their morals or their intellect, but inculcates bad les-
sons in morals and science, and, in many cases, is a worse
religion than that already established in those countries. (For
evidence, see Chapter 50.)
4. And this policy becomes still more reprehensible when
coupled with the fact that there are sixty thousand Christians
living in a state of want, beggary, destitution, and suffering, in
Christian cellars in New-York City; and two hundred thou-
sand, including Boston and Philadelphia, who are in a state
of degradation and suffering almost beyond description, who
might be relieved and placed in a situation to improve their
morals and their physical condition comfortably if the millions
of money, time, and labor were spent on them which are use-
lessly expended on foreign missions. Think of two hundred
thousand church-members living in dark, damp, dreary, sickly
cellars, with grim starvation daily staring them in the face, while
their purse-proud Christian landlords are living in luxury over
their heads. No such cruel, inhuman religion can be found in
any heathen nation.
306
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
5. And then the missionary enterprise inflicts physical evils,
as well as moral, upon the foreign heathen. It introduces habits
and customs amongst them, which, in some cases, destro}^ their
health, as well as corrupt their morals. Look, for example, at
the Sandwich Islands. Since the establishment of Christian
missions amongst them, the population has decreased thirty
per cent. Twent}r thousand children in schools in 1848 are
dwindled down to eleven thousand. Marriages have decreased,
and divorces have increased. Nine hundred divorces took
place in four }Tears, while previous to the introduction of Chris-
tianit}', we are told, divorces were almost unknown. Mission-
aries, ignorant of plysiolog}7 and the laws of mental science,
and in total disregard of natural law, establish habits among
the heathen which destroy both their health and their happiness.
6. The people in several heathen countries have proved to be
sharp-sighted and intelligent enough to detect the errors in the
Bible and religious sj^stem presented to them b}T the mission-
aries. Bishop Colenso states, that, while serving as missionary
among the Zulus tribe, some of the natives started objections
to statements found in the Bible which had not occurred to his
own mind. And this fact made him resign his mission and
return home, and read his Bible with more care, which resulted
in detecting hundreds of errors in the Holy Book, which he has
published to the world in a large volume. We are informed
that the Hindoos told some of the missionaries while among
them, that such a God as the Christian Bible describes would
not be allowed to run at large in their countiy. lie would be
taken up as a criminal.
7. The natives in several countries where the missionaries
have been operating, on becoming acquainted with the character
of the teachings of the Christian Bible, have raised objections to
its being circulated amongst them, and, in some cases, have
besought the missionaries to leave. The Lev. Mr. Ilall, a mis-
sionary in India, states that a public meeting was called at
Madras by the natives to draw up a petition to Lord Stanley
of England to send no more missionaries, and also entreat him
to withdraw those then operating there; and such was the
interest manifested that the meeting called out ten thousand
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED f 307
people. The Chinese, also, have manifested strong opposition
to the movements of the missionaries among them; while the
Japanese have kept out from amongst them both Bible and
missionaries by positive law until a recent period.
8. The inhabitants of the Friendly Isles, of Honolulu, of
India, and also of Japan, have all discussed the subject of send-
ing missionaries to this country to improve the morals of the
Christians; and it is certain that some of them are practically
acquainted with a better system of morals than that which pre-
vails in this country.
Here we will note the remarkable circumstance that a learned
Hindoo has recently held a two days’ debate with a Christian
missionary, which excited such an interest that it drew together
from five to seven thousand of the natives, who desired to see
the missionary beat in the debate. A writer states that the
Hindoo handled the missionary’s arguments as a cat would a
mouse, thus intimating that the missionary was completely van-
quished in the logical contest; and yet this Hindoo is called
a u heathen.” Pshaw! It would be a blessing to Christian
countries to be supplied with a few millions of such heathen.
It would improve both their morals and their intelligence.
Note. —Many anecdotes are afloat tending to prove the superior moral honesty of the
Hindoos and other “ heathen.” As a traveler was walking the streets of an Asiatic city
with one of the natives, he proposed to step into a store and purchase some article.
“ No,” said the native: “ see that chair in the door to let us know the merchant is ab-
sent.” — “ What! ” exclaimed the traveler: “ do merchants go away and leave their goods
exposed in that way?” — “Yes,” responded the honest native, “when there are no
Christians about.”
CHAPTEK LET. ^
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED ?
u What shall we believe and do in order to be saved? ” is an
all-important query, and one which daily occupies the minds
of millions of earth’s inhabitants of all countries and all climes.
There are ten thousand answers to this question, and they are
as conflicting as the confusion of tongues at the Tower of Babel.
No two religious orders, and scarcely any two religious believ-
308
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
ers, agree with respect to the all-important answer to be
rendered to this all-important question. To prove this, we will
interrogate the disciples of all the leading religious orders who
have found a place in the world’s history, and compare their
answers, and observe the result. Commencing in the order of
time, the disciples of the Vedas will be the first we will
interrogate, as they represent the oldest religious faith that has
ever been promulgated in the world.
I. Hindoo’s Answer to the Question.
Well, brother Hindoo, will 3*ou be so good as to answer this
question, u What shall we do and believe in order to. be saved? ”
“ Oh, yes !” responds the devout worshiper of Brahma, point-
ing to a stone arche.d pagoda. u Go and prostrate 3*ourself in
that hoty building, made venerable b3r a thousand 3*ears’ devo-
tion, and offer up piTiyer and praise to Brahma, and, if you
have committed any sins, implore his forgiveness. You must
also believe in his Hoty Book, the Vedas, and obe3T its precepts,
which enjoin virtue and holiness, and forbid theft, robbe^,
murder, tying, dishonest3r, adulteiy, and other crimes; and
you must not onty believe in the Hoty Book as God’s revealed
will to mankind, but you must believe it is all true, — every word
of it. You must believe, also, that it existed in the mind of the
great God Brahma from all eternity; and some nine thousand
3*ears ago was revealed b3T him to certain hoty men, known as
rishis, or prophets, who recorded it in a book for the instruction
and salvation of the world ; and that this divinety revealed and
perfect book contains all knowledge, past, present, and future,
and all the relirjion necessary to save the whole human race.
And, if you would become a true-born saint [i.e., in Christian
language, “regenerated and born again ”], 3tou must read the
Iloty Book through upon 3’our bended knees. [And thousands
of its most pious and devout disciples have performed this
humble and laborious task.] And if 3*011 would advance still
farther in soul-purification and true sanctit3*, so as to become a
thrice-born saint [for the3r hold that the oftener 3*011 are born
the bettor], then you must commit the divine volume all to
meinoty. [And man3r of them, we are assured, have accom-
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND BO TO BE SAVED ? 309
plisked this herculean task.] But you can not attain to
complete and perfect holiness as a Hindoo saint, unless you
forsake the busy scenes of life, retire to lonely places, and
devote yourselves to a life of religious contemplation.” By
leading this austere, self-denying life, they hold that men and
women can attain to complete holiness, and draw near to the
spirit of God, and become so exalted in his favor as to receive
important revelations from him, and be enabled by him to
perform great miracles, such as casting out devils, raising the
dead, handling fire without being burned, and swallowing poi-
son without being killed or injured, and finally become Gods,
and ascend to heaven in mortal bodies after the manner of
Enoch and Elijah. In one respect some of the sects are much
more consistent than Christian professors. Believing, as Chris-
tians have always professed to do, that sickness is often sent by
God as a punishment for sin, they never send for a physician,
nor allow one to treat the case ; because, as they argue, trying
to cure it would be trying to counteract the judgment of God,
and thus bring down his vengeance upon the heads of those
guilty of this sin. Here Christians might learn an important
moral lesson of the heathen, — that of living up to the doctrines
they preach.
We have, then, the Hindoo answer to the question, “What
must we do and believe in order to be saved ? ’ ’
The Egyptian’s Answer.
Well, brother disciple of the old Egyptian religion, let us
hear your answer to the question, “What must we do and
believe in order to be saved?” — “Well,” replies the believer
in this ancient order of faith, “ if you would make a sure thing
of escaping the pangs of hell, and being saved in the heavenly
mansion, you must not neglect to pray daily to the great God
Tulis, crucified some twenty-eight hundred }Tears ago for the
sins of mankind; and, if you have committed any sin, you
must pray to him to have them canceled from 4 The Book of
Life.’ [For the ancient Egyptians believed and taught that
our evil deeds, as well as our good deeds, are recorded in “ The
Book of Life,” in which St. John represents (see Rev. 22-19.)
310
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
our good deeds alone as being registered.] And, if you would
make a sure thing of being saved in ‘the day of judgment,’
you must intercede with Divine Mercy to erase your evil deeds
from this Book of Life, so that the}7 will not stand against you
in that solemn hour.” Here we find a few of the duties enu-
merated which the disciples of that ancient system of religion
believed and taught were necessary to be comprised in your
religious creed in order to be saved in the great day of accounts.
The Chinese Answer.
We will now interrogate the representative of the religion
of “The Five Volumes,” and hear his answer to this most
important question that ever occupied the thoughts of the human
mind. Well, then, brother Chinaman, please tell us what we
shall do and believe in order to reach the heavenly kingdom
when compelled to quit the things of time. “Why, the most
important thing of all is, to perform your daily vows to God, and
worship him through images prepared to represent him, whether
those images are made of wood or stone or metal, though
you are not to consider these images as the veritable living and
true God.” For no nation was ever so brainless or stupid as
to believe that idols or images made of mere inanimate matter
were living beings, much less a living God. No! the images
which have been represented by Christian writers as being
objects of worship in numerous heathen countries have been
nothing more than mere imaginary likenesses of the Divine
Being, and were gotten up for the same purpose that Christian
men obtain photograph likenesses of their absent friends, and
hang them on the walls of their dwellings. The object is sim-
ply to keep the images of our friends impressed on our minds
in their absence ; and the same motive actuates the idolater in
making supposed images of an absent God. The object is
simply to have something before them that will keep them
in remembrance of him, and his laws and commandments, — a
very laudable motive, most certainly. The}’ arc idolaters, it is
true ; and so are all nations who believe in a personal God,
whether called Jew, pagan, or Christian: for idolatry is de-
fined to be “image-making and image-worship; ” and both
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED? 311
of these acts all religious nations have been addicted to (Chris-
tians not excepted). This can be seen in a moment, when we
look at the essential nature of idolatry; that is, the making and
worship of images. All images are first formed in the mind.
The Christian forms his conception of a personal God in his
mind; and the pagan does the same. Both thus make their
mental images of God. The only difference in the two cases
is, the pagan goes one step farther, and represents his image
in wood, stone, or metal; but it is no more an image than
while it existed only in the mind. Then it is evident there is
no essential difference between them. Both are idolaters. For
a further elucidation of this subject, see the chapter on idol-
atry. And, if you would be saved by the Chinese religion,
there are some practical duties you must perform. You must
live up to the golden rule incorporated in their Bible nearly
twenty-five hundred years ago. You must also observe the rite
of water-baptism; for it has been a religious ordinance amongst
them for several thousand years. And, if you would attain to
complete holiness, you must be kind to all human beings, and
even all animals. Kill no living thing, and eat nothing after
sundown. Then you can be saved by their religion.
The Persian’s and Chaldean’s Answer.
Brothers of the religion of Iran^ can you tell us what to do and
believe in order to be saved? u Yes, indeed. First of all, you
must believe c God’s Living Word,’ the Zenda Avesta ; for that
is the meaning of the term. Zenda means c the life ’ or 4 the
living,’ and Avesta, ‘ the word of God.’ And you must live
up to its holy precepts, which will keep you from committing
sin, and prompt you to lead a virtuous life. You must also
say grace, both before and after eating, as that was their an-
cient custom. But you are forbidden to speculate in any of
the necessaries of fife so as to cause suffering among the poor.
And their Bible declares that he who hoards up grain, and holds
it for a high price, is responsible for all the famine and all the
misery that may take place among the people. [I would recom-
mend modern Christian speculators to borrow this heathen code,
and learn from it some important moral lessons.] To insure
312
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
salvation under this religion, you must also believe in ‘ Mithra
the Mediator,’ crucified for the sins of the world some three
thousand three hundred years ago by wicked hands, but in no
case make any idols or images of God ; for their religion prac-
tically condemns idolatry.”
The Japanese Answer to the Question.
We will now hear from a “heathen” nation distinguished
for good sense, good morals, and practical honesty.
Tell us, then, brother Japanese, what we must do and believe
in order to be saved. “ Well, first of all, you must keep the
Christian Bible out of your houses. Don’t suffer it to enter
your doors. Let all Bibles alone, and obey the inward moni-
tions of your own souls. Your own conscience and experience
and moral sense will teach you that it is wrong to lie, wrong to
swear, wrong to steal, wrong to cheat, wrong to get drunk,
wrong to fight, and wrong to kill.” Now let us learn some-
thing about the moral character and practical fives of this
“heathen nation,” who, for more than two hundred years, have
kept Christian Bibles and Christian missionaries out from
among them, most of the time by positive law. Dr. Oliphant
and Col. Hall, who both spent some considerable time amongst
them, state that the}’ are an honest, upright, moral, and sober
people. With respect to honesty of dealing, sobriety, and ab-
stinence from swearing, quarreling, fighting, or any of the
common vices of society, the best authorities assure us that
no Christian nation on earth will compare with them ; and yet
the}’ conscientiously refrain from reading the Christian Bible.
(See Chapter L. of this work.) What a startling disproof is
here furnished to the declaration of Christian writers that the
introduction of the Christian Bible, and the establishment of
the Christian religion amongst the heathen, arc essential to the
existence of good morals amongst them ! In many cases more
good would be effected by reversing the practice, and sending
heathen missionaries into Christian nations, as the pious pagans
of China, India, and the Friendly Isles have all been talking
of doing; and some of the godly people of India have already
entered upon the worK.
IVHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND BO TO BE SAVED? 313
The Mahomed an Answer to the Question.
Brother disciple of the Koran, will you please to tell us what
the one hundred and fifty million of followers of the great
prophet believe is necessary to do and believe in order to be
saved? “ Yes, certainty. The devout believers in this soul-
saving religion have understood this question for more than a .
thousand years, and know exactly how to answer it. You
must believe that the Holy Book (the Koran) is God’s last
revelation, and his last will and testament to mankind; and
you must shape your practical fives by its precepts, which will
make you 4 true saints,’ and honest, upright, and righteous men
and women. You must also believe that the great prophet is
the true, holy, and appointed messenger of God, and that
Allah is the only true God. To believe, as Christians do, that
God is divided into three persons or beings, or three attributes,
or three branches, known as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is
not only a monstrous absurdity, but a monstrous sin and an
unpardonable blasphemy; and no man or woman who holds
such doctrine can be saved. God is but one, and Allah is his
name, and you must worship him seven times a day; and on
the sabbath day (Friday) you must present yourselves at the
mosque with the Holy Book in your hand, which, having kissed,
you are then to place it upon the holy altar, and listen,while the
priest explains its great truths and its profound and godly
mysteries.” And “ on such occasions,” says Major Denham,
u tears flow in abundance, as under Christian preaching.”
Here, then, you have the terms of salvation and the road
marked out to heaven by the believers in the Koran.
The Christian Churches’ Answer to the Question.
And now, brethren of the Christian faith, we will listen with
attention to your answer to the important question, “What
shall we do and believe in order to be saved? ” But Christian
sects are so numerous, and their views so conflicting, we can
only find room for the answers of a few of the leading churches.
314
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
The Catholic’s Answer,
Well, brother Roman Catholic, as you represent the oldest
Christian denomination in existence, we will first hear from }x>ur
Church in answer to this great question, “What shall we do
and believe in order to be saved?” — “ Well, the question is
easily answered. You must believe that the Bible is the inspired
word of God; that Jesus Christ is the son of God; and that
St. Peter, succeeded by the Pope, is his vicegerent on the earth.
You must also worship, or at least believe in the divinity of,
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and the Virgin Mary; and
adhere to the various rites and ceremonies of the Church.”
The Greek Christian’s Answer.
Well, brother disciple of the Greek Church, “ what shall we
do and believe in order to be saved? ” What do you think of
the Roman Catholic’s answer? Is it correct? “ No, indeed:
far from it. It is an insult to God the Father and God the Son
both to put either St. Peter or the Pope at the head of the
Church. That is the office and mission of Jesus Christ the
Savior ; and he will never save you while you believe such blas-
phemous doctrine.” Away then goes the old mother-church,
with her hundred and fifty millions of souls, down into the
bottomless pit, being ruled out of heaven by the Greek Church;
that is, doomed to eternal perdition, according to the testimony
of the Greek Church.
The Presbyterian’s Answer to the Question.
Well, brother of the Presbjderian order, we will now listen
to your answer to the great question, “ What shall we do and
believe in order to be saved?” IIow about the Greek Chris-
tian’s answer to the question? Is it right? Docs he hold the
true doctrine, or not? “No: very far from it, indeed. Like
the Roman Christian, he believes in the divinity of the Virgin
Marj', and consequently he is an idolater; and no idolater can
be admitted into the kingdom of heaven.” So away goes the
old Greek Church, with her sevent}’ million disciples, down into
the world of endless woe, if the testimony of our Presbyterian
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED ? 315
brother is to be relied upon. And thus two-thirds of all Chris-
tendom, comprising the disciples of the Romish Church and
the Greek Church, are doomed to an endless hell, according to
their own witnesses.
The Unitarian Christian’s Answer.
Our Unitarian brother will now please come forward, and tell
us 44 what we must do and believe in order to be saved.” Do
you indorse any of the answers already obtained, or agree with
any of the churches which have been interrogated upon this
subject, or not? “No: very far from it.” What! you don’t
dissent from the views of the Presbyterian Church upon this
question, do you? “Yes, I do: for they worship 4 the man
Christ Jesus ’ (as Paul truly calls him), and, being but a man,
they are idolaters (like the Roman and Greek Christians) for
worshiping him as a God, and therefore cannot be saved, ac-
cording to the Bible. He was born as a man; he lived as a
man; he ate as a man; he walked as a man; he talked as a
man; he slept as a man, and finally died as a man. And he
calls himself 4 the son of man ’ more than forty times, which
would make him a man. For these and various other reasons
we believe he could not have been a God, but only a man ; and
therefore those who worship him as a God are guilty of idolatry,
— the most heinous sin a man can commit, according to the
Bible. And hence they can not possibly be saved, if the Bible
teaches truly.” Away then goes four hundred Protestant sects
to the regions of eternal torment, if the testimony of Christian
witnesses is to be believed and accepted in the case.
The Jew’s Answer to the Question.
Brother Jew, can you show us the road to salvation, or tell us
what to do and believe in order to be saved? 44 Oh, yes ! it is
a plain question, and easily answered. You must believe that
the Old-Testament Scriptures are the inspired word of God,
and believe in its miracles and prophecies, though you are not
to interpret or construe any of its prophecies as foretelling
the coming and mission of Christ; for, as we wrote them, we
of course know exactly what they teach, and how to understand
316
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
them. And we know most positively that they do not foretell
the coming and mission of any such a being as Jesus Christ as
the promised Messiah.”
“Now, look here, you wicked Jews,” exclaim a hundred
Christian sects, “ you are denying 4 the Lord who bought you,’
and therefore can not be saved.” So six millions of Jews are
consigned by their Protestant brethren to endless torment,—
given over to the bufferings of Satan to all eternity.
The Methodist’s Answer.
Brother Methodist, perhaps you can do something towards
settling this vexed and puzzling question, “What must we do
and believe in order to be saved?”—“ Certainly,” exclaims the
pious disciple of Wesley. “It is perfect^ plain, and easily
answered. You must believe in the Bible as the revealed will
and word of God, and in Jesus Christ 4 the Son and sent of
God ;’ and pour out j’our souls in prajTer and praises to God, and
shout4 Glory’ to his holy name.”—“ Stop ! stop ! ” cries out the
good, pious, quiet, broad-brimmed Quaker. 44 You can not be
saved in that wa}\ You drown the inward monitor of the Holy
Spirit, which must be listened to and obe3',ed in order to insure
salvation. You, by your noisy way of worshiping God, drown
the voice of this inward monitor, and consequently hear and
heed not its admonitions; thus proving that you know nothing
about the true way of worshiping God, or what true religion is.
And therefore there is no chance for you to be saved.” And
thus two millions of Methodists are doomed to eternal woe by
their Quaker brethren.
Tiie Baptist’s Answer.
Brother Baptist, will you give us your opinion, or answer the
question, 44 What shall we do and believe in order to be saved?”
— “Oh, 3'cs! the Bible is so plain upon that subject that no
honest-reader can misunderstand it. You arc to believe in the
Bible ; believe in Jesus Christ, and live up to his precepts ; and
believe in, and practically observe, the sacred ordinance of
water-baptism,.— without which, according to the Bible, it is
impossible to reach the kingdom, or inherit life everlasting.” —
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED? 317
“Stop, stop!” exclaims the drab-cloth Quaker again. “I
perceive that the Baptists, as well as the Methodists, are not
on the road to salvation. No man or woman can be saved who
believes in, and relies upon, the external and carnal rite of
water-baptism. It is a reliance on such outward performances
that causes millions of ignorant and unconverted heathen to
sink to endless ruin every year. They and you are dwelling in
the outer court, and practically know nothing about the true
religion essential to salvation, and hence can not be saved.”
— “ Now, look here,” exclaims the Campbellite Baptist, “ water-
baptism is one of the positive ordinances; and the Bible declares
that no man or woman can be saved without a compliance with
all the ordinances, from the least to the greatest. Therefore
there is no chance for you infidel Quakers to get to heaven;
but you will, sooner or later, be consigned to the pit 4 where the
worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.’ ” And thus we
might pursue the conflicting jargon of answers through all the
churches. But we stop confused and confounded amid chaos,
confusion, and contradiction. All seems to be wild conjecture
and blind guess-work with regard to what we must do and be-
lieve in order to be saved. There appears to be no way of
learning any thing about the road to salvation by the churches.
What is to be done ?
-
The Quaker’s Answer.
Brother Quaker, as you profess to get light from above, per-
haps you can throw some light on this dark question. We have
not yet heard your answer to this puzzling question. Can you
tell us “ what to do and believe in order to be saved” ? “Most
certainly I can,” replies the inspired disciple of Fox and Penn.
“ There can be no mistake about what the Bible teaches on the
subject. It is perfectly plain, and easily understood. You are
to retire into the quiet, and turn your minds inward with a
praj^erful desire to know the will of God. In this state of mind,
open 3’our Bible, and you will learn that you are to do justly,
love mercy, and walk humbly with God, and become estab-
lished in the true faith: for the Bible declares that, 4 without
faith, it is impossible to please God ; ’ that is, faith in his be-
318
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
loved Son, whom he sent into the world to die a propitiatory
offering for the sins of man.”—“ What! ” exclaims the Ilicks-
ite Quaker, “ do j"ou mean to teach the dark and bloody doc-
trine of the atonement ? Do you mean to say that we have to
swim through blood to get to 6 the house of man}" mansions ’ ?
If you do, you are egregiously mistaken. You are teaching and
preaching an old, worn-out, bloody, heathen doctrine that never
did and never can save a single soul.”—“Now, look here,”
cries the orthodox Quaker, “ the Bible declares, ‘There is no
other name given under heaven whereby men can be saved than
that of Jesus Christ;9 and }"OU are blaspheming his name by
denying the efficacy of his death and sufferings. Therefore
your chance for salvation is a hopeless one. You will be lost,
and consigned to the pit where there is eternal weeping and
wailing, and gnashing of teeth.” So away go both the Quaker
orders, each booked by the other for eternal perdition. But we
must stop, or we will swell this chapter on the war of conflicting
creeds to a volume. We have now interrogated all the leading
churches relative to what it is necessar}r to do and believe in
order to make a sure thing of salvation, and escape the awful
and dreadful fate of endless damnation. And what is the
result? No two churches — and it could easily be shown that
scarcely any two Christians — agree upon this all-important
question, upon which they tell us is hung the salvation of the
world. As we have shown, the churches all virtually shut the
door of heaven against each other. They are all off the track,
all on the road to eternal damnation, according to the testimony
of their oxen witnesses. In the name of God, what is the use or
sense, then, of professing to believe in the Bible, or claiming to
be Christians, when it is thus demonstrably proved that nobody
knows any thing about what the Bible teaches, or what it takes
to make a Christian? The picture we have presented is no
more fancy sketch. It is not the work of mere imagination.
Hundreds, if not thousands, of quotations could be furnished
from the writings of eminent Christian writers of the different
churches to show that it is a solemn realitj", and that they differ
in the way, and as widely, as wc have represented. And what
is the solemn lesson taught by it? Why, the absolute imppssi-
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED f 319
bility of our finding the road to heaven through the churches ;
and it is an entire waste of time, besides being demoralizing to
the mind, to attempt it. We are often told by the orthodox
Christians, by way of defending their creeds, that the churches
are agreed upon all the leading doctrines of the Christian faith.
Well, let us see how this is, and whether they in reality agree
upon any thing. We will institute another court of inquiry,
and briefly examine and compare the views of the various
churches relative to the cardinal doctrines of the Christian
religion.
1. Moral Depravity. —The first in order will be the fall and
depravity of man.
Well, brother Calvinist, as you hail from the oldest Protes-
tant Church, we will first solicit your views upon this all-impor-
tant question. We wish to know whether you believe that man
fell from a state of purity, and became morally depraved by the
fall. “ Oh, yes ! we believe he fell so low that he became
totally depraved by the fall; so that all men are now the children
of wrath, born in sin, and conceived in iniquity, and covered
with corruption from the crown of the head to the sole of the
foot.”
Brother Arminian, what do you think of this view of the
matter ? Is it Bible doctrine, or not ? “ No : it is neither accord-
ing to the Bible, nor according to common sense, but a damna-
ble doctrine, that will send any man’s soul to hell who believes
in such outrageous doctrine. It is not only untrue, but it is
demoralizing to rob man so completely of his moral attributes
as to make him feel like a brute, and, consequently, act like
one.”
2. Man's Restoration. — How is this to be effected, brother
Calvinist? “Why, by the outpoiiring of the blood of Christ,
the propitiator}" offering.” Brother Arminian, is this true
Christian doctrine? “No, it is not. Man’s salvation is ef-
fected in no such a way. Every man is to work out his own
salvation. I can prove it by the Bible.”
3. Endless Punishment.—Most Protestant sects hold and
preach that the wicked, when they die, are consigned to a place
or state called “ the bottomless pit.” (How they are kept in
320
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
it with the bottom out, the Lord only knows, or perhaps we
should say the Devil). But the Universalists affirm that the
Bible teaches no such doctrine, but tells us that, “as in Adam
all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive ; ” which proves, as
the}’ affirm, the ultimate salvation of all the human race. But
the Restorationists prove that there is u a mediate place for
souls, which is neither heaven nor hell, but a preliminary and a
temporary abode for all souls, good and bad.”
And there is another class of Christians who find in the same
book a still different doctrine, that of the absolute and total de-
struction of the wicked. They quote Phil. 3-19. Which of these
four Christian sects teach the true Bible doctrine ? Who can
tell?
4. Divinity of Christ.—Most of the Protestant sects tell us
that the Bible makes a belief in the supreme divinity of Jesus
Christ essential to salvation; but the Parkerite Christian, the
Hicksite Christian, and the Unitarian Christian affirm that it
does not, that it only makes him a perfect or superior specimen
of manhood. Which is right? Who can tell?
5. Polygamy. — Most of the churches once believed that
polygamy is a Bible doctrine, and practiced it for eight, hundred
years. But now they tell us it is not. The Mormons, how-
ever, declare that it is sanctioned in the Old Testament, and
not condemned in the New, and hence is a Bible doctrine.
Which is right? How can wc tell?
G. Marriage. —Nearly all the sects hold that marriage is a Bi-
ble institution. But the Shakers declare that it is not, and quote
Christ’s own words to prove it as found in Luke 20-35. “ The
children of this world marry and arc given in marriage; but
they who shall be counted worthy of that world, and the resur-
rection, neither marry nor arc given in marriage.” They rea-
sonably conclude that those who shall not be considered worthy
of being saved (which includes all married people) will not be
saved, being cut off by Christ’s positive prohibition of mar-
riage. Which is right? Who can tell? The text, however,
furnishes a consoling hope for old bachelors and old maids,
to say the least.
7. The Sabbath. —Most of the churches keep the first day
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND BO TO BE SAVED f 321
of the week as the Bible sabbath. But the Seventh-day Bap-
tists affirm that it is not, that the seventh day of the week is
the true sabbath of the Lord; while other sects tell us that
Christ, both by precept and example, labored to do away with
all sabbath observances and all holy days. Which is right?
Who can tell ?
8. The Godhead. — All Trinitarians teach that there are
three persons in the Godhead. The Paulite Christians say there
are but two, while the Unitarians affirm there is but one. Which
is right ? Who can tell ?
9. Baptism. — The churches are not agreed with regard to
baptism as to what it is, how, and when it should be applied,
and on whom it should be administered. Some hold to dip-
ping, some to douching, and some to sprinkling, as the scripture
mode of administering it. Which is right? Who can tell?
I should prefer the dipping process. It would do something
toward saving the body of the sinner from disease, if not the
soul from hell, if frequently applied. He should be baptized
once a week, if not once a day, with water and soap. We have
now enumerated nearly all the leading doctrines of the Christian
faith, and shown that the views of the churches, with respect to
them, are about as different as day from night. The impor-
tant query then arises, What progress have we made'towards
determining, by the Bible or by the churches, what we must do
and believe in order to be saved? Why, about the same prog-
ress the boy had made toward reaching the schoolhouse, who,
on being interrogated by the teacher as to the cause of his late
appearance, replied, 44 Why, master, you see the road was so
slipper}7, that, when I attempted to take one step forward, I
slipped two steps backward.” —44 How did you manage to get
here, then?” asked the teacher. 44 Why,” replied Tom, 441
turned round and went the other way.” I would suggest that
the churches try this policy.of turning round, and going the
other way. My conviction is they would find the true road to
salvation much sooner, and be better prepared to settle the ques-
tion as to what they should do and believe in order to be saved.
It is a question, however, they never can settle. The Bible is
a very old book ; and, the farther we get away from the age in
322
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
which it was written, the more difficult it will become to under-
stand it: for human language, and even human thought and
the meaning of words, are constantly changing. These circum-
stances will constantly augment the difficulty of ever under-
standing any old Bible, or of determining what it teaches or
designed to teach with respect to an important doctrine.
10. The Number of Hells.—When the disciple of the
Christian faith talks of a hell in the presence of a Hindoo, he
tells him he don’t know any thing about the matter : that there
are no less than three institutions of this kind. But here the
Mahomedan rises up, and sa}’s, “ You, too, are totally igno-
rant on the subject; for there are no less than seven institutions
of this character. One of them is set apart for Christians
who believe in the divinity and atonement of Christ.” Lieut.
Lynch, of the United-States navy, says that a Mahomedan
told him, u No man or woman can be saved who believes that
God was born of a woman, and then became a malefactor to a
human tribunal; for the doctrine is blasphemous.” Which of
all these opinions is right? Who can tell?
11. Bible Doctrines constantly changing.—The increase of
intelligence, and the growth and expansion of the human mind,
have the effect to change the views of the people general^ and
constant^ upon almost every subject that occupies the mind;
so that the creeds of the churches are constantly changing.
Hence the Bible is made to teach widelj’ different doctrines in
different ages ; and what is Christianity to-day is infidelity to-
morrow, and vice versa. (See Chapter lviii.) And so thor-
ough is the change wrought upon the meaning or interpretation
of nearly all the important texts in “ God’s perfect revelation,”
that it virtually makes a new Bible for each generation. I will
present some proofs and illustrations of this statement by com-
paring the doctrine of the churches of the last century with
those .of the present. In the days of Jonathan Edwards, a
hell, constituted of a lake of fire and brimstone, was preached
in nearly all the Christian churches ; also the doctrine of infant
damnation, when the Methodists sang that beautiful and charm-
ing hymn, —
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED? 323
“ For hell is crammed
With infants damned,
Without a day of grace; ”
also the doctrine of predestination, the doctrine of election
and reprobation, the doctrine of purgatory, the doctrine of
Christ’s descent into hell, &c. All these and other similar
doctrines were preached in nearly every pulpit nearly every
sabbath ; and the preacher who would have neglected to preach
these doctrines would have been denounced as on the road to
hell. But now the clergyman who should attempt to preach
these old Calvinistic tenets would be denounced as “an old
fog}'.” Hence the important query arises, When were the
churches preaching Bible doctrine, then or now? Who can tell?
Such changes are unceasingly going on. Important changes
are sometimes made in the popular creed in a few years’ time,
as we will cite a case to prove. Just before the last war the
peace doctrine was becoming quite popular in nearly all the
churches, and sermons were often preached from such texts as
the following : “ Nation shall not lift up sword against nation ;
neither shall they learn war anj^ more.” But, when the war
broke out, new texts were hunted up, and the preaching all ran
in the opposite direction. “ Cursed be he who holdeth back his
sword from blood” (Jer. xlviii. 10) ; “He who hath not a
sword, let him sell his coat, and buy one,” —then constituted the
texts for a sound sermon. Now it is evident that a book which
thus teaches opposite doctrines virtually teaches nothing. Its
moral force is destroyed. If a man wants to perform a certain
act to-day, and an act of an opposite character to-morrow, and
can find a warrant for both in the Bible, then it is evident the
Bible can have no effect whatever towards changing his course
of life. When every moral duty is both commanded and
countermanded, and every crime both sanctioned and con-
demned, as appears to be the case with the Christian Bible,
then it is evident that a man with the Bible would act exactly as
the man without the Bible ; for whatever he may naturally feel
inclined to do, or whatever he wants to do, he finds Bible
authority for. Hence it is evident the Bible can’t change his
conduct in the least 5 for it merety tells him to do what he wishes
324
-
TIIE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
to do, and had made up his mind to do. I will prove this posi-
tion by citing several cases for illustration. We will suppose a
man has become convinced by observation, or his own expe-
rience, that it is wrong to drink intoxicating liquors, and wants
Bible authority for preaching temperance. He can find it by
turning to Isa. v. 22: “Woe unto them that are mighty
to drink wine.” But a friend of his, a member of the
same church, living in the city, where there is great demand
for intoxicating beverages, wants to make some money by
selling it. He finds the authority for that act also in Deut.
xiv. 26 : “ Thou shalt spend thy money for oxen, or for sheep,
or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatever th}^ soul lusteth
after.” Another Christian becomes very angry, and filled with
the spirit of a murderer towards a neighbor, and concludes to
kill him. He finds Bible authority for it in the text, “ Go ye
out and slay eveiy man his companion, every man his brother,
and eveiy man his neighbor ” (Exod. xxxii. 27). Another pious
Christian has become convinced, by “ the logic of history,” that
all war and fighting is wrong, and hence concludes to preach
the doctrine of peace. He finds Bible authority for that in the
Decalogue: “Thou shalt not kill.” Another devout Chris-
tian, whose common sense has taught him that it is wrong for
one human being to enslave another, wants Bible authority
against the practice. He finds it in the text, “ Thou shalt pro-
claim liberty through all the land,” &c. Another godty saint,
living in a slave-holding country, and being both a t}Tant and a
mammon worshiper, wants Bible authority for trafficking in the
blood and bones of his fellow-beings. lie finds it in Lev. xxv.
4i): “ Of the heathen round about you shall }’e buy bondmen
and bondmaids, and they shall be your possession for ever; ” so
he knows it is all right. And thus this exposition might be
continued so as to show that there is no crime, no sin, no vice,
and no wicked deed but that is both sanctioned and condemned
by u God’s Iloty Word,” and no moral duty that is not both
commanded and countermanded ; thus proving it to be abso-
lutely impossible to follow it as a guide without being led into
the commission of every species of sin, crime, and abomination,
as well as prompted to the practice of virtue. Eveiy person
T THAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED? 325
who has not made shipwreck of common sense must see at
once that it is utterly impossible to learn any thing about what
is right and what is wrong, what is sin and wickedness, and
what is virtue, what is morality and what is immorality, or
what he should approve, and what condemn, what he should do
and what leave undone, or, finally, any thing about the duties
of life or the rules and principles of morality, by such a book.
What can such a book, then, be worth, either in the cause of
religion or morality ? Where, oh! where is the common sense
of Christendom ? It is wonderful to what extent rationality and
good sense have been banished from the human mind in all Bible
countries by a false and perverted education. It can not be
wondered at that we have so many antagonistic churches with
innumerable conflicting creeds, when we examine and learn
something about the endless contradictions and confusion of
the teachings of the book on which they are founded.
Six Hundred Roads to Heaven.
We are swamped with endless difficulties in determining what
to do and believe in order- to be saved either by the Bible or
the churches, when we look at the fact that there are, as
some writers have computed, more than six hundred conflicting
churches, each one claiming to preach and to teach the only
true and saving faith of the gospel, and yet differing heaven-
wide with respect to what constitutes that true and saving faith.
They point out six hundred roads to heaven, when Christ says
there is but one,—u One Lord, one faith, and one baptism.”
The churches are simply guessing institutions, and their creeds
so many stereotyped s}Tstems of guess-work. How much has
been learned, or what important questions have been settled,
either in religion or morals, by the nearly two thousand years’
reading and study of the Christian Bible ? The six hundred
jarring churches, and their constantly increasing number, fur-
nish a sufficient apswer to this question. What a ludicrous
aspect would the cause of science now be in, and what torrents
of ridicule and contempt would be poured upon our institutions
of learning, if they differed in their principles, or with respect
to the principles of any branch of science, as the churches differ
326
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
with respect to the doctrine of the Bible ! We will illustrate by
an imaginary examination of the students of one of our insti-
tutions of learning with respect to their attainments in mathe-
matics. A class having recited, we will interrogate each one
separately. “Well, John, as you have been studying figures
several years, can you now tell us how many are twice two? ”—
“ Yes, sir : twice two are six.” — “Very well: take your seat.
The next student will rise. James, can you tell us how many
•are twice two?” —6 6 Yes, I can: twice two are eleven.” —
“ Very well: be seated, and let Tommy rise. Tommy, as you
are a diligent student, and have been through the arithmetic and
the principal text-books, please tell us how man}’ are twice
two.”—“ I will. It is a plain case : twice two are fourteen.”—
“ Very well: stand aside. That intelligent-looking boy yonder
we will hear from now. Well, Moses, can you tell us, as the
result of your five years’ close study of mathematics, how man}’
are twice two?” — “ Certainly I can. To be nice and exact
about the matter, twice two are nine and a half.” — “Very
well: I am done with you. There is one more student to be
interrogated. Well, Solomon, can you do any thing towards
settling the disputed question, how many are twice two?” —
“ Yes : I am astonished there should be any difference of opin-
ion about the matter, when it is plain that no person who is
really in earnest to understand it can fail to see that twice two
are seventeen.” Such an institution of learning as this would
be broken up as a nuisance in less than two hours after it was
known to exist; and yet it furnishes a striking illustration of the
character and condition of our theological institutions in which
are professedly taught the science of Christianity and the Bible.
The difference among flic professors and students of theology
is as great and important as in the former supposed case ; and
were not the eyes of the soul put out, and the Christian secta-
rians rendered blind by their false or mistaken teachers, they
would see that this is a true picture of their condition. We will
institute another illustration. The Christian churches are virtu-
ally six hundred guide-boards professedly pointing the way to
heaven. Let us suppose a traveler, hunting his way to “the
Queen City of the West,” finds on a hill a tree or post, to which
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAN ED f 327
are nailed six hundred guide-boards pointing in six hundred dif-
ferent directions, and all labeled “ To Cincinnati.” How much
would he learn from them about the proper road to travel to reach
the city ? The chance of striking the right course would lay
within six hundred guesses ; and those guesses could be made as
well without the guide-boards as with them. And it is equally
certain, and most self-evidently certain, that the road to heaven
could be found as well if there were no churches and no Bibles
pointing six hundred different directions. Indeed, the chances
of finding it would be much better without them, because the
minds of the people are confused and confounded, and their
time wasted, their mental and spiritual vision darkened, and
their judgments weakened, b}^ attempting to grope their way
through such a labyrinth of chaos, confusion, and uncertainty,
which really incapacitates them for searching and finding the
right way and the sure road “ to the kingdom.”
One Hundred and Fifty Bible Translations and Commen-
taries.
When we learn that there have been no less than one hundred
and fifty different translations and commentaries upon the Bible
put in circulation, we can see at once that this is calculated
to greatly augment the difficulty of ever arriving at any thing
like a unity of belief among the churches, or of settling the
question as to what it is necessary to do and believe in order
to be saved, or of finding the road to heaven through the
churches. Translation after translation of the Bible has been
made b}7 different churches, each one alleging that all preceding
translations were full of errors. The learned Dr. Robinson of
England has estimated that some of the modern translations
of the Bible, made for the special purpose of getting the errors
out of “the Hoty Book,” contain the frightful number of one
hundred and fifty thousand errors ; and the American Christian
Union, now engaged in translating the Bible, declare that our
present popular version, translated by fifty-four of the most
learned Christian scholars, and which has long been an estab-
lished standard authority in a large portion of Christendom,
and regarded as nearly perfect, yet contains twenty-four thou-
328
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
sand errors. How many more translations we are to have, God
only knows. The thought occurs here, that, by the time all the
errors are gotten out of the Bible in this way, there will not be
much of it left,—that it will not be much larger than “Poor
Richard’s Maxims,” or a common-sized almanac. Now, to show
the utter impossibility of establishing any doctrine or settling
an}' question in theology by the Bible, or of learning any thing
about what constitutes Christianity, or what we are to do and
believe in order to be saved, we have only to compare some
of these translations together, and* observe the wide difference
in their teachings, and the fatal contradictions in their doctrines
and precepts. We will cite a few examples by way of proof
and illustration. In our translation, known as “ King James’s
Bible,” a text makes Christ say, “ A spirit hath not flesh and
bones, as you see I have ” (Luke xxiv. 39) ; but, in the most
popular translation in Europe (the Douay), this text is made
to read, “ A spirit hath not flesh and blood, as you see I have
not.” Here is a direct contradiction. One of these Bibles
makes Christ say he is a spirit, and the other that he is not,
which is a flat, and almost a fatal, contradiction. Now, where
on earth is the tribunal to which we can appeal to find out
which of these translations is right? or how can the matter be
settled ? Again : the text which in our own version is made to
read, “ There are three that bare record in heaven,—the Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost,” reads in another translation, “There
are three witnesses, — the water, the blood, and the spirit,”
which knocks the trinity and divinity of Jesus Christ both out
of the Bible, so far as they are founded upon this text. We
will cite one more example : “ The wonderful Messianic proph-
ecy ” as it is called (found in Isa. ix. G.), —which reads in our
translation, u Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given,
he shall be called Wonderful Counselor, the Mighty God, the
Everlasting Father,” &c.,—is made in another translation to
say, instead of “the Mighty God,” “the Mighty Ilero,” and,
instead of “ the Everlasting Father,” “ the Father of the ever-
lasting age,” &c., which shows that the text is not a prophecy at
all, and has no more reference to Jesus Christ’than to Mahomet.
“ The Mighty Ilero ” is not a term that is ever applied to God,
WIIAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED? 329
but to bloody warriors. Now, who is to settle the question as
to which of these translations is the right one ? It will be ob-
served, then, that Tve have, in the fifty contradictory translations
of the Bible, no less than fifty contradictory moral codes and
fifty contradictory systems of doctrines, which are virtually fifty
assumed-to-be-perfect revelations from God (of course, all m-
fallible). Now, let us multiply the number of Christian sects
(six hundred) by the number of Bible translations and commen-
taries (one hundred and fifty), and we will have indicated the
number of roads marked out to heaven by the churches. The
result is ninety thousand (600 X 150 =90,000). Here, then,
we have ninety thousand roads leading to u the house of many
mansions/’ which suggests the conclusion that nobody can pos-
sibly miss getting there ; for we must presume that it would be
impossible to travel in any direction without striking one of
these numerous roads: so that the world of sinners may be
comforted with the assurance they will all be saved. ck The
broad road ’ ’ they are traveling must be intersected at many
points by some of these many pathways to paradise ; and they
have only to turn off at the last crossing to be landed safe
in “kingdom come.” They have therefore ninety thousand
chances of being saved by traveling “the broad road,” if they
prefer that to one of “ the straight and narrow roads.” This
soul-saving system may be regarded as a lottery scheme in
which there are eighty-nine thousand nine hundred and ninety-
nine blanks, and but one prize. Who would risk a farthing in
such an investment, with eighty-nine thousand nine hundred
and ninety-nine chances against drawing any thing? Certainty
no person with common sense or any intelligence. We will
use an illustration. We will suppose the proprietor of a brick
building comprising ninety thousand bricks, one of which con-
tains a gold medal worth one thousand dollars, says to one of
his neighbors, “Sir, the walls of this building comprise ninety
thousand bricks, and one of them contains a gold medal worth
one thousand dollars. If you will step to it, and put your finger
on it, you can have it.” Can we suppose he w^ould be very
sanguine about winning the gold medal? Certainty not. We
will make another illustration. We will suppose the Queen of
330
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
England sends a compan}” of a thousand men to Australia to
dig for a treasure known to have been buried there during a
war, the locality of which she describes in writing so accurately
that she presumes there can be no difficulty in finding it. In a
few weeks she dispatches a messenger to the island to ascertain
what progress the miners are making. But imagine his sur-
prise, on reaching the place, to learn that the laborers are
divided up into six hundred companies, and each company
stoutly insisting that the spot where they are digging answers
exactly to the locality described b}^ the written instrument.
Now, on the messenger reporting the case to the queen, what
would she conclude — ay, what could she conclude—but that she
had made some serious blunder or omission in her attempted
description of the place? It is not possible that an explicit
revelation of the matter could have led to such endless confu-
sion and disputes. In like manner we are morally compelled
to conclude — yes, every principle of reasoning and common
sense impels us to the conclusion—that God has made a serious
blunder in attempting to give forth a perfect revelation to the
world, if (as it seems) he has left it so ambiguous, so unintelli-
gible, and so contradictory in its doctrines and teachings, that
six hundred churches have risen up, and are now disputing
about what its doctrines and teachings are. These six hundred
churches comprise a hundred and fifty millions of guessing
Christians, all guessing their wa}T to heaven, with ninety thou-
sand chances against their ever reaching the hcaventy kingdom.
To u the angel host” looking down, observing this infinite di-
versity, demoralization, and conflict among the disciples of the
Christian faith, it must be regarded as a species of religious
monomania ; for we may assume that no intelligent mind, which
is not blinded by religious superstition, could be drawn into such
a delusion as to conclude that such a book or such a religion or
revelation is from an all-wise and all-powerful God, or that it is
necessary to believe it, or that it is possible to believe it in any
rational sense, or that it can have the remotest connection with
our salvation. It makes God a fool, man a lunatic, religion a
farce, and the Bible superlative nonsense. Revelation is defined
to be the act of making known.” But what is made known by
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED? 331
-
a book whose language is so contradictory and so ambiguous that
no two persons in a million agree with respect to all it teaches ?
Every preacher and teacher simpty makes known his ignorance
whenever he assumes to know what the Bible teaches ; and }^et it
is called “ a perfect revelation of God’s will.” It is an assump-
tion that makes God an ignoramus and a tyrant to suppose he
would give forth a perfect revelation to the world, and require us
to accept it as such on pain of endless damnation, and yet leave
it in such a jumbled, bungling, and unintelligent condition that
it is impossible to understand it. Such an assumption certainly
borders on blasphemy. We would charge him with no such
driveling nonsense. It is the legitimate prerogative of reason
to assume that a perfect being could make a perfect revelation
or Bible, the language of which should be so absolutely perfect
and plain that no person of ordinary understanding could possi-
bly fail to understand every text, every word, and every sylla-
ble of it, and no two persons cquld possibly differ about the
meaning of one text in the whole book. Such a revelation or
Bible, and only such, could be ascribed to an all-wise God.
Even men and women can now be found who are so far master
of human language that they can write books so plainly that
there can be no dispute about the meaning of one sentence in
them. To assume, then, that an infinitely wise God could not
produce such a book is to place him lower in the scale of intel-
ligence than a common schoolboy. When, therefore, I find
the Christian Bible so far from possessing such characteristics,
I set it down as prima-facie evidence that an intelligent and
all-wise God had nothing to do in originating it. And if he
were not superior to, or incapable of, such human weakness, he
would reject with contempt and disdain the honor, or rather dis-
honor, ascribed to him in the authorship of such a book, — such
a medley of contradiction, ignorance, superstition, and barbar-
ism as is ascribed to him.
It is sometimes alleged (as we have alread}7 observed) in de-
fence or mitigation of the endless disputes among Christian
professors about the teachings of the Bible, that this disagree-
ment does not appertain to an}7 of the essential doctrines of
Christianity, but only to minor points, or doctrines of minor irn-
332
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
portance. But such an admission is fatal either to their hon-
esty or to their good sense. It concedes that the quarrels
among the churches for ages has been about mere trifles, not
worth spending breath about. It concedes that it is “ non-
essentials, ” or mere trifles, that keep them apart, and that have
led them to build five or six churches, and hire five or six
priests, in every little village throughout the country, at an ex-
pense of many thousand dollars. It is certainly a criminal
waste of time and money to spend it by the million for churches
and priests to propagate doctrines which thej" themselves admit
possess no real intrinsic importance. It shows they have been
actuated by selfish, dishonorable, and ignoble motives in fighting
each other for a thousand years, and in some cases murdering
each other by the thousand, for a difference of opinion they
admit to be of no importance. Those murdered Christians and
devout Bible-believers were charged with preaching damnable
doctrines and devilish heresies; but now we are told it was
minor and unimportant doctrines that they were quarreling
about, and for which they were tortured and killed for preach-
ing. Yes, non-essential doctrine ! 0 temporal 0 mores! But
they make a serious blunder when they talk about non-essential
doctrine; for their Bible teaches that all doctrines are essen-
tial,— that there is no such thing as a non-essential doctrine;
for it first proclaims “one Lord, one faith, and one baptism.”
and then declares that “ he who offends in the least, offends in
the whole.”
These two declarations taken together prove (if they prove
any thing) that there is no “non-essential doctrine,” and
that the slightest departure from the right faith, or the least
disregard of the most trivial doctrine of the Christian creed,
will land the soul of the man or woman in endless perdition
who is guilty of it. The solemn question arises here, then,
Who can escape eternal damnation? For, if there is only one
true faith, then the hundred and forty thousand different and
conflicting faiths cherished and propagated among Christians
must all be wrong but one, — a fact which impels us to the
awful and inevitable conclusion that not one Christian in a thou-
sand— no, not in ten thousand — can be saved by these terms
WHAT SHALL WE BELIEVE AND DO TO BE SAVED? 333
of the gospel. The thought sometimes occurs to the writer,
that no truty enlightened person, possessing a true moral dig-
nity of character, could consent to hang his salvation upon
a book which, after eighteen hundred }Tears of the most criti-
cal investigation and explanation by the most learned minds
in Christendom, still remains a mystery with regard to all
its most important doctrines, so that more than six hundred
churches are now disputing about what it teaches; and the
difficulty is still increasing by the uprising of new churches
with new creeds and new interpretations of the Bible. Let
the reader observe the striking difference in the harmony of
views which prevail in the various scientific societies throughout
the country and those of the churches, and he will discover at
once that there is no science in our religion. Take for example
the astronomical societies. They are all perfectly agreed with
respect to what the great Bible of nature teaches concerning
that science. There is no contention and no dispute with re-
spect to the doctrines and principles of that grand revelation of
nature, because they are all susceptible of proof and demonstra-
tion. Were it otherwise, —were the amateurs and students of
that science divided into six hundred conflicting factions, like
the churches, each with a different theory with respect to what
it teaches,—one contending that the sun rises in the east,
another that it rises in the west; one arguing that the sun is the
revolving center of our solar system, another contending that
the earth is ; one teaching that the starry orbs which roll their
massive forms through infinite space are mere wax tapers stuck
in the azure vault to light this pigmy planet, or mere peep-holes
for Gods to look out upon our world ; and one arguing that they
were all knocked up in a single day out of that singular sub-
stance called nothing, and another that they are the outgrowth
of other worlds, or have existed from all eternity. Had the
author, who was once a member of one of those societies, ob-
served such a chaos of confusion and conflict of opinion, he
would have discovered at once that nothing is really known
about the science of astronomy,—that what is called such is
nothing but a jargon of conflicting dogmas and wild specula-
tions. Hence he would not have remained with them a single
334
TIIE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
da}’ after making suck a discovery. Having learned that the
churches are in such a condition, he withdrew, and has not been
a member of one of those discordant institutions for many
years. He considers it a waste of time to be a member of a
religious body which only increases this difficulty and confusion,
lie has but one life to live, and does not wish to waste that in
a mere wild-goose chase after religious speculations that can
never be settled. Why fool away our lives in chasing theologi-
cal butterflies that can never be caught, when there is a hun-
dred times as much to be learned within the domain of positive
science as can be acquired in a lifetime, that is practically use-
ful and calculated to enlarge the boundaries of our knowledge
and elevate us to a higher plane of happiness, while the occu-
pancy of the mind with theological dogmas is only calculated to
“ lead to bewilder, and dazzle to blind ” ?
Yes, we shall make more progress in learning our duties, in
learning “ what we must do in order to be saved,” if we would
look about us and forward, and endeavor to read the great Bible
or book of nature illuminated by the rays of science, in which
there are no contradictions, no confusion, and where we may
learn of, and, in our finite measure, grow into and partake
of the attributes of the Infinite Father, instead of looking
backward and searching amongst the jarring contradictions,
the creeds, dogmas, myths, and traditions of the past, covered
as they are with the mold and dust of ages.
CHAPTER LIII.
TIIE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION.
“Without the shedding of blood there can be no remission for
sin.” The doctrine of this text constitutes the basis of all the
plans of salvation which various ages and nations have founded
on dead Cods and living devils. Nearly every religious nation
known to history cherished the belief that God is an irritable,
irascible, and vindictive being, subject to fils or paroxysms of
anger; and, when in this furious and unbalanced and ungov-
THE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION.
335
ernable state of mind, he frequently poured out his vengeance
upon his disobedient children, often subjecting them to the most
terrible penalties in this life, and then threatened them with a
still worse doom in the next. To avert this direful calamity, —
at least so far as it appertained to the life beyond the grave, —
most religious nations invented schemes which came to be
known as s}rstems or plans of salvation. The original model
seems to have been furnished by the Hindoos, and borrowed
from them b}T the Egyptians, and thence transmitted to the Per-
sians and Grecians, and was finally incorporated into the
Christian system, and now constitutes what is known as u the
Christian plan of salvation.’5 Each system was composed of
three cardinal principles: 1. The primeval innocency and
moral perfection of man. 2, His temptation and downfall into
a state of moral depravity. 3. His restoration to the divine
favor by the voluntary sacrifice and atoning offering of a God
(one of the three members of the trinity). These three car-
dinal doctrines constitute what Christians denominate ‘4 the
great and glorious plan of salvation,” and on which a thousand
volumes have been written, and ten thousand sermons are
preached even7 year. As it professes to point out the road,
and the onty road, to heaven, it merits a somewhat critical ex-
amination. We will therefore analyze and examine its several
principles, to see whether it has a true moral basis, or is in strict
accordance with the principles of natural justice. The first
proposition assumes that man primordially occupied the highest
plane of moral perfection, and that all his animal propensities
were held in strict abejmnce to his moral convictions, and that
he consequently led a morally pure, perfect, and holy life.
The first and most important query to which this proposition
or assumption gives rise is, Can it be shown to be true? Can it
be sustained by either the principles of natural or moral science,
or by the facts of history comprised in man’s practical life?
Now, it so happens that facts have been accumulating for thou-
sands of }^ears, gathered from almost every department of
science and history, to prove and demonstrate that the proposi-
tion is entirety untenable, —that it is not true. Geology alone
demonstrates its falsity. It has written its negative verdict
upon a thousand rocks beneath our feet.
336
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
These rocks contain the fossiliferous and organic remains of
the earl}" and primitive inhabitants of the earth, and indicate
the order of man’s moral and intellectual development; for as
each successive layer or stratum of fossiliferous rocks, in which
the organic remains of man are found, marks a distinct period
in his history, and the growth of his moral and intellectual
brain is found in all cases to correspond to the age and growth
of these strata, the question is thus settled and demonstrated
by the facts of geological science. As, the older the rocks, the
more remote period they mark in man’s history ; and, the more
remote the period to which it is thus traced, the lower the posi-
tion in the scale of moral and intellectual development his
organic remains prove him to have occupied. The question is
thus reduced to a scientific problem, which admits of no dis-
proof or refutation. It is, then, a settled scientific truth, that,
the further we trace the past history of man by the footprints of
geological science, the nearer he approaches to the condition
of an animal, — when he was almost totally devoid of intellec-
tual perceptions and moral feelings, and was consequently a
victim to his lusts and animal propensities. Where, then, w-as
his moral purity and perfection, or his angelic holiness? The
doctrine is thus shown to be false and fabulous. All the skulls
of the primitive races that have been found by geological re-
search show that man, in his first rude type, had scarcely any
moral brain; and the history of the race at that period shows
that lie possessed a correspondingly low, weak, defective moral
character, so much so that he could scarcely be considered a
moral, accountable being. To talk, then, of his occupying a
high moral plane at that early period, is to contradict every prin-
ciple of science and every page of history. His animal propen-
sities and selfish feelings must have held complete sway over the
whole empire of mind for thousands, if not for millions, of years ;
so that his moral status was but little above that of the brute.
The facts of science and history to prove this proposition are
abundant; but, as we are compelled to constantly observe the
most rigid rules of brevity, we can only find space for one or
two proof-illustrations. Human skulls have been found em-
bedded in the rocks of Gibraltar with retreating foreheads,
THE TEHEE PLANS OF SALVATION
337
-
prognathous jaws, and frontal bones an inch thick, and the re-
ceptacles for both the moral and intellectual brain very small,—
all of which denote very weak moral and intellectual minds, and
a preponderance of the animal feelings ; and geologists have de-
cided that sixty-five thousand years must have elapsed since
those bones and skulls were deposited in those rocks. Hun-
dreds of similar facts have been gathered b}r geologists, and
might be cited: but this one case is amply sufficient, and fur-
nishes as conclusive proof as a thousand could do that the prim-
itive inhabitants of the earth were on a low mental status, and
that they were greatly inferior in morals and intellect to the
least-developed minds of the present age; and consequently
man’s course has been upward, and not downward. There has
been no falling, but a gradual rising, in both the moral and in-
tellectual scale. It shows that man was at the very foot of the
ladder at the commencement of his moral and intellectual
career. —that he was flat on his back in the ditch ; and, conse-
quently, there was no lower place to fall to. The first proposi-
tion, then, is shown to be false, — that man originally occupied a
high moral position, and that he was in a state of moral purity
and perfection.
The second proposition—that of man’s fall and moral degen-
eracy — is likewise shown to be false by the same facts ; for, if
he was never in a state of moral purit}’ and perfection, then it is
evident he never could have fallen from such a state. It would
be superfluous, then, to attempt to show that man never fell,
after having shown that he never occupied a high moral position
to fall from. He could only fall in the sense the Scotchman did,
who stated he fell up a well sixty feet in a bucket. It is settled,
then, geologically, scientific all}’, and demonstrably, that man
never fell in a moral sense.
We will now proceed to present what is presumed and assumed
to be the scriptural exposition of man’s original condition and
faU.
We are told in the first chapter of Genesis, that, when God
had completed the work of creation, he pronounced it aH, not
only good, but “ very good,” which indicates a state of perfec-
tion ; but it appears the words were hardly out of his mouth
i
338
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
till a very bad being, called a serpent, came crawling into the
garden on his back, to furnish practical evidence that Moses’
God was mistaken in having pronounced every thing so 4 4 very
good.” We have to assume that he came into the garden of
paradise on his back, because the reverse mode. of traveling
was not adopted until after the fall; that is, till after he was
doomed to that mode of travel as a punishment for having
tempted and beguiled Mother Eve to try her new molars and
incisors on some fruit (supposed to be pippins) hanging on a
tree, which, it appears, underwent the rapid process of blossom-
ing, and bearing fruit that ripened in a few hours after it was
planted. And thus the serpent, although a senseless reptile,
committed the first sin, — the first violation of moral law. The
first question that naturally arises here is, Why was not the
fence around the garden of paradise made snake-proof, so as to
keep his snakeship out? Or shall we presume the gate was
left open, and that he entered in that way? This, however,
would indicate a blundering carelessness on the part of Jehovah,
which we dare not assume. Another question arising here is,
Why was not the angel with the flaming sword, which, we are
told, was placed over the door or gateway to guard it from
intruders, —wh}r was he not placed there sooner? Why was he
not placed there before the fall, instead of after, so as to bruise
the serpent’s head, or behead him, on his attempting to enter?
To place a guard over the gate after the Devil had entered, and
caused the effectual downfall and ruin of the human race, and
thus perpetrated all the mischief he could, looks very much like
locking the stable-door after the horse is stolen.” And the
quay also arises here, Are we not compelled to conclude that
Moses’ God was a little short-sighted, and rather hast}’ in his
conclusion that every thing was so “ very good,” when the ser-
pent proved to be so very bad ? The only way to escape this
dilemma is to assume that God did not make him, and that con-
sequently lie was not included in the original invoice of goods and
chattels which were pronounced “ very good ; ” but, in adopting
this expedient, we only leap “ from the frying-pan into the fire : ”
for the assumption does not do away with the difficulty, be-
cause it is declared that God made cveiy thing that was made.
THE THBEE PLANS OF SALVATION.
339
Hence it is evident that, if he were made at all, the God of
Moses made him; and, if he were not made, then it follows
that he is a self-created or self-existent being, and invested with
all the attributes, powers, and prerogatives of God Almighty
himself. And thus we would place two omniscient, omnipotent,
and omnipresent beings on the throne of the universe ; which is
not onty a moral contradiction, but a moral impossibility. We
will assume, then, for the sake of the argument, that God did
create the Devil, — an assumption, however, which brings us into
still greater difficulty. Christ sa3~s, by way of illustrating
human character, that “ a tree is known by its fruit. A good
tree can not bring forth evil fruit; neither can a corrupt tree
bring forth good fruit.” In this case God the Creator is the
tree, and the Devil the fruit; and one is good, and the other
evil. Here, then, is a good tree bearing evil fruit, which seems •
to furnish the most positive proof that Christ’s moral axiom,
u A good tree can not bear evil fruit,” is false. There is evi-
dently something wrong somewhere in this moral picture. Either
Christ was mistaken, or the Christian world is wrong in assum-
ing the existence of this omnipotent and independent being of
an opposite character. It presents us with a moral paradox
which no theologian in Christendom has yet been able to solve.
We are compelled to assume that both beings are good, or both
evil, and that they co-operate and act in harmon}^; or that a
good God made a wicked Devil,—i.e., “a good tree brought
forth evil fruit; ” or else we must reject the Christian system of
salvation, and assume the existence of but one invisible and Al-
mighty Being, who orders every thing for the best. The absurd-
ity we have just noticed is but one of man}", both of a moral and
of a scientific nature, equally senseless and foolish, which we find
involved in the Christian plan of salvation. We will notice a few
others. According to Christian theolog}T and Christian logic,
all evil or sin that is committed is prompted by an evil tempter.
Scientists and Harmonialists account for such actions by tracing
them to the abnormal or perverted action of natural faculties,
powers, and propensities, which, in their healthy state, are produc-
tive of good alone, and not evil; and thus making them the product
of the mind itself in its unhealthy condition. But Christian
340
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
theologians tell us it is a separate, evil genius operating in the
“inner man” which does all the mischief, and prompts the
possessor to the commission of sin. But this assumption gives
rise to endless difficulties, some of which we will state in the
form of questions. We would ask, then, in the first place, if
all sin or evil is prompted by an evil tempter, how came the
original tempter himself to fall victim to sin? Who put him up
to it, seeing there was no tempter in existence but himself ? In
such a dilemma, we must either assume that Divine Good-
ness was his tempter, or that he tempted himself. To make
him his own tempter would involve us in an egregious absurdity,
equal to that of Guy Faux lifting himself by the straps of his
boots ; and to make God the tempter would relieve his Satanic
Majesty of all responsibility in the case, and make God alone
accountable for the sin, and also the author of sin. This, how-
ever, they do by other assumptions. Books enough have been
written to form a library by orthodox writers in the attempt to
rescue their God from the odium and responsibility of being the
author of sin ; but, under their system of theology, he can not
escape the stigma. No sensible construction of an}" orthodox
system can save God from the authorship and responsibility of
sin. They all teach that God created man, and man committed
sin. This makes God the author of sin, either directly or indi-
rectly, in spite of all the logic and lore that ever has been, or
ever can be, made use of to escape the conclusion; for even
if it could be successfully shown that God did not implant in
man the desire or inclination to commit sin, and he derived this
inclination from the Devil, it can not be denied that God is
responsible for allowing the Devil to exist, or, if this could be
denied, would still be responsible for leaving man so morally
weak as to be overcome by the Devil. If he is infinite in good-
ness and infinite in power, as they teach, then, if lie did not
fortify man with sufficient moral strength to resist all tempta-
tion to sin, the act of sinning becomes his own. No logic and
no sophistry can resist this conclusion. It is now a settled
principle in moral ethics, that what any being does through an
agent he does himself, and is as responsible for it as if he per-
formed the act with his own hands de facto. If, then, God
THE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION
341
created the Devil, and he turned out to be the agent of evil or
sin, it was only a roundabout and indirect mode of performing the
act himself. This is a logical syllogism which defies the ingenu-
ity of the orthodox world to overturn. The most plausible plea
in the case is, that the Devil was originally a good being, but
fell from grace. According to several Bibles, he is a fallen
angel; but it is evident that he could not fall unless he pos-
sessed some inherent moral weakness that caused him to fall.
A perfect being could not fall. It is, then, self-evident that
inherent moral weakness was implanted in him by his Creator.
This would make his Creator responsible for his moral weakness,
which caused him to fall. And thus the question is settled
logically, philosophically, and morally.
We will now proceed to examine the nature of the diabolical
act which caused the downfall of the human race, — 44 the original
sin,” as it is called. We are told it consisted in eating some
fruit which grew on a tree God himself had planted in the Gar-
den of Eden, and forbidden to be used. Why it was inter-
dicted from use is not explained in the Christian Bible ; but it is
rendered plain by the relation of the same story in other Bibles.
In the Persian version it is stated that the tree bore the
twelve apples of immortality, and that the Devil, in the shape
of a monkey, guarded the tree, to prevent the genus homo
from partaking of the fruit; as tradition had taught them,
that, by so doing, man would become immortal like the Gods,
and live for ever. This the Gods deprecated, as they allowed
no other beings to become equal to them, and hence had the tree
guarded to save the immortal fruit. But the Christian Bible is
entirely silent as to the purpose of planting the tree, or forbid-
ding its fruit to be eaten. It cuts short man}7 stories which we
find more amplified and in fuller detail in older Bibles. No
reflecting or unbiased mind can see any wisdom or any sense
in permitting or causing a tree to bear fruit, and then decreeing
that it shall all go to waste by interdicting it from being used,
as Jehovah is represented as having done. Certainly no sensi-
ble God would act thus. And if Adam and Eve were 44 very
good,” as he himself declared them to be, must we not consider
it an ungodly and a tantalizing act to place fruit within their
342
TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
reach, and then forbid them to touch or taste it? It looks more
like the act of a fiend than that of a kind and loving father, who,
we would naturally suppose, would be so pleased with his newly
made children that he would do every thing possible to please
them and make them happy. If the fruit was an improper
article of diet, it should have been placed out of sight, or ren-
dered unpalatable, so that they should not desire to eat it. If
Adam and Eve were very good beings, and God both infinitely
good and infinitely wise, he could and should have placed them
in a condition from which they could not fall, and in which they
would have possessed no inclination to do any thing wrong. I
can see no possible benefit to arise from surrounding them with
temptations to commit an act that would ruin them eternally,
and their posteritjr after them. The plea is sometimes urged
that it was moralty necessaiy for the original progenitors of the
race to possess the power and liability to sin, in order to make
them free agents. Free agents, indeed! That is certainly a
novel kind of free agency, which not only makes a man free
to commit an act which it is known will lead to his own destruc-
tion and the ruin of the entire human race, but implants in him
the inclination to do it. This is free agenc}r run mad.
We will illustrate the principle. A mother sees her little child
approaching an open well, and turns heedlessly away, and lets
the child rush into the jaws of death; and, when reproved for
the act, she raises the plea, u Oh, I did not want to interfere
with its free agenc3r!,, Here is the Christian logic of free
agenc}7 put in practice. God is represented as setting traps
around the human family, knowing the}' will be caught; and
this is called moral freedom or free agency. The rat enjoys the
same kind of moral freedom when he creeps beneath the dead-
fall in quest of food, and takes the chance of misplacing the
triggers. There is no free agency in any rational sense in fur-
nishing a man with a rope to hang himself, knowing that it
would Ik* used for that purpose; and this the orthodox God
has done for the whole human family, so that wc are all now
suspended on the gallows of total depravity and moral death.
THE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION.
343
The Fall and Curse.
We will now notice some of the u awful consequences 99 said
to have resulted from eating the forbidden fruit, — u the world-
wide curse 19 pronounced upon the human race as the penalty for
that act. Several distinct effects are enumerated as conse-
quences of the deed. But a critical investigation of the matter
in the light of the present age will show, that, instead of being
curses, they are blessings, and have added greatly to the enjoy-
ment and happiness of the human famity; and, consequently,
we should now be in a more deplorable condition than we are
if “ our primitive parents 99 had heeded the divine interdiction,
and let the fruit alone. We will look briefly at some of the
consequences, and observe whether the}^ have really turned out
to be curses, or not. The first effect produced by the act of
Father Adam and Mother Eve eating the forbidden fruit appears
to have been that of opening their eyes so that the}r could see
and distinguish objects around them. It certainly was a very
singular way of cursing human beings to grant them the glorious
boon of vision, and thus relieve them from the necessity of
groping their way through life. As to the gift of sight being
a curse, there are thousands of human beings now in the world
who would like to be cursed in that way, — those who were born
blind, or have lost their sight. u The rest of mankind ” would
consider it to be a great misfortune or curse to be placed in the
original condition of Adam and Eve in this respect. We must
admit, then, that this curse turned out to be a blessing, and that
we are indebted to the serpent-devil for it; and, consequently,
he should not have been doomed to dine on dust as a penalty for
conferring this blessing upon the human race.
The second consequence growing out of the act of eating
the interdicted fruit appears to have been the acquisition of a
knowledge of good and evil; that is, the power of distinguish-
ing between good and evil. But this, so far from being a curse,
was Jan inestimable and indispensable blessing; for, without
the attainment of this knowledge, they could not have known
that any act was evil, and hence would have been liable to
plunge into all manner of crime, pillage, debauchery, murder,
344
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
&c., until they effected the entire extinction of the human race.
The acquisition, then, of the knowledge of the moral difference
between good and evil was an invaluable blessing, and no curse
at all; and, having been brought about through the agency of
the serpent-devil, he should have the credit of it.
The third effect produced by plucking and eating the pre-
scribed fruit was the discovery that they were naked. Why
they had not made the discovery before is a mystery of godli-
ness. The people of the present age, although presumed to be
in a state of degeneracy, if not total depravity, do not require
the use of their eyes to know when they are naked; but it
seems, that, before the fall in a state of moral perfection, such
knowledge could only be acquired through the optic nerves.
Hence 44 the perfection of our first parents,” so often spoken of
and lauded by the orthodox world, must simply have been the per-
fection of ignorance ; and it is true, if their history is true, that
they were most consummately ignorant until the}' were enlightened
by the serpent. They were too ignorant to clothe themselves.
God Almighty had to forsake the throne of heaven, and come
down to earth, to make garments of goatskins for them, before
they could be sufficiently habilitated to go abroad, or admit
company. Their two sons, however, were the only company
the}' were permitted to enjoy at that time. And one of these
turned out to be a murderer ; and, having killed his only brother,
he fled to the land of Nod, and married a wife, although, ac-
cording to the *4 inspired account,” his mother was the only
woman then living. It seems strange, under such circumstances,
that lie should marry a wife when there were no women to make
wives of. After he had killed his brother, and repented of it,
a mark was set upon him, that 44 whosoever found him should
not slay him. ’’ But how could this 44 whosoever99 know what the
mark meant? And who was this 44 whosoever,” when lie himself
had killed off the whole human race, excepting his father and
mother? And we presume they would not be likely to slay their
own and only son if there were no mark set upon him to prevent
it. Hp to this period the conduct of the serpent-devil had been
very respectful, and every act performed had resulted in a direct
benefit to the human family. Even his conduct towards Mother
THE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION
345
Eye seems to have been marked by politeness ; for he served her
with fruit before partaking of it himself. For these good acts
he deserved the use of his legs, which, we must presume, he lost
by the fall, when he transgressed, fell, and was cursed ; and
a part of this curse consisted in taking his legs from him, and
compelling him to crawl. But it appears his legs were after-
wards restored to him; for, when he came with the sons of
God to attend a picnic at the house of Job, and was asked
where he came from, replied, u From walking to and fro in the
. earth.” This feat of walking he could not very well have per-
formed without legs. Hence we naturally conclude they had
grown out again, or had been restored to him in some way, not-
withstanding it had been decreed he should ‘ ‘ crawl on his belly
all the days of his life.” The. whole story of the serpent, as pre-
sented in Genesis, is a borrowed and laughable fiction ; and the
reader will excuse us for presenting it in that light.
We have shown that the violation of the command of Jehovah
to Adam and Eve not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowl-
edge, so far from being attended with any evil result, gave rise
to several important benefits, and was therefore a praiseworthy
act. And if they had carried the act of disobedience a little
further, and plucked and eaten of the fruit from the “ tree of
life” also, it would, according to the context, have produced
results still more important, as it would have immortalized their
physical bodies, and prevented the ingress of death into the
world ; and we should have been spared that dreadful calamity.
But a worse calamity would have overtaken us ; for it is easily
seen, that, in the course of a few centuries, our planet would be
overstocked with inhabitants. And, as a part of Adam’s curse
consisted in being doomed to eat the ground (see Gen. iii. 17),
it follows, that, if none of his posterity had died, the}' would have
become so numerous in the course of time as to have eaten up
all the ground (there being nothing else for them to eat), and
leave not a mole-hill of terra firma for a living being to stand
upon. The conception is really ludicrous, and yet a legitimate
inference from the stor}T which presents us with a series of laugh-
able ideas from beginning to end.
We will now notice the sentence pronounced upon the several
346
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
participants in this fabled rebellion against the divine govern-
ment, and observe how, or to what extent, they were realized.
Adam, Eve, and the snake were the culprits arraigned at the
bar under charge of being rebels ; and, all being found guilty, a
sentence was pronounced upon each separately. We will exam-
ine them in their order. The first part of Adam’s curse con-
sisted in being doomed to die, — 44 The day thou eatest thereof,
thou shalt surely die” (Gen. ii. 17). The serpent, however,
took the liberty to contradict and counteract the sentence, and
told him he should not die, but that partaking of the fruit would
make him 44 wise as the Gods, knowing good and evil.” Now,
the first question which arises here is, Who told the truth in the
case, —Jehovah, or 44 the father of lies ” ? In the eighth chapter
of Genesis wTe read, 44 All the days of Adam were nine hundred
and thirt}^ years, and he begat sons and daughters.” It will be
seen, then, that he did not die in 44 the day thereof,” nor the
year thereof, nor the century thereof; so it appears the serpent
told the truth, and Moses’ God told the falsehood, or was mis-
taken. Hundreds of Christian writers and commentators have
racked their brains to find some plausible mode of disposing of
these difficulties. The most specious one they have resorted
to is that of assigning the text a spiritual signification, and
alleging that it was a spiritual death that was intended in this
case. But the text does not say so ; and the context shows it
was not so: for it is declared, 44 Dust thou art, and unto dust
shalt thou return” (Gen. iii. 19), which shows it was not
spiritual but physical death that was meant; and this did not
take place for more than nine hundred years after the sentence
was pronounced.
The second part of Adam’s curse consisted in being driven
out of the garden, and compelled to engage in agricultural pur-
suits ; that is, lie was sentenced to earn his bread by the sweat
of his face. (Sec Gen. iii. 23). But the experience of nearly
the whole human race, from that period to the present time,
proves that the sweating part of the operation is no curse at all,
but a real blessing; for no person in warm climates can enjoy
good health without perspiring occasional^; and as for labor
being a curse, because said to have been pronounced upon
THE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION.
347
Adam as a penalty for transgression, the experience of all who
have tried it, and the present condition of the civilized world,
proclaim it to be untrue. Indeed, we must consider it a very
fortunate circumstance that he was driven out of the garden,
and compelled to embark in agricultural pursuits, not only on
account of such employments being conducive to health, but
because the very existence of human life depends upon it in all
civilized countries. It is the source whence we derive all our
food, all our clothing, and nearly all the comforts of life. No :
it is laziness, aot labor, that curses the race ; and the most ac-
cursed set of beings are the drones, the soft-handed gentry,
who are almost as afraid of a hoe, axe, or spade, as they are of
the measles or small-pox, having been erroneously taught that
labor is a curse.
The third item in Adam’s curse consisted in being doomed
to eat the ground, — u Cursed is the ground for thy sake, and
in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life 99 (Gen. iii.
17) ; but we have never seen any report of either Adam or any
of his posterity eating the ground, or making it an article of
diet. It will be observed, then, that no part of the sentence
pronounced upon Adam turned out to be a curse, but, when
realized at all, was realized as a blessing.
The sentence pronounced upon the woman was also of a
threefold character. In the first place, she was doomed to
“ bring forth children in sorrow 99 (Gen. iii. 16). And her pos-
terity, we are told, inherited the curse, and must suffer in the
same way; but the history of the human family shows that
many individuals, and whole nations in some cases, have never
suffered this affliction. It is well known that the mothers of
some of the African tribes, also some of the tribes of Ameri-
cans, never suffer in childbirth. Hence it will be seen that the
curse in the general sense implied by the text is a failure in this
case also.
The second punishment to which woman was to be sub-
jected was that of being ruled over by her husband. This
portion of her curse, we must confess, has not been an entire
failure. Many women, even in civilized countries, are not only
ruled over, but tyrannized over, by their husbands. Yet this
348
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
state of things has by no means been universal. On the con-
trary, in many cases, woman has been the ruling party ; and, in
some instances, they have not merely ruled their own husbands,
but all the husbands in the nation. Queen Mary, Queen Anne,
and Queen Victoria, and many others, are examples of this kind ;
and then there have been thousands of women in all ages and
countries who never had any husbands. Consequently the curse
is a failure in their cases. The curse of husband-dominion, then,
has not fallen upon woman as a sex.
There was to be enmity between the seed of the woman
and the seed of the serpent (i.e., their offspring) as the third
part of woman’s curse ; but we find no evidence that this part
of the curse has ever been fulfilled. We observe no more en-
mity between men and serpents than between men and other
noxious reptiles and ravenous beasts. How much enmity exists
between the Hindoo juggler and the serpent that twines around
his arm and neck, and crawls through his bosom? We may be
told in reply that it is not the common serpent that is referred
to here, but the serpent-devil that beguiled Eve ; but we do not
learn that his Devilish Majesty ever had any offspring. So this
part of the curse, in a general sense, is a failure also.
Tiie Curse of the Serpent.
The curse pronounced upon the serpent was of a twofold
character.
He was doomed to crawl upon his belly. How 'he traveled
previous to that period we have no means of knowing, as reve-
lation is silent on this momentous subject. lie must have
crawled on his back, or hopped on his head or tail, — either of
which we should consider a much more difficult mode of travel-
ing than that inflicted on him by the curse. I can see no curse
or punishment in an animal or reptile traveling in its natural
wa}r, and by the easiest mode known in the whole animal king-
dom. To make a curse of his mode of travel, he should have
been turned the other side up, so that, while wiggling or wrig-
gling along on his back, his eyes and mouth would get full of
dust and mud. This would have been much more like a pun-
ishment,— a more real and sensible curse than his present mode
of traveling.
THE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION.
349
The second mode of punishing the serpent was to compel
him to eat dust as an article of diet; but some difficulty must
have arisen in attempting to comply with the injunction. When
the ground is saturated with water, he would have to take a
meal occasionally of mud, which would not be more nutritious
than dust, and would not be fulfilling the law. But it is need-
less to speculate. It is evident he does not subsist in that wa}",
but, like the other culprits, escaped the penalties or punishments
due to his crime.
I have now examined all the items of the curse — eight in
number — said to have been visited upon Adam, Eve, and the
serpent; and what do they all amount to ? Not one of them has
been realized as such ; but most of those which were practically
realized turned out to be real blessings. And yet they have
been proclaimed to the world by the clergy as the missiles of
wrath hurled upon a guilty world for the sin of rebellion against
the divine government; and, whether any of these so-called
u visitations of divine displeasure’ 9 were designed as penalties
for disobedience or not, it is evident they have not in a moral
sense been realized, or had any beneficial effect whatever. And
we must conclude that it was rather short-sighted in •Moses’
God to attempt to bring his children into obedience by pro-
nouncing curses upon them. He himself virtually acknowledges
it; for, after having tried these expedients and found they availed
nothing, he became so discouraged, that he said, “It grieved
him to the heart” (see Gen. vi. 6) that he had made so rebel-
lious a creature as man.
The Second Scheme op Redemption.
The God of Moses, after having tried the expedient of curs-
ing his children, —the cunning workmanship of his hands, — and
grieved over the failure for more than a thousand years,—he
(the God of Moses) came to the conclusion to try another ex-
pedient. He concluded to select a few of the choicest speci-
mens of the genus homo, in order to preserve the race, and start
anew with some of the best stock or material that could be
found. Accordingly, old drunken Noah — the most righteous
man that could be found amongst the millions of the inhabit-
350
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
ants of the globe — was chosen to build a schooner, yacht,
canoe, or some kind of a vessel, called an ark, into which he
stowed millions of birds, bipeds, and insects of all species
and all sizes, from the ostrich and condor down to fleas, flies,
mosquitoes, spiders, and bed-bugs; and millions of animals
and reptiles of all kinds and all sizes, from the mammoth and
the mastodon down to skunks, lizards, snakes, gophers, and
grasshoppers; together with himself and family of eight persons,
and food sufficient to last them ten months while in the ark,
and several years afterwards, as we must presume was done
from the fact that it is declared that the waters destroyed every
living thing upon the face of the earth. And it must have re-
quired several years to restock it with grass and animals to
serve as food for the granivorous, herbivorous, and carnivo-
rous species ; and this would make a bulk sufficient to fill forty
such vessels, and a weight Sufficient to sink the whole British
navy. And all this living mass of respiring and perspiring
animals were dependent upon one little window twelve inches
by fifteen for light and air, and which had to be kept shut most
of the time to keep out the rain. If some giraffe or cameleo-
pard had been disposed to monopolize the window by thrusting
his head out, we can easily imagine what would have been the
fatal consequence to this living, breathing cargo. And then
we have to entertain the thought that lions and lambs, wolves
and sheep, dogs and skunks, hawks and chickens, owls and
doves, cats and mice, men and monkej’s, all ate and slept to-
gether inimmediate juxtaposition like a band of brothers. Per-
haps more glorious times never were realized since 4ttlie sons
of God shouted for jo}’.” But it appears the whole thing
turned out to be a failure. The drowning process was no more
effectual in producing the desired reformation than the first
scheme that had been tried ; for, only a few hundred years after
the culmination of this world-drowning experiment, Moses’ God
is represented as crying out in despair, “ The imagination of
man’s heart is evil, and onl}r evil continually.” This was cer-
tainly a deplorable and disheartening state of things witnessed
so soon after it had been presumed that all the bad folks had
been drowned; but it appears, that, if all that class had been
THE THREE PLANS OF SALVATION.
351
-
drowned, there would have been no human beings left. David,
therefore, was probably right when he exclaims, 44 There is none
that doeth good, no not one ” (Ps. xiv. 3).
The Third and Last Plan of Salvation.
The atonement was the third and last resort. The third
experiment in any case generally ends the siege whether suc-
cessful or unsuccessful. After a few thousand years more had
elapsed of grief, anger, and disappointment in the practical
history of Moses’ God, he ventured to try one more experiment
in the effort to get his people in the right track, — not so much,
however, to get them in the right way, as to have his own
wrath appeased. In this way he sanctions the greatest crime
ever perpetrated by the hand of man, — that of murder. God
the 44 Father,’ in order to cancel the sins of his disobedient
and rebellious children, and mitigate his own wrath, is repre-
sented as proposing to have his 44 only-begotten son ” killed, —
at least, as consenting to the act. This looks like 4 4 doing evil
that good may come of it; ” which is a very objectionable prin-
ciple of moral ethics, according to Paul. How the commission
of the greatest of all sins can do any thing towards reforming
other sins, or how the punishment of an innocent being can do
any thing towards atoning for the sins of the guilty, presents
us with a moral problem, shocking both to our common sense
and common reason. If the Father’s anger could not be ap-
peased or his vengeance satisfied without the perpetration of a
horrible murder, and the knowledge that some victim had died
a slow and agonizing death, we are forced to the conclusion
that he is a cruel and revengeful God, and that his passions
overrule his love of justice and his paternal regard for his son.
But it appears that this last experiment, whether right or wrong,
was attended with as complete a failure as the two preceding
ones ; and yet it assumes to be* the best that44 Infinite Wisdom ”
could devise. And the resources of divine knowledge and skill
were apparently exhausted when this scheme culminated. And
yet it also failed, according to the admission of its own friends
and ardent supporters (the clergy) ; for they tell us, that, not-
withstanding all the schemes and systems that Omniscience and
352
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Infinite Prescience could devise to save man, he does not get
saved : at least but few are saved, and they have to 44 work out
their own salvation with fear and trembling.’’ Nineteen-twen-
tieths of the human family, the clergy tell us, are still traveling
44 the broad road,” and are finally lost, notwithstanding all the
labored experiments and expedients of omniscient or Jehovah-
istic wisdom to save them. With this view of the case, the
thought is suggested that it was hardly worth while to have
gone to the trouble and expense of fitting up a heaven for the
few that are saved. It certainly 44 doesn’t pay.” And this con-
clusion is the more forcible in view of the fact that it must be
rather a lonesome place, and consequently not a very desirable
home or situation to live in ; for we are told it is 4 4 a house of
many mansions,” 44 and yet few there be that find the strait
and narrow road ” leading to it. Hence we may conclude that
man}r of the rooms or mansions are empty. Such a lonesome
heaven could not be congenial or adapted to any class of saints
but monks and hermits.
We have now briefly examined the three plans of salvation
which lie at the foundation of the Christian religion, and
shown that they are all failures according to their own wit-
nesses. In view of this fact, we can not wonder that Moses’
God is represented as saying that he repented for having made
man, and that it grieved him to the heart (Gen. vi. G). Such
a series of signal failures is enough to discourage even a saint
or a God.
CHAPTER LIV.
THE TRUE RELIGION.
True religion sees God in every thing, reads his scriptures
on every page of Nature’s open Bible, and feels him in the in-
spiration of the soul. It calls God father, not king; Christ a
brother, not a redeemer. It loves all men, but fears no God.
Its God is not a tyrant, but a loving father. It looks upon
THE TRUE RELIGION.
353
Jesus Christ as a truly good man, but not a God ; as a noble,
loving, benevolent being, but endowed with human frailties. It
considers him a martyr to truth and right, but not a just victim
to his father’s wrath, or the just object of a blood}r sacrifice.
It regards the laws of nature as sufficient, if diligently studied
and-strictly observed, to serve as a guide for man’s earthly life
without any special revelation. It holds that man’s natural
love of goodness, justice, mercy, and honesty is capable of
endless expansion and augmentation. (Tt walks by the light of
science"^ The many grand truths of the age, developed by the
onward march of mind, form its infallible laws, and constitute
its living virtues. Vjt uses reason for a lamp, and an enlightened
intellect for a guide^ It ties no martyr to the stake, piles the
faggots around no heretics. It issues no dogmas, no bulls, no
canons, and^hangs man’s salvation upon no infallible revelation^
Christians say, Give us a better revelation ; Christ said, “ Cease
to do evil, and [then] learn to do well.” All wrong and hurtful
institutions should be pulled down or abandoned., and trust to
finding better ones. ^Remove the weeds from the soil, and a
healthy and useful vegetation will spring up in their place^ The
true religion grants perfect freedom to all human beings ; leaves
human thought as free and unfettered as the wind, as free as
the rays of sunlight which fall upon every hill and every valley,
and rest upon the bosom of the deep.
True religion does not regard God as a personal monarch,
governing the universe by the caprices of an angry and fickle
mind, but as the living, moving, all-pervading, self-sustaining,
energizing, vivifying power which moves and sustains the ma-
chinery of the whole universe, and controls, by a concatenation
of laws, the myriads of worlds which move in majestic grandeur
through infinite space, and causes them to act in concert and
harmony without a discordant jar. It does not write its in-
spiration and revelation in a dead language or unintelligible
Hebrew, but in living characters, which all can read and un-
derstand. It indulges in no spirit of bigotry, consigns no man
or woman to endless torment, never talks of total depravity or
original sin. It is a natural and godlike religion, calculated to
satisfy the deep, unutterable longings of the soul, and bring
354
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
blessings and happiness to all who live up to its requirements.
It is a tree bearing the fruit of practical righteousness. It does
not teach that all of God’s truth is shut up in a printed book.
It knows no sects, no creeds, and no thirty-nine articles. It
does not pilot the pilgrim through life with a dark lantern, nor
search for living truths among the religious mummies of the
dark ages, but regales itself upon the living truths of the age.
Its devotees do not require temples made with hands in which
to worship the Father. It does not require holy houses, holy
days, or holy sacraments. It recommends all to search for
truth as a pearl of great price. It teaches all to worship God
by a life of practical goodness, and by cherishing kindly feel-
ings toward every human being. This is a religion that will
impart true pleasure in life, and afford sure comfort in a dying
hour.
Tiie Religion for this Age
Is a religion founded upon truth and goodness, — a religion
freed from the old, worn-out, superstitious, Oriental myths.
The people are becoming too enlightenedjto tolerate them much
longer; they are becoming tired of being fed on the stale food
of past ages ; they have been kept in a state of spiritual stagna-
tion long enough. They are becoming too intelligent to wish
to listen to old m3Tthologial doctrines which have been preached
by Christians for centuries. We want a religion better adapted
to the wants of the age. We want a religion that will furnish
better nourishment for man’s moral and spiritual nature,—a
religion calculated to develop true manhood, instead of repress-
ing it; a religion whose doctrines do not conflict with estab-
lished principles of science; a religion which our moral sense
does not condemn, and against which our reason will not
rebel. We want a religion that builds no walls between reason
and revelation, and forms no creeds and no barriers to the
spontaneous outgrowth of every faculty of the soul. We want
a religion that does not require men and women to be born
several times before they can be honest, truthful, and reliable,
or “ good enough to enter the kingdom of heaven.” We want
a religion which acknowledges no law but truth and justice, —
THE TRUE RELIGION.
355
a religion that will tolerate no wrong, and forgive no sin. We
want a religion whose bond is love, whose temple is truth, and
whose altar is a guiltless conscience, and whose creed is a
life of practical righteousness. We want a religion which will
teach us to cherish kindly feelings toward all mankind, and
which will prompt us to labor to spread flowers instead of
thorns in the pathway of every one with whom we come in con-
tact, and thus make them better and happier beings; for this
is the true end of all true religion and all true preaching.
“For modes of faith let zealous bigots fight:
He can’t be wrong whose life is in the right.”
We want a religion which will estimate men and women for
what they are, and not for what they believe, — a religion that
does not measure their moral worth by their creeds, but by their
practical lives. We want a religion that will banish all creeds
and mind-enslaving dogmas from the earth, and substitute in
their place brotherly love and goodness. We want a religion
that will do away with ignorance and poverty, that will labor to
prevent any one from suffering for the needful things of life, and
that will bind all together in the ties of universal brotherhood.
In fine, we want a religion which will make truth and love and
true practical righteousness the pole-star of every man and
woman who embrace it. This is the religion we need ; this is
the religion for the age; this is the religion that would and
will banish all unrighteousness from the earth, and elevate the
race to a higher plane than they ever have or ever can attain
under their soul-cramping, creed-bound religions; this is the
religion the author is laboring for, and has earnestly desired
for twenty-three years to see established among “ all nations,
tongues, kindred, and people.” This religion is not derived
from any Bible, but is an outgrowth of man’s moral and reli-
gious nature, as all true religions in all countries have been.
A religion derived from this source would prompt us to labor
daily to promote the happiness of our neighbors and fellow-
beings generally, ^instead of studying every hour of our lives
to practically rob them, as do most men in civilized countries,
including nearly all Christian professors A who are positively for-
356
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
bidden by their Bible and lawgiver (Christ) to lay up any treas-
ure on earth; yet it is their constant study how to draw all the
mone}7 possible out of the pockets of their neighbors, with but
little regard to their wants, necessities, or even sufferings, that
they may die in the midst of wealtlj^ It is a strange, yet
ahnost universal, infatuation, that the inauguration of the true
religion will banish from the earth.
CHAPTER LV.
“ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OE GOD.”
If this statement be true, then God must have “led a very
busy lifefor the world is literally loaded down with scrip-
tures. There are not less than eleven hundred and fifty pious
effusions that may come under this head, and at least that num-
ber claiming to have originated from the fountain of divine in-
spiration ; but the religious sects and religious orders will tell
us that but one of those eleven hundred and fifty scriptures
is the product of the Divine Mind, and but one of them has
received the seal and sanction of Almighty God. Then our sal-
vation hangs by a very slender thread ; for no rule has been fur-
nished us by Infinite Wisdom by which we can distinguish which
is the spurious and which the genuine, or which is the scripture
given by inspiration of God. All pious nations have had their
scriptures in profusion. Let us hold a court, and hear the testi-
mony of some of the witnesses with respect to the validity of
their respective claims. Here is a Hindoo, a pious soul of the
Brahmin order. Well, brother, we wish you to tell us whether
you know any thing about “ the scriptures given by inspiration
of God.” — “Most certainly I do.” Well, where and what
are they? “ Why, after existing in the mind of the great God
Bralnna from all eternity, they were revealed by him, about
nine thousand years ago, to the holy ricliis (prophets), who
penned them into a Iloly Book for the instruction and salvation
of the world, now known as the Vedas. They are pure, holy,
ALL SCBIPTUBE GIVEN BY INSPIBATION OF GOD. 357
and divine, and point out the only sure road to salvation.”
Here comes a Chinese mandarin. Well, brother, what light
can you throw upon this subject? Have you ever seen 44 the
scriptures given by inspiration of God 9 ’ ? 44 That is a question
easily answered. The Five Volumes are the purest, the holiest,
and the most sublime production ever given to the world.
There is nothing immoral, no obscene language, to be found in
this 4 Holy Book.’ Its precepts are matchless; and it is the
only book whose teachings are calculated to 4 make wise unto
salvation.’ It will save all men who receive it, and obey it.”
Take a seat: we want now to hear from a disciple representing
the land of Iran. Brother Persian, the question is, Where is
u the scripture given by inspiration of God”? 4 4 Your ques-
tion surprises me. The Holy Zenda Avesta has been circu-
lating for thousands of years; and have you not seen it ?
It points out the only sure road to the kingdom of eternal bliss,
and contains the only true religion for the human race.” Very
well: be seated. There is yet another class of devout wor-
shipers we wish to interrogate on this all-important subject.
Brother Mahomedan, will you please to step forward, and help
us solve this difficult problem ? Where are 4 4 the scriptures
given by inspiration of God”? 44 Have you never read that
holy and inspired book, the Koran? If so, you. ought to be
able to answer the question; and, if not, you are risking your
eternal salvation by remaining ignorant of its beautiful truths :
for it consigns to an endless fiery hell all who disbelieve and
reject its sublime teachings, and refuse to travel the road it has
marked out to paradise and eternal bliss.” Thus we are mak-
ing but little progress toward settling the question, Where is
44 the scripture given by inspiration of God”? We will now
question the Christian Church. Here we are met at the very
threshold with two hundred answers. 44 Join our church, and
beware of counterfeits,” meets us at every church-door. We do
not mean to say that every church has a separate Bible, though
virtual^ it almost amounts to this, as each denies to ail others
that use of the Bible and construction of its doctrine and teach-
ings which alone can insure salvation. But, in a broader sense,
there are two hundred answers to the question, Where are we
358
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
-
to find “ the only scriptures given by inspiration of God”?
The two hundred translators and four hundred commentators
make out more than two hundred distinct systems of faith, and
virtually more than two hundred Bibles. When we look at the
numerous and widely different translations of the Bible, and the
numerous collection of books by different churches which have
been made to constitute the Bible at different periods, and the
numerous alterations which Christian writers tell us have been
made in all of the books of the Bible, and the great number of
gospels and epistles floating over the world at one period and
afterwards denounced as spurious, and the constant alteration
of the Bible by adding some books and rejecting others, we
can see at once that it is impossible ever to find any way of
determining which are 4 4 the scriptures given by inspiration of
God.” Here let it be noted, that, for nearly three hundred
years, the Christian world had no Bible but the Old Testament,
and that, during that period, hundreds of gospels and epistles
were written, and thirty-six Acts of the Apostles, by all kinds
of scribblers, or, as one Christian writer calls them, 44 ignorant
asses.” These were put in circulation as constituting 44 the
only scriptures given by inspiration of God.” Most of them
were afterwards condemned by the Church fathers as being the
product of the Devil, and as being calculated to lead eveiy soul
down to hell who should read and believe them. But there
never was any agreement among church-leaders as to which of
the three hundred gospels and epistles in circulation were spu-
rious, and which were genuine ; nor has there ever been any
rule for distinguishing them, or determining which was which.
How, then, was it possible to know which were 44 the scriptures
given by inspiration of God”? Here arises a query of most
striking import, which should sink deep into the mind of every
honest investigator of this subject. Should it not be set down
as a moral impossibility that an all-wise God would inspire men
to write gospels and epistles for the instruction of mankind and
the salvation of the world, and then let them get mixed up with
hundreds of others 44 inspired by the Devil,” and calculated to
44 lead to perdition ” ? It must have been the means of effecting
the eternal ruin of thousands, if not millions, of immortal souls.
ALL SCBIPTUBE GIVEN BY INSPIBATION OF GOD. 359
And nearly" all Christian writers admit there was no way of dis-
tinguishing the poisonous and pernicious productions from the
“inspired.” It is also admitted that the former were more read
than the latter. Now, we must assume that a God would be
essentially lacking in the ingredients of good sense (or rather
would be a mere imaginary being) who would do business in
such a bungling and reckless manner as to furnish man with a
revelation of his will, hang his salvation upon it, and then aban-
don the field for three hundred years, and let every thing run to
ruin. Such a God ought to “ repent, and he grieved to the heart."
Look what kind of stuff the people swallowed for gospel during
that period ! The Gospel of the Infamy, which was afterwards
condemned as the work of devils and impostors, was, during this
period, accepted as inspired by nearly the whole Christian world ;
and see what it contains. In the first chapter it is related that
a woman had a son who was, by the intervention of some witches,
turned into an ass, when she hastened off to the mother of the
young Messiah (Jesus), and related her grievance to that ami-
able personage, which so excited her compassion that she forth-
with seized the young child Jesus, and set him astride the ass’s
neck, when, “ lo and behold! ” it took all the ass properties out
of the animal, and restored him back to manhood, or rather boy-
hood. And all the biped asses then in Christendom swallowed
this assinine storjT as “ scripture given by inspiration of God.”
The same book relates that various sick and impotent persons
visited the child Jesus, and were cured of their diseases by hav-
ing his swaddling-clothes wrapped about their heads, necks, or
other portions of the body, and forthwith thie devils departed
(on one occasion in the shape of a dog). If there is a lower
plane of senseless superstition than this, I pray God I may
never know it. And all this was gospel and “inspired scrip-
ture,” for whole centuries, with the majority of Christendom.
Both preachers and laymen read and believed those “ Holy
Scriptures.” This is about as senseless as the story of some
devils coming out of a woman, and taking up their abode in
a herd of swine. These stories are all “chips of the same
block,” and all equally incredible.
SCO
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Character op the Voters who decided what Scriptures
SHOULD BE CONSIDERED INSPIRED.
It is now well known that the first authentic collection of Gos-
pels and Epistles, called “ the Bible,” was made by the Council
of Nice 325 A.D.,— a body of drunken bishops and lawless
bacchanalians. The Christian writer, Mr. Tyndal, says they
got drunk, came to blows, and lacked and cuffed each other;
and that “ the love of contention and ambition overcame their
reason.” They claimed to be under the influence of “ the
spirit.” Undoubtedly they were; but it was a kind of spirit
that men hold intercourse with by uncorking the bottle, and not
the spirit of gentleness and peace. He says, u They fell afoul
of each other; ” and such was the severity of their blows, that
one member was mortally wounded, and died a short time after.
It was simply a disgusting and disgraceful row, — a scene of
rowdyism of at first seventeen hundred, and finally about three
hundred, Christian bishops, without a character for either virtue,
sobriety, or honesty. One writer says, u They were abandoned
to every species of immorality, and addicted to the most abom-
inable crimes;” and such was their extreme ignorance, that
but few of them could write their names. Their method of de-
ciding which Gospels and Epistles were divinely inspired was
quite unique. It is stated the}" were all placed under the com-
munion-table ; and, when the proper signal was given (so says
Irenseus), the inspired Gospels “hopped on to the table,” which
separated them from the spurious. Why the spurious Gospels
did not possess the hopping power and propensity is not stated.
Two of the bishops, Chrysante and Musanius, died during the
council, before the vote wa3 taken; but such was the impor-
tance of the occasion, that they did not withhold their votes on
that account. The proper documents being prepared and car-
ried and placed near their defunct bodies, the}’ mustered all the
force their dead bodies could command, and signed them; and
thus, between the living and the dead, we have got a Bible
which, it is presumed, contains all “the scripture given by in-
spiration of God ” under the new dispensation. The Gospels
and Epistles thus voted into favor were not arranged together
ALL SCRIPTURE GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD. 361
in the form of an authentic Bible until nearty sixt}r years after.
This was clone Iry' the Council of Laodicea in the year 363.
After this, council after council was called to vote in or vote
out some of the books adopted by previous councils, and to
settle some important church dogmas. The first council voted
the Acts of the Apostles and Revelation out of the Bible (i.e.,
voted them down) ; but the second council, which met in 363,
voted them in again. Another council, which met in 406, voted
them, with several other books, out of the Bible again. And
thus were books and dogmas voted in and voted out of ‘c the
infallible and inspired word of God,” and altered and corrected,
time after time and century after centuiy, by twent}^-four differ-
ent councils, composed of bigoted bishops and clergymen, so
quarrelsome and belligerent that they resorted to fisticuff fight-
ing in several of the councils; and thus was “God’s Holy
Word ” and “ perfect revelation ” tossed to and fro like a bat-
tledore,— this book voted in, and that one voted out, and
sometimes half a dozen at a time. And where was the “all
scripture given by inspiration of God ” at the end of this revo-
lution a it and demolishing clerical crusade? And where was
its author, that he would suffer the whole thing to be taken out
of his hands, altered and corrupted till he could not know his
own book, and would not have been willing to father it if he
had been able to recognize it? William Penn says, that “ some
of the scriptures which were taken in by one council as inspired
were rejected by another council as uninspired ; and that which
was left out by the former council as apocryphal was taken in
by the latter as canonical. And certain it is that they contra-
dict each other. And how do we know that the council which
first collected and voted on the scriptures — voting some up,
and some down—were able to discern the true from the false? ”
Here the whole thing is set in its proper light by a devout
Quaker preacher. The extract contains a volume of instruc-
tion, and shows the impossibility of our determining the “all
scripture given by inspiration of God.”
Additions, Alterations, and Interpolations.
We have a vast amount of testimony to prove that councils,
362
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
churches, and clerg3unen arrogated to themselves a lawless
license to change, insert, and leave out various texts, chapters,
and even whole books, from “ God’s unchangeable word,” till
it may now be assumed to be thoroughly changed. From a
large volume of testimonies we will cite a few: The version of
the Old Testament made under Ptolemy Philadelphus, 287
B.C., — the most reliable version extant,—Bishop Usher pro-
nounces a spurious cop3T, full of interpolations, additions, and
alterations. He says, u The translators of the Septuagint
added to, and took from, and changed at pleasure;” and St.
Jerome says that Origen did the same thing with the New
Testament. Bishop Marsh testifies, in like manner, that Ori-
gen, who first collected the Bible books together, confessed that
he made many alterations in them before they fell into the
hands of the Council of Nice. Dr. Bentle}7 admits that the
best copy of the New Testament contains hundreds of irrepar-
able omissions, errors, and mistakes. The Bev. Dr. Whitby
saj^s, “ Many corruptions and interpolations were made almost
in the apostolic age.” Dupin says, “ Several authors took the
libert}' to add, retrench, correct divers things.” Some of the
clergy and churches rejected books which did not suit them,
while others altered them to suit their fancy. We are told that
Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, made countless numbers
of alterations in the Bible in the sixth century for the purpose
of making them suit his Church. Eusebius says he found so
much proof that the Gospel of Matthew had been altered and
corrupted, that he rejected it as being unworthy of confidence.
Victor Wilson informs us that a general alteration of the Gos-
pels took place at Constantinople in the 3’ear 50G by order of
the Emperor Anastasias. St. Jerome complains that in his
time many alterations had been made in the Bible, and that its
different translations were so essential^ changed that 44 no one
copy or translation resembled another.” Scaliger testifies that
the clergy and the churches put into their scriptures what-
ever they thought would serve their purpose. Michaclis says,
“ Tiny thrust in and thrust out as best suits fancy.” In the
name of God, we would ask how any person in his sober reason
can think of finding “all scripture given by inspiration of
ALL SCRIPTURE GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD. 363
God ” in the midst of such a general wreck, ruin, and demoli-
tion of the original scriptures. It is as impossible as to raise
the dead or to find Charlie Ross. The Rev. Dr. Gregory says
that no profane author has suffered like the Bible by profane
hands. Where, then, can we find “ all scripture given by inspi-
ration of God ” ?
Forged Gospels and Epistles.
The Unitarian Bible says, in its preface, u It is notorious that
forged writings, under the name of the apostles, were in circula-
tion almost from the apostolic age.” Mosheim testifies that
“ several histories of Christ’s life and doctrines, full of pious
frauds and fabulous wonders, were put in circulation before the
meeting of the Council of Nice ; ” and he states, like William
Penn, that he had no confidence in their ability to distinguish
the truer from the false. We will here quote another statement
of William Penn : “ There are many errors in the Bible. The
learned know it: the unlearned had better not know it.” Here
is another sad proof of the blinding effect of reading and believ-
ing a book which abounds in errors. He would have the un-
learned and honest reader swallow all the errors of the Bible,
and be thereby morally poisoned by them, rather than have the
book brought into discredit by having its errors exposed. This
circumstance of itself is sufficient to seal its condemnation.
Belsham says, “ The genuine books of the Bible were but few
compared with the spurious ones.” This would be inferred
from the circumstance of only four Gospels being adopted out
of fifty, and only seventeen Epistles out of more than one
hundred. Daille says, “The Christian fathers forged whole
books ;9 9 but neither he nor anybody else can furnish any rule
for determining which they are.
Lost Books Found or Re-written.
Dupin says a portion of the books of the Old Testament
were burned in wars, and others lost by the Jews themselves;
and in the Second Book of Chronicles (xxxiv. 14) we are told
that Hilkiah found the Book of the Law after it had been lost
eight hundred years. This law appears to have constituted the
364
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
most important portion of the Jewish sacred writings. The
circumstance gives rise to some very strange reflections and
conclusions. It appears from this circumstance that the Lord’s
holy people had been without any law to guide or govern them
for eight long centuries. Now, can we suppose for a moment
that their God, Jehovah, was a being of infinite wisdom to
write or dictate a law, and base the happiness and welfare of his
people if not the world on that law, and then, through care-
lessness or otherwise, suffer it to get lost, and remain unfound
for eight hundred years, so that nobody could have the benefit
of it during that long period ? The very thought is a trespass
upon our good sense, and does violence to our reason. And
where was the law during all that time ? and how wras it pre-
served for so long a period of time ? If written on papyrus or
parchment, it would have perished in less than a century from
being exposed to the weather : for we can’t assume it was pre-
served in a drawer or box, as, in that case, it would not have
been lost; and, if engraven on stone, the weight would have been
fifty times as much as Hilkiah could carry. We are told that
when Josiah the king heard the law read, he rent his clothes
(2 Chron; xxxiv. 19).
-
Well, that is strange indeed. It must have been a very
curious law, or he must have been a very curious man. Why
the reading of a few plain moral precepts should drive a man
to insanity, and cause him to tear his clothes, is something hard
to understand. And it is evidence that the whole Jewish tribe
had never known or read much about the law: otherwise a
knowledge of it would have been preserved by tradition, and
the king would not have been so profoundly ignorant of it. If
the law was the Pentateuch, as some writers assume, the king
would have had to stand a week to hear it all read; and it
seems strange that “ Shaphan the scribe ” could pick up a doc-
ument covered with the mold, rust, and dust of eight centuries,
and read it off with sufficient expertness for the king to listen
to with patience. Put the wonder and difficulty don’t stop
here. It was only about a quarter of a century until this great
‘•holy and divine law ” was lost again ; which left “ the Lord’s
holy people ” again without any moral code to guide them, or
ALL SCBIPTURE GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD. 365
a governing law, for six centuries longer. No wonder they
preferred worshiping a calf (see Exod. xxxii.) to paying hom-
age to a God so reckless of their welfare and happiness. On
this occasion it became so thoroughly lost, that it never “ turned
up ” again ; and there seemed to be no way to remedy the de-
plorable loss but to have it written over again. At least that
appears to have been the impression of Ezra the priest, who
set himself to the onerous task of reproducing the long-lost
document from memory or from a second installment of divine
inspiration. (See Esdras.) Such a meinor}’ does not often fall ^
to the lot of mortals to possess, — a memory that could enable
a man to reproduce a document which neither he nor any other
person had read for six hundred years. If the world could be
furnished with such a mental prodigy at the present day, we
might again have the benefit of the numerous books and libra-
ries which have been destroyed by fire in modern times. It
would require no previous knowledge of any of those works to
achieve the task of reproducing them. Perhaps we may be told
that we are becoming “wise above what is written.” It would
require no mental effort to attain to this eminence, and become
obnoxious to such a charge. In this case, a few brief sen-
tences, and the whole thing is dismissed: no details are given.
The story of Hilkiah finding the Book of the Law sounds very
much like Joe Smith finding the Mormon Bible ; and the case
of Ezra’s re-writing it is matched by the story of “ Vyass the
Holy ’ ’ finding the divine law of the Brahmins some three thou-
sand years before Hilkiah was born. Mr. Higgins says that
nearfy all ancient religious nations had the tradition of losing
and finding their holy books, holy laws, and holy languages.
The quer}" is here suggested, that if such an important docu-
ment could be restored to the people in the manner adopted by
Ezra, why was not this expedient resorted to a thousand years
sooner, and thus save the demoralization of the Jews? The
policy adopted is too much like “locking the stall after the
horse is stolen.”
Impossibility of possessing a Reliable Translation.
It is quite evident, from the facts presented and from others
366
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
which will hereafter be presented, that, if God ever gave forth
a revelation of his will to the founders of the Jewish and Chris-
tian religions, the world is not in possession of it now, and
can not find it in a book as old as the Christian Bible, and
written by simply stringing consonants together in a line without
any vowels, and without any distinction of words, and which
must necessarily be an enigma that would puzzle any scholar
to decipher. Hence the learned Le Clere says, “Even the
learned guess at the sense in an infinity of places, which has
• produced a prodigious number of discordant interpretations.”
And Simonton, in his “ Critical History,” says, “ It is unques-
tionable that the greater part of the Hebrew words of the Old
Testament are equivocal in their signification, and utterly uncer-
tain ; and that even the most learned Jews doubt almost every
thing in regard to their proper meaning.” To talk of finding
“ all scripture given by inspiration of God ” environed with such
difficulties, is to talk nonsense. We will illustrate the nature of
these difficulties by citing a case. We will look at the random
guessing at the meaning of a single word of a single text by the
most learned students and scholars in biblical literature. The
word indicating the material of which Noah’s ark was com-
posed, our translation says, was gophir-wood: but the Arabic
translation says it was box-wood; the Persian translation says
it was pine-wood ; another translation makes it red ebony ; and
still another declares it was wicker-work; Davidson, assuming
to be “ wise above what is written” in the case, says it was
bulrushes cemented with pitch; another writer translates it
cedar-wood, &c. And thus God’s Iloly Book, designed for the
guidance of man, has been the sport and the bauble of learned
guessers in all ages of Christendom, who evidently know as
much about it, in many cases, as a goose does about Greek.
Many Different Christian Bibles.
Owing to the multiplied}’ of Bible translations, which differ
widely in their doctrines, precepts, and the relation of general
events, making a different collection of books to constitute
“the word of God,” various churches, and even individual
professors, have assumed the liberty to compile and make a
ALL SCBIPTUBE GIVEN BY INSPIBATION OF GOB, 367
Bible for themselves. The Roman-Catholic Bible differs essen-
tially from that of the Protestants’, having fourteen more books.
The Bible of the Greek Church differs from both. The Camp-
bellites have a translation of their own. The Samaritan Bible
contains only the Five Books of Moses. The Unitarians, having
found twenty-four thousand errors in the popular translation,
made another translation containing still many thousand errors.
The American Christian Union, having found many thousand
errors in King James’s translation, are now engaged in a new
translation. How many more we are to have, God only knows.
Martin Luther condemned eleven books of the Bible, as we
have already stated, and thus made a Bible for himself. Paul’s
Epistle to the Hebrews he denounced in strong terms. Eu-
sebius, the learned ecclesiastical writer, throws eight Bible-
books overboard, and had a Bible to his own fancy. Dr. Lard-
ner and John Calvin each condemned five or six books, and had
a Bible peculiar to themselves. Grotius places the heel of con-
demnation on several books of the Bible. Bishop Baxter voted
down eight books as uninspired, and unworthy of confidence.
Swedenborg accepted only the Four Gospels and Revelation as
inspired. The German fathers rejected the Gospel of St. Mat-
thew, and I know not how many other books. The Bible of the
learned Christian writer Evanson did not contain either Mat-
thew, Mark, or John. The Unitarian Bible does not contain
Hebrews, James, Jude, or Revelation. The Catholics de-
nounce the Protestant Bible, and the Protestants condemn the
Catholic Bible, as being full of errors. A number of other
churches and learned Christians might be named who had Bibles
of their own selection and construction. And thus every book
in the Bible has passed under the flaming sword of condemna-
tion, and has been voted down by some ecclesiastical body or
learned and devout Christian. Each church has either made
out a Bible for itself, or accepted that which came the nearest
teaching the doctrine of their own peculiar creed. In the
midst of this rejection, expulsion, and expurgation of Bibles
and Bible-books, where can we find “the scripture given by
inspiration of God”? We have it upon the authority of Dr.
Adam Clark, Eusebius, Bishop Marsh, and other writers, that
368
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
many texts and passages contained in our Bible can not be found
in the earlier editions ; thus showing that many gross interpola-
tions and forgeries have been practiced by the Christian fathers.
Christ’s prayer on the cross, u Father, forgive them,” &c., the
story of the woman taken in adultery, the passage relative to
the three that bare record in heaven, &c., the}^ assure us, can.
not be found in any early translation of the Bible. Where,
then, are “ the scriptures given by inspiration of God ” ? Who
can tell ?
CHAPTER LVI.
INFIDELS UNDER THE ORIENTAL SYSTEMS.
It is an interesting and instructive historical fact, that in all
religious countries, — Christian, heathen, and Mahomedan, — as
the people become educated and enlightened, a portion of them
improve the teachings of their Bible by new interpretations;
while another portion, possessed of still more intelligence,
abandon the book altogether, and become infidels to the pre-
vailing religion of the country. I have spoken of the former
class in another chapter. In this chapter I shall present a
brief history of the latter class, who are known as infidels
under different s}Tstems of religion. We find, by our historical
researches, that in India, Eg}~pt, Persia, Chaldea, China, Mex-
ico, Arabia, &c., a portion of the people outgrow the religion
of the country in which they have been educated. And it is an
important fact, observable in all religious countries, that that
portion of the population who become dissatisfied with the
established religion of the country arc the most intellectual,
the most intelligent, and very generally the most moral also.
We desire the reader to notice this, as it tends to prove that
the cause of infidelity in all countries is intelligence and intel-
lect, and to establish the converse proposition that the mass
of people who adhere so rigidl}' to the religion in which they
were educated are people of limited intellect, large veneration,
and not very progressive by nature, and very generally have
INFIDELS UNDER THE ORIENTAL SYSTEMS. 369
but little historical or scientific knowledge. They consequently
have not observed the errors and defects of their religion, or its
cramping and stultifying effect upon the mind, or its effect upon
the morals of the country. They prefer having somebody else
to do their thinking for them. This will be fully illustrated by
the brief historical sketch we will now present of the practical
operation of infidelity under several forms of religion.
I. The Religious Skeptics of India.
It is generally assumed by the disciples of the Christian faith
that the people of India are on a low scale of mind and intelli-
gence, and that this accounts for the tardy success of the mis-
sionaries in the work of converting them to the Christian faith,
and the obstacles which lie in their pathway, which makes the
cost of conversion bear an enormous proportion to the few
proselytes won over to the religion of Jesus. This matter is in-
terestingly controverted by the Rev. David O. Allen, who spent
twenty-five years in that country as a missionary. We will
make an extract from his work, u India, Ancient and Modern.’9
Speaking of the obstacles the two hundred missionaries have to
encounter in the work of conversion, he says, “ It is now some
years since a spirit of infidelity and skepticism began to take
strong hold of the educated native minds of India. This spirit
was first manifested in Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay; and it
is making rapid progress in all the large cities ” (p. 584). Let
the reader mark the word 44 educated 99 in this extract. Most
cogently does it sustain the assumption we have several times
made in this work, that it is intellect and intelligence that
cause infidelity under every form and system of religion. It
denotes an upward tendency from the brute creation, which is
devoid of intellectual brain. Mr. Allen says, “ This class of
persons [the infidels] have associations and societies for de-
bates, discussions, and lectures ; and, among the subjects which
engage their attention at such times, religion, in some of its
forms and claims, has a prominent place. Their libraries are
well furnished with infidel and deistical works, which have been
provided from Europe and America. The historical facts and
doctrines of the Bible, the ordinances of the gospel, and certain
370
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
facts and periods of the history of Christianity are made the
subjects of inquiry, discussion, and lectures. At such times
Christianity and all connected with it — the scriptures, doc-
trines, and characters, as well as parts of its history — are
often treated with levity, scurrility, and blasphemy.” Let the
reader bear in mind that it is a Christian missionary that is
speaking, who is in the habit of styling every thing “ blas-
phemy” in the shape of argument against his idolized and
superstitious religion. We are assured from other sources that
their language, although freighted with argument and wit, is
always respectable. u On such occasions,” continues Mr.
Allen, u they make a free use of the works of infidel writings,
and the sneers and cavils and arguments of deists in Europe
and America. . . . This same class has also, to a great extent,
the management and control of the national press of India.
[This statement suggests that infidelity in India is becoming
deep, wide-spread, and popular.] In their journals much ap-
pears of an infidel anc] scurrilous nature against Christianity in
perverted and distorted statements of its doctrines and duties,
of its principles and its precepts, of the conduct and char-
acter of its professors, and of the ways and means used for
propagating it. . . . The following facts show the state of the
native mind in India: The proprietor and editor of one of the
oldest and best-supported newspapers in Bombay some time ago
expressed his views of the state of religion among all classes,
and suggested what course should be pursued. After inserting
two or three articles in his paper, to prepare the minds of his
readers, he said it was obvious to all that the state of religion
was very sad, and becoming more so, and that all classes of
people appeared to have lost all confidence in their sacred
books; that Christians do not believe in their Bible, or they
would practice its precepts; that the Jews, Mahomedans,
Hindoos, and the Zoroastrians do not believe in their sacred
books, because, if they did, they would not do so many things
which their Bibles forbid, and neglect so man}* things which
they command, lie then proceeds to say that the sacred books
of all these different classes may have been of divine origin,
and when first given they may have been adapted to the then
INFIDELS UNDER THE ORIENTAL SYSTEMS. 371
state and circumstances of the people, and may have been very
useful, but that they had become unsuitable to the present ad-
vanced state of knowledge and improved state of society; and
that none of these sacred books could ever again have the confi-
dence of the people, and become the rule of their faith and prac-
tice. ... He then suggested that a religious convention be
called in Bomba}", and that each class of people send a delega-
tion of their learned and devout men wdth copies of their sacred
books, and that the men of this convention should prepare from
all these sacred books a Shastra suited to the present state of
the world, and adapted to all classes of people. And he ex-
pressed his belief that a Shastra thus prepared and recom-
mended would soon be generally adopted. In his next paper
he proceeded to mention some of the doctrines which such a
Shastra should contain; and among them he said it should
inculcate the existence of only one God, and the worship of him
without any kind of idol or material symbol. And then he
would have no distinction of caste, which he thought was one
of the greatest evils and absurd things in the Hindoo religion.
Now, these opinions and suggestions are chiefly remarkable as
exhibiting the state of the native mind. [Do you mean to say,
Mr. Allen, that the hundred and fifty millions of the native
minds in India are all tinctured with these doctrines ? If so, it
is glorious news indeed.] It is unnecessary to say that these
views are entirely subversive of Hindooism, involving the rejec-
tion of its sacred books as well as its preceptive rites and most
cherished practices. The writer of these articles for the public
was a respectable and well-educated Hindoo. . . . He was pro-
prietor as well as editor of his paper; so he had much interest
in sustaining its popularity and increasing its circulation. In-
deed, I was told he had but little property besides his paper,
and that he relied chiefly upon it for his support. He knew the
state of religious opinions among the Hindoos ; and he was w-ell
assured that such opinions and suggestions would not be to the
prejudice of his character, nor to the injury of his paper. [Glad
to hear this, Mr. Alien, on his aecount, and as showing that a
remarkable amount of good sense, intelligence, and infidelity
predominate over the Christian religion in India.] Now, this
372
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
man, the readers of his paper, and the circle of his acquaintance,
shoiv the state of hundreds of thousands in India, who are dis-
satisfied with the Hindoo religion, and, having no confidence in
it, would gladly embrace something better, more reasonable,
and calculated to exert a better influence upon society and the
character of their nation.” All hail to such intelligence as
this! It shows that the heathen of India have more reason,
sense, and intelligence than many professors of Christianity.
Now, mark the cause which Mr. Allen assigns for this intel-
lectual skepticism of India. He says, “It is in part the effect
of the knowledge they acquire which removes their stupidity
and ignorance, and imparts power to think, compare, reason, and
judge on religious subjects; and in part from the principles
and facts of modern astronomy, history, geography, &c., being
utterly" at variance with the declarations and doctrines of the
Hindoo Shastras : so that no person who believes in the former
can retain any confidence in the latter. [And, if he had in-
cluded the Christian Bible with the Shastras, the statement would
have been almost equally true.] The natural consequence
of this course of education is to produce a spirit of skepticism
in respect to cdl religions. [Another wonderful admission, and
more proof that infidelity', brains, and intelligence are correlative
terms.] The effect is now seen in the religious, or rather the irre-
ligious, views of a proportion of the young men who have been
educated in European science and literature in the institutions
established by the government of India. The}' are strongly op-
posed to Christianity", and often ridicule its most sacred and
solemn truths [errors more probably]. The}' openly avow their
skepticism and deistical sentiments ; but they have hitherto gen-
erally conformed to the popular superstitions so far as to avoid
persecution, and retain their sacred positions, and to secure and
enjoy their property rights. . . . Motives of worldly policy may
lead most of the present generation of educated young men
through life to show some respect to notions, rites, and ceremonies
which they regard as false, unmeaning, and superstitious; but,
should these views pervade the masses of the native population
(which they are now doing rapidly), they may be expected to
develop their genuine spirit in very painful consequence, . . .
INFIDELS UNDER THE ORIENTAL SYSTEMS. 373
unless Christianity acquires sufficient power to restrain them ”
(pp. 574 and 321). The painful consequence here appre-
hended is simply the triumph of religious skepticism based on,
and growing out of, a broad and thorough literary and scientific
education oyer the senseless dogmas and superstitions of Chris-
tianity. Such “painful consequences ” will alwa}^s follow in
any country the enlightenment and expansion of the minds
of the people by a thorough acquaintance with the principles
of science and literature. It is just as natural as that light
should dispel darkness ; and that is exactly what is realized in
such cases. Mr. Allen’s statement that motives of worldly
policy* restrains many of the educated y*oung men of India from
avowing their real convictions on the subject of religion shows
that the same spirit of mental surveillance and priestly despotism
prevails in India that prevails in all Christian countries, and pre-
vents thousands from letting their real sentiments be known.
And this mental slavery has filled the world with hypocrites;
but it will soon burst its bonds in India, or would, if the two
hundred Christian missionaries could be called home. And then
I would suggest that the tide of missionary emigration be re-
versed, and that some of those highty enlightened, educated men
of India be sent to throw some light upon this country. Mr.
Allen, in the continuation of his subject, states that th.3
government councils of education in India are publishing vari-
ous works on science and literature, — the production of the
minds of its own citizens, — and that they* have published a large
number of works of this character within a few years past. And
he states that, “ if this course is continued, India will soon have
a valuable indigenous literature” (p. 321). This statement
tends to enlighten us still further as to the cause of the recent
rapid spread of infidelity in that country ; for science and litera-
ture are certain to precede infidelity. But he complains that the
government system of education, which simply teaches science
without superstition, while “it is destroying the confidence of
the people in their own system of religion, is also introducing
speculation, skepticism, and deism” (p. 321). If he were an
enlightened philosopher, he would understand that this is the
legitimate operation of cause and effect. Mr. Allen, in con-
374
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
eluding this sketch of the rapid progress of skepticism in India,
says there are man}' thousands in India who have passed from
conviction of the falsehood of the Hindoo religion into a state
of skepticism and indifference to all religion, unless when the
progress of Christianity now and then rouses them to oppose it.
This must be cheering news to every enlightened philanthropist.
This whole sketch of Mr. Allen’s is very interesting, as it dis-
closes the real causes of infidelity or skepticism in all religious
countries, and shows that every form of superstition is giving
way and sinking before the march of science, literature, and
education in the most populous nation on the globe. It is
indeed a soul-cheering thought. And where is there a Chris-
tian professor who is so bigoted as not to derive the hint from
these historical facts that he can find the cause of his rigid ad-
herence to his own religion, with all its errors, by simpl}' placing
his hands on his head? It is true. There are, however, many
persons who still believe in an erroneous system of religion,
simply because they have had no opportunity of obtaining light
on the subject.
II. Sects and Infidels in Greece and Home.
When we arrive at Greece we find a nation possessing a men-
tal caliber seldom equaled, and furnishing many philosophers
with brains sufficient to enable them to see through the errors
and the absurdities of any system of religion. Hence infidels
were more numerous than sectarians ; and those infidels (better
known as philosophers) nearly succeeded, by the force of supe-
rior logic and wisdom, in banishing all s}'stems of religious
superstition from the nation. But questions of controversy
were more on philosophical subjects than on religious themes;
because the dogmas of the popular religion of Greece, like that
of all other countries, were so absurd that the Grecian philoso-
phers could dispose of them without much mental effort. As a
proof and illustration of this statement, we will cite the case
of Stilpo, who, on being asked by Crates (B.C. 331) whether
he believed that God took any pleasure in being worshiped
by mortals, replied, “Thou fool, don’t question me upon such
absurdities in the public streets, but wait till we arc alone.”
INFIDELS UNDER THE ORIENTAL SYSTEMS. 375
Greece, and also Rome, furnished intellectual minds of a high
order; and all their numerous philosophers were skeptical on
the prevailing forms of religion in those and other nations. It
will be observed, then, that nearly all the religious orders of
antiquit}’ gave rise to numerous sects, and also numerous infidels
and skeptics, alias philosophers.
III. Sects and Skeptics in Egypt.
Ancient Egypt was characterized by a considerable amount
of intellectual mind, and no inconsiderable proficiency in the
arts and sciences. And hence, as would naturally be expected,
a considerable portion of her people, in the course of time, broke
from the trammels of the popular religious faith, and became
infidel to all the systems and sects in the nation; while those
of a secondary order of intellect abandoned some dogmas, modi-
fied others, and started new sects. This gave offense to the
parental religious order, which resulted in one or two cases
in a serious quarrel, though not with the bloody and deadly
results which have marked the religious quarrels among the sects
and followers of “ the Prince of peace,” which have been so
sanguine, cruel, and bloody, as to leave eighteen million human
beings on the battle-field, or consumed by fire, or consigned
to a watery grave. Religious wars among the heathen have
not been half so fiendish or fatal as those waged by the disci-
ples of the cross. The number of sects in Egypt is not known,
but they were numerous.
IY. Sects and Skeptics in China.
China, though characterized by less mental activity than most
other religious nations, has had her sects and her skeptics, and
not a very small number of the former, though less in propor-
tion to her religious population than either Egypt, India, Persia,
Chaldea, or Arabia. Some of her sects manifested a disposition
to borrow dogmas from other religions ; while others attempted
an improvement on the ancient faith established by Confucius,
although in its moral aspects it was the best system of religion
extant. The oldest sect known was founded by Laotse, and
was known as Taotse. His religion differed more from that of
376
TEE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Confucius with respect to its ceremonies than its doctrines.
On the whole, there has not been sufficient intellectual growth
in China to produce any very marked changes in the long-estab-
lished religion of the country. Innovation and religious im-
provement in China are checked and almost prevented by a sort
of ecclesiastical tribunal, which has existed from time imme-
morial, known as “ the Court of Rites,” which is invested
with authority to suppress religious innovation, and thus put
an extinguisher on infidelity.
V. Persian Sects and Skeptics.
Persia has possessed sufficient intellectual mind to make very
considerable changes in her religion. According to tradition, she
was once overrun with idolatry. But now, and for at least three
or four thousand years (and before the time of Moses), that
nation has manifested the greatest abhorrence to images, excel-
ling in this respect even Moses, who probably borrowed his
antipathy to idolatry from that country. Sects have arisen
which have condemned not only the doctrines of the primary
system, but its mode of worship. There has been considerable
controversy among the sects in Persia upon the question whether
God should be worshiped in temples made with hands, or in the
open air; also with respect to the origin of evil, and whether
the Devil (Ahrimanes) was eternal, or co-eternal with God
(Ormuzd). These questions of dispute, and various others,
have given rise to more than seventy different sects ; while the
most intellectual and best improved minds have outgrown and
renounced them all, and assumed the character of infidels.
VI. Maiiomedan Skeptics and Sects.
Mahomedans have paid very particular attention to educa-
tion, and the cultivation of the arts and sciences, and have pro-
duced and published a number of literary works. A num-
ber of scientific men have arisen among them from time to
time ; and schools and colleges have been established, in which
many have obtained a literary and scientific education. Hence
there will be no difficulty in understanding why thousands
of infidels or skeptics have arisen amongst them, and avowed
INFIDELS UNDER THE ORIENTAL SYSTEMS. 377
their disbelief in the religion of the Koran. Some of them
have spent much time in writing and speaking in their attempts
to expose its errors and absurdities ; and a large number of
sects have sprung up amongst them from time to time, number-
ing, on the whole, not less than fifty. All these sects mark the
progress of religious thought; and each sect made some im-
provement in the prevailing creeds and dogmas, or some of the
religious customs and ceremonials. One of the oldest and
principal sects was the Sabeans, who claim to be the original
founders of the Mahomedan religion. They are very devout,
pray three times a da}", — morning, noon, and evening. They
also observe three annual fasts, offer animal sacrifices, and
practice circumcision, and cherish other foolish customs, and
preach other superstitious doctrines, which the cultivation of
the sciences has had the effect to open the eyes of some of its
devotees to see the absurdity of. Hence they have left, and
founded new sects with new and improved creeds. In this
way a great many new sects have sprung up from time to time,
as in Christian countries, which marks the progress of religious
improvement. A great amount of religious controversy has
been carried on between these belligerent sects, which has had
the effect, to some extent, to liberalize all. One of the largest
and most important of these sects has arisen in modern times, —
46 the anti-Ramazan ” sect, —which now numbers not less than
forty thousand adherents. They discard the feast of Ramazan,
condemn polygam}", and contend that no man ought to be
persecuted for his religious opinions or his infidelity. It will
be perceived they are somewhat radical; and this is easily ac-
counted for. Their origin dates since the dawn of literature in
that country; and they number in their ranks the best educated,
most enlightened and intelligent professors of the Mahomedan
faith. Here is suggested again the cause of infidelity, or the
act of outgrowing the popular faith, which has characterized a
portion of the disciples of nearly every form of religion known
to history. Some of the Mahomedan sects rose up against one
form of popular superstition, and some another. One sect
opposed the prevailing belief in a physical resurrection, and
argued that the soul rises only as a spiritual entity. Another
378
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
sect opposed and exposed the absurdity and obscenity of the
rite of circumcision. Another argued that punishment after
death would be blit for a limited period. Another sect opposed
the savage superstition of animal sacrifice, &c. While the
mother institution, which worshiped in the ancient, moss-covered
mosque, condemned them all as infidels ; but none of them seem
to have possessed the amount of intellectual acumen or scien-
tific intelligence to enable them to perceive that the whole sys-
tem was defective. Hence they labored to improve it, instead
of laboring to destroy it, and supply the place with something
better ; though hundreds and thousands of the educated classes
had their mental vision sufficiently enlightened and expanded
to enable them to see truth beyond the narrow confines of
creeds and dogmas. Hence they abandoned their long-cher-
ished religious errors, and have since lent their influence to
expose them, and put them down.
“ Thus round and round we run;
And ever the truth comes uppermost,
And ever is justice done.”
CHAPTER LYII.
SECTS, SCHISMS, AND SKEPTICS IN CHRISTIAN COUNTRIES.
The practical history of Christianity, ever since the dawn
of civilization, has been that of schisms, sects, and divisions, all
indicating the natural growth of the human mind, and its thirst
for knowledge, its struggles for freedom, and its unalterable
determination to be as free as the eagle that soars above the
clouds. The number of church sects is estimated to be more
than five hundred, and the number is still increasing. And the
multiplication of infidels lias kept pace with the increase of the
churches ; and skeptics are now increasing much more rapidly
than converts to the elm relies. This fact accounts for the lam-
entations with which church organs and religious magazines are
now filled with respect to the rapid falling off of church mem-
SECTS, SCHISMS, AND SKEPTICS.
379
-
bership, and the decline of church attendance. The people are
rapidty outgrowing their creeds and dogmas. This causes the
decline of the churches. We will cite a few facts by way of
illustration: A recent number of “ The Christian Era” states
that there has been twenty-two thousand more deserters from
the Baptist Church than conversions to it within the brief period
of five 3’ears. This does not look like converting the world, as
they have avowed their determination to do. And the Meth-
odist Church, according to “The Watchman and Reflector,”
is losing its members still faster: several thousand have left
within the past year. “ Zion’s Watchman ” presents us with a
still sadder picture of the evangelical churches in general. It
states that religion is on the decline in all those churches, and
that in some of them it is rapidly dying out. It states, that,
where one new church is erected, two are shut up; and con-
cludes b}T saying, “ Zion indeed languisheth, and religion is at
a low ebb.” It means churchianity religion ; u for pure religion
and undefiled,” the outgrowth of modern intelligence, is on
the increase, and increases in the ratio of the decline of the
churches. The cause of Zion in old England appears to be in
as lamentable a condition as in this country. A recent number
of “ The English Recorder ” makes the solemn declaration that
there are five millions of people living without the means of
grace in that one province, and that, if arranged in a continuous
line in single file, they would reach the distance of fourteen
miles. This is rather a large number of immortal souls to be
traveling the broad road in one nation. And we are informed
that in Canada a large number of the people have no religion,
and are on the road to infidelity. To return to this country:
A colporteur of the American Bible Society informs us that
three-fourths of the citizens of Philadelphia, and four-fifths
of those of New York and vieinity, have no religion, and no
faith in the religion of the Bible. They must therefore be set
down as infidels. And the American Christian Commission,
which assembled not long since in New York, has made some
startling developments with respect to the decline of church
attendance throughout the country. This body, I believe,
represents nearly all the evangelical churches, and is com-
380
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
posed principally of clergymen. They have had census com-
mittees traveling the whole country over to ascertain the pro-
portionate number of church-members and church-goers in ever}"
city", town, and village in the countiy. Their report is'really
astonishing; and, as figures will not lie, these reports prove
that the orthodox churches are rapidly declining. As indicative
of the state of the whole countiy, look at the condition of some
of our large cities. This vigilance committee tells us that
three-fourths of the citizens of St. Louis never attend church,
making about two hundred thousand out of the whole popula-
tion. And in Boston, according to their figures, the proportion
of church-members and church-goers is still smaller, being only
about one-fifth, which leaves two hundred thousand persons
u out in the cold ; ” but it is a kind of cold that is very com-
fortable compared with the cold, chilling dogmas of orthodoxy.
Statistics similar to the above are furnished for many of the
cities, towns, and villages throughout the country, by which it
appears that many people are forsaking these old, obsolete insti-
tutions, and that the credal churches are really in a dying con-
dition. The State of Vermont, taking it at large, furnishes a
moral lesson worthy of imitation. It is one of the best edu-
cated, moral, enlightened, and intelligent States in the Union.
Crime is but little known compared with the world at large;
and yet only about one in twenty of her citizens is a sound
church-member. Thus we see that Vermont is about the best
educated and most moral State in the Union, and, at the same
time, the most infidel State. Put this and that together. It
will be seen at once that education, intelligence, morality, and
infidelity go hand in hand; and that morality grows out of
infidelity, instead of Christianity; and that science and infi-
clelity, and not the Bible or Christianity, are to be the great
levers and instrumentalities for reforming the world. Where,
then, is the moral force of Christianity, so much talked of by
the clergy? And wc have it, upon the authority of this national
body of clergymen, that there are not a sufficient number
of church edifices in the country to hold one-half of the people
if the}’ wished to attend “ divine service;” and that, on an
an average, the churches are not half filled on the sabbath.
SECTS, SCHISMS, AND SKEPTICS.
381
From this statement it is evident that only about one-fifth are
church-goers ; and a large number of these are not church-mem-
bers, but attend, as the committees state, for mere pastime.
This state of things forms a striking contrast with the con-
dition of things only eighty or a hundred years ago, when
nearly everybody attended church. To sum up the thing in
a few words, the case stands about thus: A hundred years
ago from three-fourths to nine-tenths of the people were church-
attendants, and the most of them church-members; but now
not more than one in eight or ten is a church-adherent, and
not the half of these are sound or full believers. A gentleman,
who has recently traveled in every State in the Union for the
purpose of critically investigating the matter, concludes, as
the result of his inquiries, that not one in fifteen of the entire
population of the United States is a sound orthodox believer.
This, contrasted with the state of the country and churches a
hundred years ago, shows the difference is great, and that the
decline of the orthodox faith is rapid, and their approach to
their final destiny swift and sure. Calculating from the present
rates of decrease in church interest and belief in church
creeds, there will not be an orthodox church in existence sixty
years from this time. Truly does the committee making this
report say, u The state of the churches is alarmingbut it
is only alarming to the unprogressive adherents to old, must}7,
mind-crushing creeds and dogmas. To us it is not alarming,
but cause of rejoicing, in view of the fact that the disappear-
ance of these old soul-crushing institutions will give place to
the glorious and grand truths of the Harmonial philosophy, —
a religion adapted to the true wants of the soul, and calculated
to save both soul and body from every thing which now mars
their health, beauty, and happiness. Then every one can u sit
under his own vine and fig-tree, where none can make him
afraid” of orthodox devils or an angry God. We bring these
things to notice for the purpose of showing that a religious body
which persists in preaching, from year to year and from age to
age, the same creed, dogmas, and catechisms, without any
improvement, or even conceding the possibility that they can be
improved, will fall behind the times, and finally be abandoned
382
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
by all growing and intelligent minds. They cease to answer
the moral and spiritual wants of the people, and become as
cramping to their souls as the Chinese wooden shoes would be
to their feet. “ Excelsior, onward and upward,” is the motto
for this age. And that institution, whether moral, religious, or
political, which obstinately refuses to live out this motto, will
die as certainty as that the stopping the circulation of the blood
will produce death.
Having spoken of the decadence of the churches, we will now
look at the counter-picture, — the progress of infidelity. And
here we observe that leading church-members not only confess
to the decline of the churches, but concede, on the other hand,
that what they are pleased to stigmatize as infidelity is rapidly
increasing. We will refer to some of their alarming reports.
A recent number of u Scribner’s Monthly ” says, that at this
veiy moment a black cloud of skepticism covers the whole
moral horizon ; ” and the Eight Reverend Bishop of Winches-
ter corroborates the statement by exclaiming, “ Infidelity is
everj'where : it colors all our philosophy and our commonplace
religion.” Professor Fisher, in a warning note to Christian pro-
fessors, says but few religious teachers are aware of the strength
of the infidel party, and the alarming prevalence of infidelity
throughout the country, —that “ it pervades all classes of soci-
ety, and is in the very atmosphere we breathe.” If this be true,
that infidelity pervades the atmosphere, then all must inhale it,
and become contaminated by it, and thus become infidels natu-
rally, and in spite of an}r godly resistance. Hence they should
not be blamed for what the}' can not help. The Rev. David
K. Nelson, author of “ The Cause and Cure of Infidelity,” makes
some wonderful concessions in regard to the alarming preva-
lence of infidelity among the higher classes. He tells us that
three-fourths of the editors of our popular newspapers are infi-
dels, that nearly all our law-makers are infidels, and that even
the Church itself is full of infidels.” If these statements
are to be credited, the reverend gentleman ma}r as well aban-
don all efiorts to arrest it; for it evidentty has the reins of
government, and can’t be stopped, and will ultimately rule
the nation, and finally the world. Then will we have a ra-
SECTS, SCniSMS, AND SKEPTICS.
383
tional religion; then will the millennium, so long predicted
by seers and sung of by poets, be ushered in as an earthly par-
adise. This statement of Mr. Nelson’s is corroborated by the
religious magazines of the da}". 4 4 The American Quarterly
Review” asserts that seventeen-twentieths of the people are
tinctured with infidelity. This leaves but a small handful of
the faithful and zealous defenders of the 44 faith once deliv-
ered to the saints.” The editor of 44 The Baptist Examiner ”
says that a member of the United-States Senate remarked to
him, 44 There are, I assure you, but very few members of this
bod}" who believe in your evangelical religion.” This is con-
firmatory of the statement frequently made in this work, that
our current religion is not adapted to the times ; that it is prac-
tically outgrown by the better informed classes of society.
Mr. Beecher says, 44 Four-fifths of the educated young men
of the age are infidels.” Take notice, 44 the educated.” Here
is further evidence that infidelity and intelligence are almost
synonymous terms, — further proof that education and intelli-
gence alone are needed to banish Christian superstition from
the world.
Let it be borne in mind that infidelity, in its true sense,
simply means want of faith in the worn-out creeds and dogmas
of past ages, but no lack of faith in any thing good and true.
If we were to accept the orthodox definition of infidelity,—
44 Want of faith in the precepts and practice of Christ,” —then
it would apply to every Christian professor on earth. There is
not one of them that is not tinctured more or less with this kind
of infidelity. There is not a Christian professor who believes
as Jesus Christ did, or who practices the life he did. For
example : no civilized Christian in this enlightened age believes
with Christ that disease is produced by devils, and that, to
cure the 44 obsessed,” the diabolical intruder must be* cast out
44 of the inner man.” In this and other respects all enlight-
ened Christian professors of the present day differ from the
precepts and examples of Christ; hence, strictly speaking, are not
Christians, but infidels. And we are warranted in saying that
Christ himself, if living in this more enlightened and scientific
age, would reject some of the superstitious notions which he cher-
384
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES,
ishecl in common with the religious professors of that dark and
illiterate era. He was most devoutly honest, but veiy ignorant
on scientific subjects. Here permit us to note the fact that
a very great change has taken place within half a century in the
practical lives, as well as the religious views, of those wrho still
profess to believe in the Christian faith. The time has been
when nearly all religious professors, including even officers under
the government, kept a diary of their religious experience, about
which they talked whenever they met together; daily engaged in
vocal prayer, and daily read their Bibles and catechisms ; and
the latter many of them committed to memory. But now it is
doubtful whether one-half of even the clergy themselves ever
read it. And as for the Bible, which used to be read every
day by Christian professors, probably not one-half of them ever
see inside of it once in six months, unless it is when they wish
to settle some controverted question in theology. Some modern
works of fiction or of travel have taken the place of u the Holy
Book” on the centre-table, while the newspaper has supplanted
the catechism. These are some of the extraordinary changes
which have recently taken place, and are still rapidly going on,
in the practical lives of Christian professors, which tend to show
that their faith is dail}r growing weaker in the soul-saving effi-
cacy of their religion, or in the belief that it possesses any
intrinsic importance. This rapid decline in practical Chris-
tianit}’ will land nearly all its professors on the shores of infi-
delity in less than half a century.
CHAPTER LVIII.
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY.
Wiiex Martin Luther left the Roman-Catholic Church, and
adopted the motto, “Liberty to investigate,” he sounded the
death-knell of every orthodox church that should afterwards
spring up outside the jurisdiction of the Pope. Luther was
bigotcdly orthodox, and something of a tyrant: but he had more
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY. 385
intellectual brain and mind than most men of his time; and
that intellectual ability, though warped by education and en-
chained by bigotry and superstition, struggled for freedom as
minds of that character always do. Luther commenced reason-
ing (most unfortunate for his orthodoxy) ; but he had been
living in the murky atmosphere of superstition all his life, and
preaching a creed that had been stereotyped for a thousand
years : so that his reasoning powers had been much’weakened,
and he had not sufficient intellectual light to see his way out of
the dark prison-house of superstition in which the whole Chris-
tian Church was then enslaved. But he had intellect enough,
when exercised, to convince him there was something wrong
in the popular religion of the times ; and he commenced reason-
ing, though in a very narrow circle. He did not attack ortho-
doxy, but only the tyranny of its misrule and the audacity of
the Pope. It was only a reasoning mind beginning to feel the
impulse of intellectual growth. The method which he adopted
— u liberty to investigate ”—was a dangerous experiment for
orthodox}7, and will yet prove the death-warrant of all Protes-
tant churches. The Pope has adopted the only true policy
for keeping the light of the grand truths of science and infidel-
ity from entering the darkened doors and windows of the
Church, and producing schisms and disputes,—that of binding
the intellect in chains, and laying it at the feet of the Pope.
But Luther, by adopting the motto, “ Liberty to investigate,”
set some orthodox minds to thinking and reasoning ; and a reli-
gious mind that is allowed to think for itself will eventually
think and reason its way out of its soul-enslaving creed, or at
least make some progress in that direction. Hence, ever since
Luther adopted this grand motto, the Christian Church (except
that part kept in fetters by the Pope) has been gradually mov-
ing every hour since Luther entered upon this hazardous experi-
ment of allowing religionists to reason and think for themselves.
Orthodox}’ has been growing weaker. It is becoming gradually
diluted with the grand truths of science, and now entertains
broader and more enlightened views. Thus this bigoted spirit of
orthodoxy is dying by inches. Its days are numbered ; and the
last orthodox Protestant church will die in less than a century.
386
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
This is no mere visionary dream or random guess-work : it is a
scientific problem, which can be proved and demonstrated by
figures. The progress of the churches in the past, in permitting
the truths of science and the infidelity of the age to displace
its mind-crushing dogmas,'and modify its creeds, furnishes a
certain criterion for calculating their final destiny; and, by
this rule, we are assured its }’ears will be few. Let us look and
see what progress the Protestant churches have already made
towards 41 abandoning the faith once delivered to the saints.”
Some of them are much farther advanced in the line of progress
than others ; and each new church that has sprung up since the
days of Luther dates a new era in the religious progress and
onward march of infidelity; and yet each one professed to be
sound in the faith, and forbid any one to advance beyond its
landmarks. Every one proclaimed, Thus far shalt thou go, and
no farther, in the line of religious progress. We will notice
them in their order. The old Romish Church held all Chris-
tians in its iron grasp for eleven hundred years, and hung its
dark curtains in the moral heavens to exclude the light of
science. Reason was held in chains, and the intellect crushed
beneath the foot of popish infallibility. But, after this night of
intellectual darkness, Luther rebelled, and broke the spell, and
set what little intellect there was left in the Church to thinking.
Its doctrines were heathenish. It taught the infallibility of the
Pope, and the divinity of the Virgin Mary. In this respect they
were more consistent than the Protestant churches; for the
divinity of Christ presupposes the divinity of both his parents,
otherwise he would be half human and half divine. It also
teaches the doctrine of election and reprobation, endless pun-
ishment, and other sil^ superstitions. In this state of mental
darkness Greek literature made an attempt to invade its ranks
and dispel its ignorance with the light of science, but failed,
— not, however, until it had let a few gleams of light into the
intellectual brain of some of the best minds, and set them to
thinking. This caused a few members to reject the infallibility
of the Pope, and a division in the Church was the consequence.
A new Church was instituted, which received the name of “ the
Greek Church. * * Here we find a slight improvement in the
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY. 387
Christian creed. The Greek Christians rejected the doctrine of
the infallibility of the Pope, but still held to the divinity of the
Virgin Mary, and all the other senseless dogmas of the Church.
But, as it abandoned one of the most popular but unreasonable
doctrines of the Church, it was an important step toward ad-
vancement. They did not, however, look upon it in that light,
but declared it was the true doctrine of the Bible, and here
planted then* stakes, and forbade any further improvement.
After gathering a Church of seventy million souls, another
night of intellectual darkness set in, and continued for four
hundred years ; which brings us down to the fifteenth century,
when Luther rebelled against the Pope, and again broke the
spell of mental lethargy and intellectual darkness, and set what
little intellectual mind there was left in the Church to thinking.
Another slight improvement was made in the Christian creed.
The Lutherans not only rejected the doctrine of the infallibility
of the Pope, but also the divinity of the Virgin Mary, but here
stopped, and planted their stakes, and issued a bull to interdict
further progress; but the ball, once set in motion, can not be
stopped. As well attempt to bind the ocean with a rope of
sand as to attempt to stop the march of thought when one link
is broken which binds it to the Juggernaut of superstition.
This is true, however, of but few minds. But few church-
members possess thought and independence enough to advance
faster than their leaders. Luther did not live long enough to
outgrow all the superstitious dogmas in which he had been edu-
cated ; but he made such rapid progress in infidelity that he
condemned the doctrines of eleven books of the Bible, and
consequently rejected them ; viz., Chronicles, Job, Ecclesiastes,
Proverbs, Esther, Joshua, Jonah, Hebrews, James, Jude, and
Revelation. He was then an infidel with respect to eleven
books of the Bible ; and, had he lived in an age of progress like
the present, he would have become an out-and-out infidel. But
the mass of his followers did not possess minds so susceptible
of intellectual growth: hence they lived and died in faith with
the creeds he made for them. There were, however, a few ex-
ceptions to this rule. In all ages and all religious countries,
and under every form of religion, there have been a few minds
388
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
gifted with thought and reason beyond that of the multitude.
A few of this class figured under Lutherism, who eventually,
by virtue of their tendency to mental growth, discovered some
defects in his creed and system of faith. Among this number
was Arminius', who rejected the doctrine of total depravity,
original sin, the eucharist, purgatory, &c., and, with this change
of Lutherism, founded what became known as the Arminian
Church: but as no mind and no set of minds in any age have
possessed the mental capacity to discover all error, or to grasp
all truth, so Arminius only outgrew a few of the erroneous
dogmas of the Christian faith, and then stopped, and planted
his stakes, and stereotyped his creed ; and any opinion or doc-
trine that advanced beyond that was infidelity. He did not
live quite long enough to discover the absurdity of the atone-
ment and an endless hell, and hence those doctrines are
found in his creed; but the change he made in the popular
religion furnishes another indubitable proof of the progress of
mind, and the progressive improvement of the religion of Chris-
tianity, and another proof of the steady progress Christianity
has made towards infidelity. So distinct and marked have been
these changes, that the}7 furnish data for calculating proximately
the period when the last dogma shall drop out of the creeds of
the churches, and bring them into conformity to the teachings
of reason and science,—in other words, when Christianity shall
merge into infidelity. And what is meant by infidelity is the
want of faith in the false and morally injurious dogmas of the
superstitious ages.
Another step in the road of religious progress brings us to
the Unitarian Church. Here we find still longer strides in the
direction of the Christian faith towards infidelity. The Uni-
tarians rejected the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus Christ.
And why? Simply because the founders of that church had
expansive intellectual minds that enabled them to perceive the
absurdity and logical impossibility of the truth of the doctrine.
Their enlightened reasoning powers enabled them to discover
these objections to the doctrine: viz. (1) The impossibility of
incorporating an infinite being into a finite body or into the
human body; (2) the absurdity of considering any being on
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY. 389
earth a God while there was acknowledged to be one in heaven,
making at least two Gods; (3) the difficulty of accepting the
Bible history of Christ as furnishing proof of his divinity, while
it invests him with all the qualities of a human being. These
and numerous other absurdities, which are treated of in “ The
World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” lead them to reject the
doctrine of the divinity of Christ, while most other Protestant
churches consider a belief in the doctrine essential to salvation.
Thus they make a long leap towards infidelity. Having intel-
lectually outgrown the doctrine, they set themselves to work to
get it out of the Bible. This was no difficult task: for as many
texts as may be found in the New Testament in favor of the
doctrine, a much larger number may be cited in opposition to it.
And a similar history may be given of the Universalist
Church. It, too, has run into infidelity. The doctrine of Uni-
versal salvation is a beautiful doctrine : it had its origin in the
noblest and kindest feelings of the human mind. Messrs. Mur-
ra}T and Ballou, founders of the church, were men of broad
philanthropy and human sympathy, and possessed the kindest
feelings. Such men could not brook the idea of endless misery
for a single soul in God’s universe. They were also men of a
liberal endowment of reason and logical perception, and hence
rejected the doctrine from logical considerations also. Being
intellectual and intelligent men, they became cominced that the
doctrine was wrong. They set themselves to work to get it out
of the Bible. Their object in doing this was more to save the
credit of the Bible than to make it an authority to sustain their
own position. The Bible being a many-stringed instrument, on
which you can play any tune, they found about as little diffi-
culty in disproving the doctrine by the Bible as others do in
establishing the doctrine by that authority. It is wonderful
with what ease and facility a dozen conflicting doctrines may
be drawn from the same text. • This is because all human lan-
guage is ambiguous, and that of the Bible pre-eminently so;
and this fact demonstrates the absolute impossibility of settling
any controverted theological question b}" the Bible. Controver-
sialists who should argue a question before a jury on Bible
ground, for a week or a month, should, in most cases, have
390
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
a verdict given in favor of both parties; for, usually, both
“ beat,” and also get beaten. Universalists, taking advantage
of this ambiguity and uncertainty of Bible language, are now
able to show that the doctrine of endless punishment is not
taught in the Book. The}" succeeded in ruling the doctrine out
of all the punitive terms to be found in “ Hoi}" Writ.” The
word “ devil,” on being traced to its origin, was found to be a
contraction of “do evil.” With this discovery they cast the
“devil” out of their Bible. The word “hell” was found to
be derived from the Saxon word “ hole ; ” and hence, if it can
have any application in the case, must mean “ Symm’s Hole.”
“I-Iell-fire” originally meant a fire kindled in the vicinity of
Jerusalem to consume the offal of the city. And thus, accord-
ing to Universalism, the doctrine of future endless torment is
no longer a Christian doctrine; and, whether their position is
correct or not, it is rather comforting to believe that none of us
are to be eternally roasted in the future life, and that even
Satan himself has been released from the “painful duty” of
ruling that kingdom. The history of both the Unitarian and
Universalist Churches furnishes evidence of the rapid advance-
ment of Christianity toward infidelity ; and also the conclusion
that the natural desires and moral feelings, and also the rea-
soning faculties, have much to do in forming the opinions of
Christian professors as to whether certain doctrines are taught
in the Bible,—whether they are scriptural or antiscriptural.
The wish is often father to the belief. Just let a certain Bible
doctrine become repugnant to the natural feelings of some
pious professor, or at war with his enlightened reason, or in-
stinctively repulsive to his moral sense, and he will find some
way to convince himself that it is not a Bible doctrine. A new
light springing up in the mind has, in many cases, led to new
and improved interpretations of the Bible. It seems strange,
indeed, (hat none of the two hundred millions of Christian pro-
fessors have been able to discover that it is the improvement of
the moral and intellectual faculties that has done so much to
improve the doctrines and general teachings of the Bible in
modern times. The old absurdities and heathenish ideas of
the Bible arc pumped out by the clerical force-pump, and a new
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY. 391
set of ideas substituted in their place. This keeps it from fall-
ing immeasurably behind the times. It is a work of moral
necessity to keep it from being condemned and set aside, or
trampled under foot. Christian professors can all find abun-
dant scripture to prove any thing they desire to prove ; but let
them change their belief, and adopt the opposite doctrine, and
they can find as much scripture to prove that also. There is
no difficult}" in making out any kind of a creed or code of faith
that may be desired. Hence a man may change his creed or
his conduct as often as he pleases, and still be a Christian, or
at least pass for one.
Who that is not blinded by priestcraft, or a false religious
education, can not see that it was the natural growth of the
moral and intellectual faculties which gave rise to those new
churches to which I have referred, with their new and improved
interpretation of the Bible ? Step by step along the pathway
of human progress, the churches are forced against all resist-
ance to make occasional improvements in their creeds; but so
strong is their resistance to any change, and so determined to
keep their creeds and dogmas unalterably stereotyped, that
their improvements are too slow to suit the most progressive
minds amongst them. Hence they leave the churches to which
they have been tied, and in some cases form new ones, with
new creeds, better adapted to the improved taste and improved
moral code of the times. There is not a Protestant church in
existence that does not furnish incontestable proof that Chris-
tian doctrines are perpetually changing. There is not a Protes-
tant church that is not on the high road to infidelity. They
have all unconsciously broken loose from the old landmarks.
There is not One of them that is not now preaching doctrines
which they would fifty or sixty years ago have denounced as
infidelity. This may be to some a startling statement, but I
will prove it.
I have pointed out numerous changes in doctrines made by
all the modern churches, and their rapid tendency to infidelity.
I will now show that the churches from which they emanated,
on account of their immobility and conservativeness, have also
made radical changes in their creeds, and are moving on in the
392
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
same direction, being pushed forward by the irresistible tide of
modern innovation and improvement. They have made more or
less change in nearly all the doctrines of their creeds. Then
look at the numerous doctrines once regarded as the very
essence of Christianity, which they have entirety abandoned.
We will enumerate some of them: The doctrine of casting out
devils ; the doctrine of a lake of fire and brimstone ; the doc-
trine of Christ’s descent into hell; the doctrine of purgatory
(these two last-named doctrines, Mr. Sears says, “ were once
the doctrines of the Church universal, which nobody called in
dispute”); the doctrine of election and reprobation, fore-
ordination ; the doctrine of infant damnation; the doctrine of
polygamy, &c. These were all once regarded as prime articles
of the Christian faith ; and most of them were preached b}’ all
the churches: and now they are all abandoned by most of the
churches ; thus showing that they improve their creeds as the}T
advance in light and knowledge. Thus the enlightenment of
their own minds leads them to preach more enlightened doc-
trines, which the}^ erroneously suppose are the teachings of the
Book, when they are realty the product of their own minds.
The Indian, when he halloos to the distant hills and receives
back the echo of his own voice, erroneousty supposes some one
is responding to him. In like manner, Christians, when read-
ing and interpreting their Bible, receive the echo of their own
minds, which they mistake for the response of the Bible writers,
and the true meaning of the text. Each new church, springing
up from time to time, is founded on some new interpretation of
the Bible, and flatters itself, that, for the first time since the
establishment of Christianity, it has found the true key for un-
locking all the mysteries and explaining all the doctrines of the
Bible ; and that all the churches which preceded it were in
the dark, each of which interpreted the same texts differently,
with the same conviction that they had found the true key for
laying open the hidden mysteries of the “ word of God.”
But the probability is, that if the Bible writers could be called
up from their graves, and interrogated about the matter, they
would declare that not one of the churches had guessed at the
real meaning of those texts which they are quarreling about the
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY. 393
meaning of; that they are all far from the mark ; and that they
have all saddled a meaning on the texts which the writers never
intended, and never thought of, and would make them smile to
hear of,—though, in many eases, they have made decided im-
provements on the original meaning, so as to make them more
acceptable to the enlightened and thinking and intelligent
minds of the age. This saves the Book from being rejected.
Did the clergy preach the same doctrine they did fifty or a hun-
dred years ago, they would find themselves minus a congrega-
tion. It is the improvement they are constantly making in the
Bible that keeps up its reputation, and saves it from the ruinous
criticisms and condemnations of the scientific men of the age.
And yet these changes are wrought unconsciously to the great
mass of Christian professors; and many of them would have
been startled had they been told in early life that the time
would come when they would believe as they do now,—per-
haps horrified at the thought, — and would have denounced it
as the rankest infidelity. The question, then, naturally arises
here, Where is the usoof erecting standards of faith, when you
believe one thing to-day and another to-morrow? You admit
you were mistaken in the belief you entertained a few years
ago ; and in a few years more, if you have a progressive mind,
you will admit that your present position is wrong, and suscep-
tible of improvement. Every Christian professor of much in-
telligence makes some improvement in his creed in the course
of his life. Hence it is impossible for him to know what he
will believe to-morrow, or how much more of an infidel he will
be than he is to-day. One change makes way for another. The
wheels of progress move steadily onward: they never stop, and
never run backward. It is impossible, after you have made
the slightest change and improvement in your religious belief,
which is a step in the direction of infidelity, to know how many
steps you will take in the future. You may resolve and re-
resolve, as most religious professors do, that there shall be no
change fin your present views ; but that will not prevent it. One
change proves not only the possibilhy, but the probability, of
another change. Martin Luther once believed, like Rev. Dr.
Cheever of New York that, u There is not the shadow of a
394
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
shade of error in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation ;9 9 and
yet he afterwards found eleven books of the Bible so full of
errors, that he decided they were not divinely inspired, and re-
jected them from his creed: and, had he lived fifty years later,
he might have rejected all the other books of the Bible, and be-
come as rank an infidel as Paine and Voltaire. They became
infidel to the whole Bible in the same way he became infidel to
nearly a fourth of it. The mind which loosens itself from the
trammels of its early education, and begins to think for itself,
has launched its bark on the sea of infidelity. One free thought
is one step toward infidelity; that is, a disbelief in the dogmas,
superstitions, and traditions of the dark ages. It is just as
useless and just as foolish for a man to resolve he will never be
an infidel, as to resolve it shall never rain, or that the hair on
his head shall never turn gray; for he has just as much control
over one as the other.
We have shown that the Protestant churches arc sailing out
on the ocean of infidelity, and are making steady progress in
that direction ; and it is only a question of time when they will
be entirety infidel. It is true, that, owing to the conservative
character of the church creeds, and the inveterate hostility the
priests have ever manifested to changing them, upon the as-
sumption that they are too holy and too sacred to be criticised
and too perfect to be improved, the churches have made slow
progress in the way of improving their creeds compared with
what would have been witnessed in this respect under a more
liberal and tolerant spirit. Owing to this impediment the
improvement in Christian doctrine has not kept pace with im-
provements in other things. The progress in the arts, science,
agriculture, political econom}', the mechanic arts, the fine arts,
&c., has far outstripped the improvement of our religious
institutions, and their relinquishment of the errors and super-
stitions of the past, and nothing but the most absolute com-
pulsion by the moral force of the progressive spirit of the ago
has induced the churches to make any improvement -in their
creeds and doctrines. The spirit of improvement is manifested
in eveiy department of business, and in all our numerous institu-
tions but that of our religion* Vixen it comes to that, it is,
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY. 395
“Hands off! there shall be no changes here.” It must still
continue to wear the same old garments it has worn for nearly
two thousand years, though they have become must}", soiled,
and worn, and directly opposed to the spirit of the age. In
view of this strongly opposing conservative spirit, it is remark-
able that so much improvement has been realized in our na-
tional religion as we now witness. This improvement has been
effected more by the process of changing the meaning of words
and language than that of changing the text by a new trans-
lation, as I have already shown. This surgical operation
has been inflicted upon thousands of texts; and so fre-
quently and so generally has this expedient been adopted by
churches to get rid of the errors of the “Holy Book,” that the
meaning of some texts has been changed hundreds of times.
There is one text in Galatians (iii. 20), which, Christian writers
inform us, has received no less than two hundred and forty
interpretations at different times by different writers; that is,
two hundred and forty guesses have been made at the mean-
ing of this one text. “Revelation” is defined as “the act of
making known.” But what is made known by a book, one text
of which you have to guess two hundred and forty times at the
meaning of, and then don’t know whether it is right or not ?
And this is but a sample of many texts scattered through the
Book, which have been overburdened with meanings in a similar
manner in order to get a sufficient amount of science and sense
into them to make them acceptable to the enlightened minds of
the age. This renovating and revolutionizing process makes
Christianity a mere system of guess-work, and salvation a mere
lottery-scheme; and thousands, in view of this ambiguity and
precariousness, have come to the conclusion that it is easier to
find what is right in any question of morals, without recourse to
the Bible, than it is to find out what the Bible writers desired
to teach in the case. Why, then, waste such a vast amount of
time in attempting to find out the meaning of thousands of texts,
as many Christian writers have done in all ages of the Church,
when, if the meaning could be determined with certainty, there
would be but little accomplished by it ? For, after all, we have to
test the truth of the doctrine or precept by our own experience,
306
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
in the same manner the}" proved it,—if they proved it at all.
There has been time enough wasted in this kind of speculation
to build the Pyramids ; and the world is no wiser or better for
it. As there is no certain rule for interpreting one text in the
Bible (and every word originally written in Hebrew had from
four to forty meanings), we may guess at the meanings till our
heads are gray, and then die in doubt. To show how the mean-
ing of Bible texts has been improved by successive construc-
tions, I will cite one case. For more than a thousand years
the various texts which refer to casting out devils were ac-
cepted as literally true. It was supposed they mean just what
they say, and that “the old fellow’’ (King Beelzebub) is to
be cast out of the inner man,—body, head, horns, and hoofs.
But, when the age of reason dawned upon the world, it began to
be discovered that the notion of casting out devils was an old
heathen tradition, and too senseless for sensible people to be-
lieve in. Hence, to save the credit of the Book and the credit
of the Church, casting out devils was interpreted to mean cast-
ing out our evil propensities, which, although a perversion of
the meaning of the writer, was an improvement on the original.
The further acquisition of scientific knowledge, accelerated by
the invention of the printing-press, revealed the fact that man
never parts with his evil propensities, or any other propensities,
however much the}" may be subdued. Hence Bible-mongers set
themselves to work to ferret out another meaning for the text.
They finally decided that casting out devils means restraining
our evil propensities. This, although far from the meaning of
the writer, is another improvement on “God’s perfect revela-
tion.” In this way, step by step, this and thousands of other
texts have been improved from time to time by successive
translations and interpretations, until u God’s Book v has be-
come partially purged of the errors it would seem he put into
it; and it may yet, in this way, become a sensible book.
The interpretation of the Bible has been (as already stated)
an art in all Christian countries for ages. The original object
was to obtain the meaning of the Bible writers ; but, in modern
times, the object seems to be to obtain a meaning to suit the
reader, without much regard to the meaning of the writer.
MODERN CHRISTIANITY ONE-HALF INFIDELITY. 397
This statement may be,*to some readers, rather startling; but
there can be no question of its truth. Some of our most popular
Christian writers have avowed it, though in rather an indirect way.
Hear what the Rev. John Pye Smith, the leading Christian clergyT-
man of England, and one. of the ablest and most popular in all
Christendom, says with respect to Bible interpretations: 441
would advise the clergy everywhere to interpret the Bible ac-
cording to the spirit of the age.” Most wonderful advice
truly, and a, dead shot at.the Bible. Let it be understood, then,
that, according to this Christian divine, Bible readers hereafter
are to pay no attention to the plain and obvious meaning of the.
Bible language, or to the writer’s intended meaning (which is
the only true meaning), but force a meaning into the text which
you know will be. acceptable 4 4 to the spirit of the age ; ’ ’ that
is, to men of reason and of scientific attainments. The Bible,
then, is to.be venerated henceforth, not for what it teaches, but
for what it ought to teach, or what the fanciful reader would
have it teach. Verily, verily, we have fallen upon strange
times when 44 God’s word,” like a nose of wax, is to be
molded into any shape to suit 4 4 the spirit of the times;”
but don’t let it be supposed that the Rev. John Pye Smith is
the only,Christian professor who makes God’s infallible revela-
tion succumb to the good sense and intelligence of the age, —
44 the spirit of the times.” There is not an orthodox clergy-
man,*' not a Christian church, and scarcely a Christian pro-
fessor, who does not make the Bible a mere tool in that way,
None of them, in all cases, accept the literal meaning of the
Bible. None of them take the dictionary for a guide in all
cases to determine the meaning of the words of the text. As
we have said, there is not an orthodox church or clergyman
who does not frequently abandon the dictionary, and travel out-
side of it, and coin a new meaning of his own for many of
the words of the Bible, and ingraft into those words a meaning
they never possessed before. They thus assume a license that
would not be tolerated with respect to any other book; and
yet, notwithstanding these countless alterations and changes
in 44 God’s unchangeable word,”—changes in the language,
changes in the meaning of its words, changes by translation,
398
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
changes in the import of its doctrine, and changes in the teach-
ing of its precepts ; yet millions cling to it as u God’s perfect,
unalterable revelation,” his “ pure and unadulterated word.”
They seem to take the same view of it the old lady did of
the carving-knife, which, although it had been mended sixteen
times, had had seven new blades and nine new handles, yet it
was the same old keepsake which her father had given her forty
years before. The Bible, in like manner, has been altered
and amended by fifty translations and a hundred and fifty thou-
sand alterations, according to the learned Dr. Robinson of Eng-
land, and is still believed by millions to be the same old book,
—just as God gave it to man. What superstitious infatuation !
It is an instructive fact, which we will note here, that all this
labor of amending and enlightening the Bible is the work of
the very best minds in the churches,—the growing, thinking,
intellectual minds in those institutions; minds that are in a
state of unrest, that are hungering and thirsting for something
better; minds which are unconsciously struggling to get free
from the trammels of priestcraft and superstition, and the reli-
gious creeds in which they were educated, and are uncon-
sciously aspiring for something better, something higher, holier,
and purer, but can not give up the idolized Book which has
been so long enwrapped among their heart-strings that it has
seemingly become a part and parcel of their souls. Hence,
rather than abandon it and leave it behind them, they prefer to
remodel and reconstruct it, and bring it up to their own moral
standard, and thus make a better and more sensible thing of
it than God himself did in the first place; that is, assuming
that lie had any thing to do with it. And they generally put
newer and better ideas into the Book, and better morals, than
the}" ever got out of it; and finally, in many cases, outgrow
the current theology, and become more enlightened, more intel-
ligent, and more useful members of society, than they were in
any period of tlioir lives.
CHARACTER, OF THE CHRISTIAN’S GOD.
399
-
CHAPTER LIX.
CHARACTER OF THE CHRISTIAN’S GOD.
The object in selecting and presenting the list of texts quoted
in this chapter is to show that Bible writers entertained a very
low and dishonorable conception of the “ all-loving Father,” and
that, on this account, the reading of these caricatures of Infinite
Wisdom must have a demoralizing effect upon those who habit-
ually read them, and accept them as truth. Even if they were
all accepted as metaphors, or mere figures of speech, that would
not prevent or destroy their injurious effect upon the mind ; for
descriptions by metaphor or pictures have the same effect upon
the mind as literal descriptions or representations. And what
must be the effect upon the mind of the ignorant heathen who
read the Book with no suspicion of its being aught but reality,
as much of it was unquestionably designed to be ?
1. “ There went up a smoke out of his nostrils, fire out of his mouth devoured: coals
were kindled by it ” (2 Sam. xxii. 9). Suggestion of a volcano.
2. “ He had horns coming out of his hand” (Hah. iii. 4).
3. “ Out of his mouth went a sharp two-edged sword” (Rev. i. 16). Rather a fright-
ful monster to look at.
4. “ fie shall mightily roar from his habitation” (Jer. xxv. 30). Wonder if it fright-
ened the saints in glory.
5. “ He shall give a shout, as they that tread the grapes ” (Jer. xxv. 30).
6. “ He awaked as one out of sleep ” (Ps. lxxviii. 65). The presumption would he he
had been asleep.
7. ‘ ‘ And like a mighty man that shouteth by reason of wine ” (Ps. lxxviii. 65). Would
not this lead to the conclusion he was drunk?
8. In his anger he persecuted and slew without pity (Lam. iii. 43). Good authority
for persecuting and killing enemies. No wonder all Christendom is noted for persecu-
tion and bloodshed.
9. “ His fury is poured out like fire ” (Nah. i. 6). Rather a frightful God.
10. “ The rocks are thrown down by him” (Nah. i. 6). Throwing stones is rather a
ludicrous business for a God to engage in.
11. He became angry, and sware (Ps. xcv. 11). It is easy to see why swearing is
so common in Christian countries.
12. He burns with anger (Isa. xxx. 27). Who would wish to live in heaven with
such a being?
13. “His lips are full of indignation” (Isa. xxx. 27). Who saw his lips? and what
peculiar aspect did they present to lead to this conclusion ?
14. “ And his tongue as a devouring fire ” (Isa. xxx. 27). How came the writer to see
his tongue ?
15. He “is a jealous God” (Exod. xxxiv. 14). Jealous of what? “Jealousy is a
hateful fiend ” (Cato).
400
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
? _V\v.
16. “He shall stir up jealousy like a man of war ” (Isa. xlii. 13). Of course, if he in-
dulged in jealousy himself, his example would stir up this vile passion in others.
17. He rides upon horses (Hab. iii. 8). In what part of the universe are those horses
kept? and how many does he ride at a time?
18. “ He shall cry, yea, roar” (Isa. xlii. 13). Rather a frightful object.
19. “ He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision”
(Ps. ii. 4). “ But thou, O Lord, shalt laugh at them; thou shalt have all the heathen in
derision ” (Ps. lix. 8). Who ever heard him laugh?
20. “ The Lord is a man of war ” (Exod. xv. 3). What kind of arms does he use?
21. “I will make mine arrows drunk With blood ,?:(Deut. xxxii. 42). A good archer.
22. “ They have provoked me to anger.”—“Anger shows great weakness of mind”
(William Penn). . .
23. “I will heap mischief upon them.” — “Mischief-makers are enemies to society”
(Socrates).
24. “I will spend my arrows upon them” (Deut. xxxii. 23). “Arrows are the
weapons of savages ” (Goodrich).
* 2-3. “A fire is kindled in mine anger” (Deut. xxxii. 22). “Angei' resteth In'the
bosom of tools” (Solomon).
26. “I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents”
(Deut. xxxii. 24). This exhibits a more fiendish spirit than that of Nero.
27. “ I myself will fight against you in anger and fury and great wrath ” (Jer. xxi. 5).
Anger and fury disclose a weak and unbalanced mind ” (Publius Syrus).
28. “I will laugh at your calamity” (hov. i. 26). f* Only brutal savages can be
happy while others are miserable” (Publius Syrus).
29. “ I frame evil against you” (Jer. xviii. 11). Who, then, can deny that God is the
author of evil ?
30. The spirit said, “ I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets ” (1 Kiiigs
xxii. 22). Of course, then, all the lies they told would be his, andnot theirs.
31. “ If I whet my glittering sword” (Deut. xxxii. 41). What a frightful picture for
the all-loving Father!
32. “ Spare them not, but destroy both men and beasts, infant and suckling” (1 Sam. xv.
3). We would neither worship such a God on earth, or dwell with him in heaven.
33. “He was unto me as a bear lying in wait, and as a lion in secret places” (Lam.
iii. 10). Think of the God of the universe descending from heaven, and crouching in
ambush, like bears and lions, to spring upon the unsuspecting traveler! The tendency
of such a thought is to weaken both moral and intellectual growth.
34. He will “ cry like a travailing woman ” (Isa. xlii. 14). •
35. He is full of vengeance and wrath, and is furious (Nah. i. 2). A savage monster.
Who would worship such a God ?
36. “ The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and
the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs (Deut. xxxii. 25).
37. “ The sword shall devour, and make drunk with their blood” (Jer. xlvi. 10).
The language of the above is blasphemous and shocking to
refined feelings, whether accepted as literal or figurative.
Though but just begun, we will pursue this sickening theme
no further at present. It is an unpleasant task to pen these
shocking pictures of u Divine Goodness ;” but the time has ar-
rived when these evils should be fully exposed, that Christian
professors ina}r see the error of preaching the doctrines of the
semi-barbarous ages, which have the effect to dwarf the intel-
lect and repress the growth of every healthy moral emotion of
the mind, and thus retard the moral and intellectual progress
of society. Such considerations loudly call for a full exposition
of the errors and evils of biblical theolog}T, feo long concealed
under the sacred garb of u inspiration.”
Note.—This chapter might easily be extended to a hundred pages of similar ex-
amples.
ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY ERRORS.
401
CHAPTER LX.
ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY ERRORS OF JESUS CHRIST.
In 44 The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” under the
head of 44 The Two Hundred Errors of Christ,” the author has
pointed out sixty errors in his teachings and practical life. It
was the intention of the author to have completed the expo-
sition in this chapter; but he has discovered that a full and
thorough elucidation of all the errors would swell this volume
beyond its proper size. He has therefore concluded to present
a mere abstract of one hundred and fifty of those errors in this
work, and reserve a fuller exposition to be comprised in a
pamphlet to be published soon, and to contain also thirteen
powerful and unanswerable arguments exposing the numerous
absurdities and impossibilities of the orthodox theory that
Christ possessed two natures, human and divine,—that he
was both God and man. This assumption is known as 44 the
hypostatic union,” or dual nature of Christ. The pamphlet,
comprising these two subjects, can be had when published, of the
usual booksellers or the author, for twenty-five cents.
The admirers and worshipers of Jesus Christ adore him as a
being of absolute perfection,—perfect in intelligence, perfect
in wisdom, perfect in power, perfect in judgment, perfect in his
practical life, and perfect in his moral inculcations. We are
told, 44 He spake as never man spake;” and, finally, that he
taught a system of religion and morals so absolutely faultless
as to challenge the criticism of the world, and so perfect as to
defy improvement: and to doubt or disbelieve this dogmatic
assumption is to peril our eternal salvation. With this kind
of teaching and preaching in the Christian pulpit for nearly two
thousand 3~ears, it is not strange that the great mass of Chris-
tian professors have been blinded and kept in ignorance with
402
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
respect to his numerous errors, which modern science has brought
to light both in his teachings and his practical life, a portion
of which will be found briefly noticed in this chapter under
three heads: viz., (1) “ Christ’s Moral and Religious Errors,”
(2) “Christ’s Scientific Errors,” (3) “Christ’s Errors of
Omission.” ;j» >
I. The Moral and Religious Errors of Christ..
In “The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors” we have,
under the above heading, shown (1) that' Christ possessed a
very ardent religious nature ; (2) that he was unenlightened by
scientific culture, (3) and that consequently he often indulged
in the most extravagant views of the duties of life; (4) that he
inculcated a moral and religious s}"stem carried to such extremes
as to render its obligations utterly impossible to be reduced to
practice ; (5) that his injunction, “ Take no thought for to-mor-
r6w,” is of impracticable application, and never has b&en lived
up to by any of his disciples in that age or since; (6) that, if
reduced to practice, it would starve the world to death in less
than twelve months ; (7) that his injunction, “ La}" not up treas-
ures on earth” (Matt. vi. 19), has been ignored and trampled
under foot by the whole Christian world ; (8) that his injunction
to his disciples to part with all their property (Matt. xix. 21)
would soon fill the world with paupers ; (9) that his promise to
supply all the necessaries of life to those who shall “ seek 'first
the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. vi. 33) has never been ful-
filled; (10) that his injunctions, “Resist not evil,” (11) when
smitten on one cheek, turn the other also, are virtual invita-
tions to personal abuse ; (12) that his mandate, “ Love not tho
world;” (13) also, “to hate father and mother, brother and
sister,” &c. (Luke xiv. 26) ; (14) also, to give up voluntarily
our garments when attacked by a robber (Matt. v. 40) ; (15)
also, to make no defense of our lives when they arc sought by
murderers (Luke xvii. 33), are all extravagant, unnatural, and
unreasonable moral obligations ; (1G) that his declaration to his
disciples, that they would be “hated by all men ” (Matt. x. 22),
(17) and his injunction to shake off the dust of their feet
against their skeptical hearers, (18) and “go and.teach all na-
ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY ERRORS.
403
tions,” (19) and “ take nothing for your journey ” (Mark. vi. 8),
are all indications of a mind run wild with religious fanaticism ;
(20) as is also the declaration, “ He that believeSth not shall be
damned ;” (21) and “ He that believeth and is baptized shall
be saved ” is equally unreasonable ; (22) that?’all things asked
for in prayer believing has never been realized by any person ;
(23) that it sets aside all natural laws. (24) It is calculated
to encourage idleness and sloth, (25) and thus bring on misery
and starvation. (26) The commands to “call no man ‘ father ;9 v
(27) also, “ Call no man c a fool; ’ ” (28) also, to “ pray without
ceasing; ” (29) also, to forgive our enemies four hundred and
ninety times (“ seventy times seven”); (30) also, to “ love
your enemies ” (Matt. v. 46) ; (31) also, to pluck out our eyes
and cut off our hands if they offend us ; (32) and, also, to be-
come eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s Sake, are utterances
which bespeak a mind devoid of a knowledge of either natural
or moral philosophy; (33) as does also the injunction to be-
come perfect as (God) our Father in heaven (Matt. v. 48).
(34) His belief in an angry God; (35) his injunction to fear
God (Matt. x. 28) ; (36) his advice to his followers to live
like the lilies of the field (Matt. vi. 26) ; (37) his statement
that “the meek should inherit the earth,” (38) that his disci-'
pies would be hated hy all men ; (39) his reasons for forbidding
them to swear ; (40) his blessing on the poor ; (41) his denun-
ciation of the rich; (42) his parable of Dives ; (43) his en-
couragement to mourn ; (44) his blessing on the pure in heart,
(45) and on the hungry and thirst}"; "(46) his choosing the
ignorant for companions; (47) his setting the mother against
the daughter (Matt. x. 36) ; (48) his getting angry - (Matt,
xxi. 12) ; (49) his treatment of his mother, (50) also of the
money-changers, (51) and of the Pharisees ; (52) his usurpation
of property (Matt. xxi. 2) ; (53) his calling men “ fools and
hypocrites,” (54) also “vipers,” (55) and* “ children of the
Devil” (John viii. 44) ; (56) his enjoining his disciples to
shake off the dust of their feet against them, (57) and to call
no man “rabbi,” (58) and no man “master;” (59) his
falsehood about going to Jerusalem (Johnvii.* 8); (60) his
substituting water for wine; (61) his * strong sectarianism
404
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
(John x. 1) ; (G2) his treatment of the Gentiles (Matt. x.
5) ; (G3) his threat toward Jerusalem ; (G4) his calling honest
men u robbers ” (John x. 8) ; (Go) his denunciation of Sodom
and Gomorrah, (GG) and Chorazin and Bethsaida (Matt,
xi. 21), (G7) and Capernaum; (G8) his answer to the woman
of Samaria, (69) and his calling Peter u Satan;” (70) his
hatred of the world, (71) and contempt of life, —all these pre-
cepts and practices, when critical^ examined, are found to be
at variance with the laws of moral science as taught in this
enlightened age, which establishes the fact that Christ was no
moral philosopher.
II. Scientific Errors of Christ.
The following scientific errors of Christ, a portion of which
are exposed in u The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors,”
show that he was neither a natural nor a moral philosopher:
(I) He assumed that disease is produced by demons, or evil
spirits. (2) He generally treated disease, not as the result of
natural causes, but as produced by evil beings. (3) His rebuk-
ing a fever (Luke iv. 39) discloses an ignorance of the science
of pliysiolog}". (4) His declaration about the stars falling
(Matt. xxiv. 29) evinces his ignorance of astronomy ; (5) as does
also his belief in the conflagration of the world (Matt. xxiv.
34). (G) His belief in a personal devil (Matt. xvii. 18), (7)
also his belief in a literal hell (Matt, xviii. 8), (8) also a
belief in tho unphilosophical doctrine of repentance (Mark ii.
17), (9) and also that of divine forgiveness (Matt. vi. 12) ;
(10) his repeated assumption that belief is a voluntary act of the
mind ; (11) his frequent reference to the heart as being the scat
of consciousness; (12) the great importance he attaches to a
right faitli; (13) his unpardonable sin against the Iloly^ Ghost;
(II) his superstitious idea of casting out devils ; (15) his com-
paring faith to a grain of mustard-seed (Matt. xi. 23) ; (1G)
the promise of u well done” (Matt. xxv. 21) as a reward for
well-doing; (17) his statement about man increasing his stat-
ure, (18) and about two men joining in pra3’cr (Matt, xviii.
19) ; (19) his promise to come in the clouds of heaven (Matt,
xxiv. 30) ; (20) the time that event was to take place (Matt.
ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY ERRORS.
405
-
x. 23) ; (21) his penalty for wrong-doing, or sin; (22) his pen-
alty for falsehood (John viii. 44) ; (23) his superstitious belief
in an undying worm; (24) his penalty for idle words; (25)
his statement about speaking in new tongues (Mark xvi. 17),
(26) about handling poisonous serpents, (27) also swallowing
deadly poisons, (28) and that these acts should furnish a proof
of divine power; (29) his frequent confabs with imaginary
devils ; (30) his views of the marriage relation (Luke xx. 34) ;
(31) why a certain man was born blind (Matt. vii. 22) ; (32)
his ignorance of the natural causes of physical defects; (33)
his conduct toward the fig-tree (Matt. xxi. 20) ; (34) his
statement relative to the Queen' of Sheba, (35) and relative to
Noah’s flood (Luke xvii. 27) ; (36) hrisr frequent denunciation
of unbelievers; (37) his injunction to become perfect as God;
(38) his erroneous views of love, (39) and of the peacemakers,
(40) and of the tax-gatherers, (41) and of divorce; (42) his
views of alms; (43) his statement about Moses (John v. 46),
(44) about Nicodemus, (45) about- bearing witness, (46)
about letting our light shine, (47) about his disciples praying,
(48) about praying for the kingdom of heaven, (49) about the
law (Matt. v. 17), (50) about his being the Christ (Matt,
x. 23), (51) about performing miracles, (52)'about* bringing a
sword, (53) about his disciples sitting on the twelve thrones,
(54) about judges in heaven, (55) about the fate of Judas;
(56) his deception by Judas ; (57) his mistake about Peter ; (58)
his promise to the sons of Zebedee (Matt. xx. 23)r; (59) his
parable of the unjust judge ; (60) his new commandment; (61)
his promise of a hundred-fold reward; (62) his’ ideas about
paying tribute, (63) also about marrying a divorced woman;
(64) his promising Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven;
(65) his declaration relative to binding things in heaven ; (66)
his notion of merit in religious belief, (67) and that faith is the
gift of God; (68) his ideas of lust, (69) and about earthty
treasures, (70) also treasure in heaven, (71) about tomb-
stones, (72) and about an arbitrary personal God ; (73) his
ignorance of science and natural law. (74) He never spoke of a
natural law, (75) nor used the word “science,” (76) nor
“ natural philosophy.” (77) And, finallyyhis spending nine-
406
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
tenths of his time in idleness or obscurity is historic, scientific,
and practical proof against his divinity. From all the facts
and precepts enumerated above, we are compelled to conclude
he was no philosopher, and was ignorant of the principles of
natural science. And this accounts for the numerous scientific
errors which abound in all his teachings and preachings and
his whole practical life, as set forth in the work of which this
is a synopsis.
III. Christ’s Errors of Omissiox.
Had Christ been an all-wise and omniscient God,—the char-
acter his orthodox disciples claim for him,—he would have
noticed and understood, and consequently have condemned,
various demoralizing practices, customs, and institutions then
existing in society. He would also have discovered and taught
the grand moral and scientific truths and principles which have
since been brought to light, and have proved such signal bless-
ings to society, so that the world could have enjoyed them two
thousand years ago.
(1) He would, in the first place, have discovered and exposed
the evils of the despotic form of government under which he
lived, (2) and have suggested a better system. (3) He would
have taught the people the beauties and benefits of a true democ-
racy, (4) and would have exposed the evils of physical as well
as mental slave ly; (5) also the deleterious and demoralizing
effects of intoxicating drink, instead of manufacturing it. (See
John ii. 7-9.) (G) He would also have exposed the errors and
evils of the many' popular religious superstitions then and there
prevalent, instead of indorsing them. (7) lie would have
taught the science of anthropologj” as essential to human hap-
piness, (8) including the principles of mental science; (9) and
likewise the true principles of moral science, (10) and the
necessity of mental culture, (11) and the most important lesson
of all,—that of self-development. (12) lie would have taught
the people that every thing is controlled by natural law, (13) in-
stead of b}’ the caprices of an angiy God. (14) lie would have
taught the people that right and wrong are natural principles;
(15) that virtue contains its own reward, (16) and sin or crime
DOCTRINES OF THE APOSTLES.
407
its own punishment. (17) He would have taught the science of
life and the laws of health as essential to human happiness;
(18) and that the violation of natural law must be attended
with suffering; (19) and that every immoral act a man com-
mits against another must injure himself, (20) and destroy his
true happiness, (21) and tend to make him a victim to his own
passions. (22) He would have taught the true principles of
mental freedom, (28) and the rights of conscience in matters of
belief; (24) and that man is responsible to himself alone for his
belief. (25) And, finally, he would have taught the'modern doc-
trine of evolution as furnishing the true and philosophical solu-
tion of all human actions, both good and bad. Certainly a being
possessing infinite wisdom could have discovered and brought
to light these grand practical truths, and thus greatly aug-
mented the sum of human happiness, instead of leaving the
world to drag on in suffering ignorance. And his omitting to
do it must be characterized as an error of omission. For a fuller
exposition, see the pamphlet.
CHAPTER LXI.
CHARACTER AND ERRONEOUS DOCTRINES OF THE
APOSTLES.
Christ’s apostles, although reputedly inspired, were very far
from being exemplary characters. Quarrels, -jealousies, and
emulations are frequently disclosed in their practical lives. We
are told there were “ envyings and jealousies and divisions”
among them (1 Cor. iii. 3), and that “ they disputed among
themselves who should be the greatest” (Mark ix. 34). This
implies that there was selfishness and worldly ambition at the
bottom of their movements. Paul also represents them as
u defrauding” and la wing each other (1 Cor. vi. 7, 8) ; and Paul
himself had a serious quarrel with Barnabas, as we are told:
“ The contention was so sharp that they departed asunder one
from the other ” (Acts xv. 36). These incidents in the prac-
l
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
403
tical lives of the apostles show that they were frail and fallible
mortals, and under the control of selfish feelings like the rest
of us, and that their “ inspiration/’ if they possessed any, was
not of a very high order. Such men are very unsuitable exam-
ples for the heathen to imitate, as they are impliedly recom-
mended to do when the Bible is placed in their hands.
With respect to the. doctrines taught by the apostles or New-
Testament writers, we will here assume the liberty to say they
contain more errors than we can allow space to enumerate.
For those of Paul and Peter we shall appropriate a separate
chapter, but will only cite a few of the errors of the other
New-Testament writers as mere samples of others. James’s
superstitious idea of curing the sick by prayer and oil we have
already noticed (chapter xli,). He also indorses the foolish
and incredible story of Elijah controlling the elements so as
to cause a three-years’ drought (chap. v. 17). He tells us we
qan get, wisdom by simply, ashing it of God (chap. i. 5). Then-
why do millions of people devote years to hard mental labor
to acquire it ? He speaks approvingly of the practical life of
Abraham, also of • the- miserable harlot Rahab (chap. ii. 23,
25), and avows his belief in a devil, &c. John also avows
his belief in this superstition (1 John ii. 13), and likewise in
the bloody atonement (1 John i. 7) and the doctrine of pre-
destination (1 John v. 18),; and, worse than all, he issues the
bigoted mandate, “Receive;np man into your house” who does
not preach the doctrine I do (2 John i. 10). Jude indorses
the foolish story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the contest between
Michael and the Devil, the second advent, a day of general
judgment, &c. These will do for specimens of apostolic errors.
CHAPTER LXII.
CHARACTER OF PAUL, AND HIS DOCTRINES.
Paul, standing at the head of the Church in the apostolic
age, and being the principal New-Testament writer and the
CHARACTER OF PAUL, AND niS DOCTRINES. 409
principal teacher and doctrinal expounder of the New Covenant,
or gospel dispensation, his practical life and his doctrines must
therefore be regarded as constituting a part, if not the princi-
pal part, of the basis of the Christian religion. We shall there-
fore make no apology for presenting here a brief exposition of
his character and his doctrines; and we shall show that both
present numerous defects and inconsistent and contradictory
features.
1. In his First Epistle to Timothy (i. 13) he states that he
had been 44 a blasphemer and persecutor, and injurious,’’ and
confesses that he was particeps criminis in the martyrdom of
Stephen; yet, in the Acts of the Apostles, he declares, 441
have lived in all good conscience before God unto this day”
(Acts xxiii. 1). Here is one specimen of his many incongru-
ous statements.
2. He relates the account of his miraculous conversion three
times, and in three different ways. In the first statement he
says, 44 The men stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing
no man ” (Acts ix. 7). In the second account he says, 44 They
heard not the voice that spake to me” (Acts xxii. 9). In the
third statement, when relating the case to King Agrippa, he
says, u They were all fallen to the earth” (Acts xxvi. 14) ;
while, in the first account, he had stated, 44 The men stood
speechless.” It is evident they could not stand speechless
while they were all fallen to the earth.
3. In one account he states that Jesus told him to stand up,
and receive his mission; but in another place he says he was
ordered to go to Damascus to receive the message.
4. He told the king that he showed himself first at Damas-
cus, and then at Jerusalem (Acts xxvi. 20) ; but in his Epistle
to the Galatians he declares that he did not go to Jerusalem.
5. Again he says he went to Jerusalem, and Barnabas took
him by the hand, and brought him to the apostles (Acts ix.
27).
6. And then, again, to the Galatians he declares he saw none
of the apostles, 44 save James, the Lord’s brother ” (Gal. i. 18).
7. In 1 Cor. x. 35 he says, 441 please all men in all things ; ”
but in Gal. i. 10 he says, 44If I yet pleased men, I should not
410
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
be the servant of God.” Here, then, is another palpable con-
tradiction.
8. In Rom. xi. 5 he speaks of the “ election of grace ; ” but
in Tit. xi. 9 he says the grace of God has appeared to all.
9. In his letter to Timothy he says, “ God will have all men
to be saved (1 Tim. ii. 4) : but in Rom. ix. 22 he speaks of
“ the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction; ” and in Rom. ix.
27 he says, “A remnant shall be saved.” All will not be
saved if only a remnant are saved.
10. When about embarking for Rome he stated, “ I perceive
the voyage will be of much hurt and damage to life” (Acts
xxvii. 10) ; yet on the voyage he declared, “There shall be
no loss of any man’s life among you” (Acts xxvii. 22). An
“ inspired apostle” and oracle of God should be punctiliously
accurate in all cases, or all his statements will be brought under
distrust, and it will be impossible to arrive at the truth in the
case ; or, in any case, all will be involved in doubt and conjec-
ture.
11. Paul’s errors in doctrinal inculcations are numerous.
His confession to the Corinthians, that, “ being craft}r, I caught
you with guile ” (2 Cor. xii. 16), sets forth a bad example, and
indicates a bad s3Tstem of morals, which is calculated to have a
demoralizing effect upon Bible readers and believers, especially
the heathen and the }^outh of Christian countries.
12. And his statement.that the truth of God “hath more
abounded through my lie unto his glory” (Rom. iii. 7), is still
more demoralizing in its tendencies. Many have looked upon
it as a justification for lying. It seems to imply that tying is
all right if done for the glory of God; and as he states in
1 Cor. x. 31, that whatsoever wre do should be done to the glory
of God, it logically follows that tying is justifiable in all cases.
And Mr. Higgins states that such doctrine had the effect to re-
duce lying to a S3’stem among the earty Christians, and that
the3T considered it a duty to lie when the interest of the Church
could be promoted b3r it. A book inculcating such bad morali-
t3’ should not be circulated amongst the heathen.
13. Paul’s reason for recommending a life of single blessed-
ness is deserving of notice. lie sa3’s the unmarried man careth
CHARACTER OF PAUL, AND HIS DOCTRINES. 411
for the things of the Lord ; but the married man careth for the
things of the world, — u how he may please his wife ” (1 Cor.
vii. 33). The last act he named here does not trouble men much
nowadays, at least after the honeymoon is passed ; and a man
who considers God worthy of more attention than wives, as
Paul did, would not be likely to bestow a very high apprecia-
tion on the latter. But the greatest objection to the doctrine
is, that, if practically carried out in accordance with his recom-
mendation, there would soon be no wives to please.
14. We must notice another objectionable doctrine of Paul with
respect to marriage. Instead of acknowledging an honorable
and virtuous motive for marriage, he would tolerate it as the
least of two evils ; that is, as a means of mitigating a burning
lust (1 Cor. vii. 9). This makes marriage a mere animal attrac-
tion, — the union of a man and woman drawn together from lustful
motives. Paul advises bachelors not to marry or touch a woman,
but remain single like himself (1 Cor. vii. 1). But such advice,
if practically complied with, would soon depopulate the globe.
If not so strongly adverse to human nature, it would doubtless
ere this have filled the world, first with Shakers, and then with
the graves of an extinct race.
15. Paul says to the Romans (Rom. vii. 17), u It is no more
I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I prove . . .
that in my flesh dwelleth no good thing.” Here are taught two
erroneous doctrines: (1) The essentially corrupt and sinful
nature of the human body, taught anciently by the Hindoo as-
cetics ; (2) that sin or the Devil operates on the mind independ-
ent of the human will or volition, which savors of fatalism. And
his statement that some vessels are made to honor, and some to
dishonor (Rom. ix. 21), seems unequivocally to set forth the
same doctrine. Many commentators have puzzled their brains
over it to make it mean something else, but with ill success:
the declaration is not, that men become vessels of honor and dis-
honor, but that they are made so.
16. Paul’s exhortation to servants to be obedient to their
masters has furnished pious Christian slaveholders a good text
to preach from throughout slaveholding Christendom, and has
done much to rivet the chains tighter upon the limbs of the
slave.
412
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
17. When Paul calls the Cretans “liars, evil beasts,’’ &c.,
he descends to a low position, both in the scale of manners and
morals : he is not only uncivil, but exhibits bad passions. They
did not merit such personal abuse, as they had never done him
an injury, at least we have no proof of it.
18. Paul tells us that God sends people a strong delusion,
that they may believe a lie and be damned (2 Thess. ii. 12).
More fatalism. To delude people with lies in order to damn
them is worse than hardening Pharaoh’s heart in order to find
a pretext for drowning him. Let it be borne in mind,
that, if there is any spiritual signification justly assignable to
this text, it can only benefit the few, as the common people
always accept language with its common signification. But
can we assume that Paul was such a blunderer that he frequently
used language conveying exactly the opposite meaning from
that intended, and that in this way he taught fatalism and
immoral doctrines when he did not intend to do so? And then,,
as it is claimed he was inspired, is it not a slander upon
Infinite Wisdom to assume that God was so ignorant of human
language that he put these pernicious doctrines in Paul’s mouth
by mistake? One or the other of these conclusions we are
driven to accept, in order to save Paul from condemnation;
but this only saves his moral character at the expense of his
good sense. The most rational assumption appears to be,
that Paul lived in an age and country which knew nothing of
mental or moral science, and honestly believed and taught these
pernicious doctrines. We will now learn something about the
moral code of bachelors.
10. “I suffer not a woman to speak in the church.” “It is
a shame for a woman to speak in the church ” (1 Cor. xiv. 35).
lie says, if they want to know any thing, let them ask their
husbands at home. But this, in some cases, would be the blind
leading the blind ; and, in other cases, only the leaders would
be blind. Paul should have learned the lesson of O’Connell,
the Irish agitator, who said, “Since I have learned that my
mother was a woman, I have great respect for women, and
advocate their rights.”
20. We will now notice the reason Paul assigns for having
CHARACTER OF PAUL, AND HIS DOCTRINES. 413
wives subject to their husbands : it is simply because man was
created before woman (1 Tim. ii. 13). What profound logic!
Tvorth}^ a Locke or a Newton! But, if there is any logical force
in the argument, then monkeys should have the preference of
men in the churches, as they came still earlier in the order of
creation.
21. Paul’s doctrine that all governments are ordained of
God, and that those who resist them shall receive to themselves
damnation (Pom. xiii. 1), is a virtual condemnation of those
noble philanthropists who in various ages and countries resisted
the authority of tyrants. It makes Washington, Jefferson,
Franklin, and others sinners and criminals for opposing the
tyrann}’ of King George.
22. Paul evinced a very intolerant spirit when he said, u If
any man preach any other doctrine than that which I declare
unto you, let him be accursed” (1 Gal. i. 9). This is the spirit
of intolerance, persecution, and bigotr}^,—the spirit which
has erected the scaffold, piled the fiery fagots around the stake,
wielded the guillotine, adjusted the halter around the neck
of the martyr, and crimsoned the earth with the blood of the
righteous. This very text has had the effect to fire up such a
spirit; and it has frequently been quoted as authority for such
cruel deeds as those just cited.
23. Paul gives utterance to a very singular doctrine when he
says that even nature teaches that it is a shame for a man to
wear long hair, but the glor}^ for a woman, because nature gave
it to her for a covering. (See 1 Cor. xi. 14.) He was certainty
not much of a philosopher, or he would have made the dis-
covery that nature promotes the growth of the hair upon the
heads of men and women exactly alike. If nature did not
permit any hair to grow upon the head of man, or did not
allow it to grow more than an inch in length, there might be
some plausibility in the assertion. But, as the case stands, it
is the shears, and not nature, which teaches that it is a shame
for a man to w^ear long hair; or rather, if there is any shame in
the case, it consists in man cutting off his hair after nature
has been so kind as to supply him vTith such a useful covering.
24. Paul’s indorsement of the doctrine of the atonement, and
414
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
his declaration that ‘ c without the shedding of blood there can
be no remission for sin” (Heb. ix. 22), show that he had not
advanced beyond the old Jewish and pagan superstition of
u blood for blood.” The doctrine is a relic of heathen bar-
barism, and is shocking to persons of fine moral sensibilities;
but this subject is treated in another chapter.
25. Paul also indorses the old heathen tradition that God is
an angr}^, revengeful being. (See Eph. ii. 3.) He lent the
influence of his powerful mind and- pen to perpetuate this
demoralizing and blasphemous doctrine, which has had an
injurious effect upon the minds and morals of the people in all
past ages.
26. We again call attention to Paul’s declaration that God
sent the people a strong delusion that they might believe a lie
and be damned. Think of a just and righteous God deluding
people in order to damn them! The doctrine is certainty blas-
phemous. It is enough to charge a demon with such acts as
this. Some writers suppose that Paul did not mean what is
here literalty expressed ; but it is probable he did, for it is the
old Jewish idea that every thing that takes place is the achieve-
ment of a God. We must assume that the Devil, who now
attends to such business, had not been sworn into office at
that time. lienee he supposed that Jehovah still attended to
such business.
27. One indelible stigma on Paul’s character is found in his
indorsement of the pagan and Jewish rite of circumcision, — a
cruel and blood}" custom,—which no truly enlightened and sen-
sible man would lend his sanction to perpetuate, much less per-
form with his own hands, as Paul did on Timothcus (Acts xvi.
3). Paul also contradicts himself with respect to the matter,
lie says, uIf }^e be circumcised, Christ shall profit 3^011 nothing ”
(Gal. v. 2). Yet he afterward performed the act on Timothcus,
as stated above. This is preaching one doctrine and practicing
another.
28. Paul said that he was a Roman citizen ; but no Jew could
be a full Roman citizen till the reign of Philip or Dccius, long
after, lie also passed for Paul of Tarsus ; but Tarsus was not a
Roman cit}' at that time, nor until about a hundred 3’cars after-
CHARACTER OF PAUL, AND HIS DOCTRINES. 415
ward. This was being all things to all men in order to gain a few
prose^fles ; and truly he carries out the doctrine quite well. At
one time he professes to be a Roman (Acts xxii. 2G) ; at another
time he professes to be a Pharisee, and says that his parents
were Pharisees (see Acts xxiii. 6) ; and then, again, he was an
apostle of Jesus Christ (Acts xv. 10).
29. Paul uses some rather doughy arguments on the subject
of the resurrection. He says that on the last da}r, at the sound
of the trumpet, we shall all be raised, the dead in Christ first
(1 Cor. xv. 52). We are also told that 44 this mortal shall put
on immortally.” We are compelled to believe, from the lan-
guage here used, that Paul believed in the sleep of the soul in the
grave ; and the resurrection of the natural body is a ridiculous
absurdhy and a physical impossibility. The sleep of the soul is
a still worse assumption. Why should the soul lay in the ground
covered with filth and worms? What possible benefit could
it derive from la3fing in a state of insensibilit3r for centuries?
And what would become of it if some one should remove the
decomposed remains of the body, and all the earth contiguous,
to some other localhy, or toss it into a running stream ? And
this has been done. What becomes of the soul in such a case?
Does it float down the stream with the plysical debris? If so,
where will it stop ? and how will it be found in the day of resur-
rection ?
30. And his doctrine of his resurrection is attended with still
greater difficulties and logical obstructions. The ply si cal body,
according to Paul, is to become a spiritual bod3^. But a portion
of the bod3T is consumed b3" worms during the process of decom-
position in the grave; and those worms, when they die, are
consumed b3r other worms. Will it not, then, require a search-
warrant in the da3T of resurrection to find all those worms, and
to gather eveiy minute particle of the old body together to form
the spiritual bod3’ ? Wly not make the new bod3r of a stone or a
stump, or some other material, instead of the old, decayed, de-
composed bod3T ? It would require a miracle in either case. Cases
have been reported of Christian missionaries being eaten up by
cannibals. The flesh of the Christian in such cases becomes a
part of the plysical body of the cannibal; and the cannibal
416
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
will, according to Christian theology, come forth unto u the
resurrection of damnation,” and will take a portion of the
bod}" of the missionary with him to the bottomless pit.
How will it be obtained? A serious difficult}", certainly!
How is it to be met and surmounted? Many other logical
difficulties lie in the way of making a practical application of
the doctrine.
31. When Paul calls our physical tenements “vile bodies”
(see Phil. iii. 21), he reveals the old pagan idea of the body
being sinful. They looked upon it as a kind of prison for the
soul, and a thing to be hated and contemned as you would a
tyrant with a rope around your neck. This error discloses
great ignorance of the functions of the human body, and its
relation to the soul or mind. It would be impossible to have a
pure soul in a vile body. Here Paul discloses still further igno-
rance of science.
There are other acts and other erroneous doctrines, which mark
the practical life of Paul, that are quite obnoxious to criticism;
as, for example, the curse he pronounced upon Elymas, whom
he stigmatized as a sorcerer, though he does not prove he was
one, but says that was his name by interpretation (Acts xiii.
8). This act, which it is stated produced total blindness,
must be regarded as an act of bigotry and intolerance. Elymas
is not charged with any crime or immoral conduct; and, so far
as we can learn his history, he was an honest, upright man:
but he sought “ to turn away the deputy from the faith ” (Acts
xiii. 8) ; that is, like the Greek philosophers, he attempted to
point out the absurdity of some of Paul’s doctrines. There is
something very significant in the statement of Paul, that some
of his doctrines were “to the Greeks foolishness” (1 Cor.
i. 23) ; for they were a learned, intelligent, and sensible nation
of people. And no such nation ever has, or ever will, accept
as true and sound doctrine some of the theological nonsense
and absurd doctrines which Paul preached. Future generations
will wonder that such doctrines were ever taught by people
claiming to be sensible and intelligent.
The circumstance which Paul relates of a viper coming out
of a bundle of sticks, and fastening on liis hand without inflict-
CHARACTER OF PAUL, AND HIS DOCTRINES. 417
ing a deadly wound, evinces a degree of superstition which no
philosopher could entertain. The assumption is, that God, after
bestowing upon the reptile the disposition and means of defend-
ing itself, interposed by a divine act to prevent their action.
Christ and his apostles (including Paul), instead of studying
and understanding the laws of nature, were constantly looking
for something to contravene them, and set them* aside. Of
course the}1* were honest in this ; but it shows their want of sci-
entific knowledge, which was characteristic of the age.
The circumstance of Paul’s handkerchief and apron heal-
ing the sick, as related in Acts xix. 12, is evidently regarded as
another interposition of divine power. But cases are frequently
performed in this manner in various parts of this country by
Dr. Newton and other healers, who impart their magnetic aura
to a handkerchief, or some article of clothing, or a piece of paper,
and send it to the sick, who are cured as effectually as those
were by Paul’s magnetized handkerchief; for it was undoubt-
edly his magnetism imparted to the handkerchief that effected
the cures. Modern science is solving the mysteries and mira-
cles of the past.
We will only observe further, that Paul la}rs down three
systems of salvation, which, when arranged side b}r side, cer-
tainty make the road broad enough to enable nearly every son
and daughter of Adam to reach the heavenly kingdom: —
Salvation by Faith. —66 By faith ye are saved, and not of
yourselves: it is the gift of God” (Eph. ii. 8). It being
the gift of God, we, of course, can have no agency in the matter.
u A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law”
(Rom. iii. 28). This is a direct contradiction of James, who
declares, “ Faith, if it hath not works, is dead ” (Jas. ii. 17).
Salvation by Works. —“ God will render to every man
according to his deeds ” (Rom. ii. 6). “ The doers of the law
shall be justified” (Rom. ii. 13). Thus, it will be observed,
Paul, in the above-cited texts, not only contradicts James, but
contradicts himself.
Salvation by Divine Predestination. —“As many as were
ordained to eternal life believed” (Acts xiii. 48). This is not
given as Paul’s language; but it is spoken with respect to his
418
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
preaching. And Paul sets forth the same doctrine in Rom. xi.
5 when he speaks of a remnant being u saved by the election
of grace.” Here, then, are three roads to heaven, which so
multiply the chances of being saved that but few can be lost.
Such conflicting statements show that confusion and ambiguity
characterize the Bible, and render it impossible to learn any
thing definite from its statements.
Note.—How can Christians believe in the immortality of the soul after reading
Paul’s declaration that “ Grod alone hath life and immortality dwelling in the light”?
If so, then man is not an immortal being (see 1 Tim. vi. 16).
2. Character and Erroneous Doctrines of Peter.
In his practical life St. Peter was a singular and angular
being. He presents us with the opposite extremes of virtue
and vice. He appears to have been about as distinguished for
wickedness as for piety. He told the same falsehood repeat-
edly, and backed it up with an oath (Matt, xxvi.) : hence
ljfing, cursing, and swearing are laid to his charge. And then,
we are told, he was put in possession of the ke3's of the kingdom
of heaven (Matt. xvi. 19). How a man, guilty of such moral
derelictions, could have had a higher honor bestowed upon him
than was ever bestowed upon any other human being, or how
he could have been considered a safe custodian for such an im-
portant charge, it is difficult to see; and then it looks too
much like a bribe for immoral conduct. It weakens the incen-
tives to a virtuous life to reward the criminal, and shows
imperfection in the moral s}’stem which he was allowed to
represent. As for his doctrines, they are characterized by the
same moral and scientific errors and defects as those of St.
Paul, and embrace some of the same doctrines of heathen
mythology.
1. lie speaks of the earth as “ standing out of the water and
in the water ” (2 Pet. iii. 5). Here is the old Hindoo tradition
which taught that the earth floated on a sea of water, traces of
which are also found in Genesis.
2. He tells us, also, that the earth has been once destroyed
by water, and in the day of judgment will be destroyed by fire
(2 Pet. iii. G, 7). It has been from time immemorial a very
CHABACTEB OF PETEB, AND HIS EOCTBINES. 419
prevalent tradition amongst the Oriental nations that the world
had been, and would be again, alternate^ destroyed.by water
and fire. Peter and Josephus also seem to indorse this tradi-
tion.
3. Peter also indorses and teaches the absurd and unphilo-
sophical doctrine of fore-ordination (1 Pet. i. 20).
4. He also enjoins “servants to be in subjection to their
masters,” not only the good, but the froward (1 Pet. ii. 18).
This is absolute tyranny. There is to be no resistance to the
bloody lash. The motto of Patrick Hemy is much better, —
“ Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.”
5. "Wives are to be in subjection to their husbands (1 Pet.
iii. 1). even as Sarah obeyed Abraham (verse 6). There is
nothing said about husbands obeying wives, probably because,
as he says, woman is the weaker vessel (1 Pet. iii. 7). Won-
derful logic ! A sage conclusion for a Christian moralist. He
thus places Christian morality below that of the ancient Druids,
who placed women on a level with men in both Church and
State.
6. Peter tells us, u Christ bore our sins in his own body on
the tree ” (1 Pet. ii. 24). This is the old Jewish idea of carry-
ing away sins by scapegoats, and the Oriental heathen doctrine
of putting innocent Gods to death as a punishment for the sins
of the people, — a doctrine which posterity will condemn as bar-
barous. (See “ The Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” Chapter xxi.)
7. Peter says a u dumb ass spoke with man’s voice ” (2 Pet.
ii. 16). He thus indorses the story of Balaam’s ass becoming
endowed with human speech.
8. Peter, like Paul and Christ, indorses the absurd story of
Noah and the flood (1 Pet. iii. 20).
9. But space will not permit us to notice all the erroneous
doctrines set forth by Peter. He teaches the doctrine of a gen-
eral judgment (2 Pet. ii. 9)-, the doctrine of election and
reprobation (2 Pet. i. 10), the doctrine of a general conflagra-
tion of all things terrestrial (2 Pet. iii. 12).
10. But the most remarkable incident in the life of Peter is
his connection with the fate of Ananias and Sapphira. We
find many logical absurdities and moral errors in this story re-
420
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
corded in Acts v. 1. It is very strange that Peter, who denied
his Lord and master three times, and hence was repeatedly
guilty of telling positive falsehoods, should be the chosen in-
strument under Christ’s religion to pronounce sentence of death
upon Ananias and Sapphira for the same sin. 2. Why should
Ananias and Sapphira be punished with death for a crime that
Peter, Abraham, and Isaac were all guilty of several times?
3. Is it not strange that Jehovah should be considered as being
strongly opposed to lying, if he himself, as stated in 1 Kings
xxii., converted four hundred of his prophets into liars, and
then indorsed the lying Peter? 4. Is not the crime of Ananias
and Sapphira — that of attempting to withhold a little money
from the priests by tying — of less magnitude than that of ruin-
ing a whole nation by robbery, as we are told God’s holy people
did? The}’robbed and u spoiled the Egyptians ” (Exod. xii.
36). 5. Is it not probable they needed it more than the
priests did ? The moral law teaches that it is necessity, and not
might, that makes right. 6. Does it not look rather unreason-
able that Sapphira should repeat the same falsehood for which
her husband had just been struck dead, as it must have been
known to her? Who can believe it? 7. And can we suppose
that God would be so partial as to kill a man and woman for
the first offense of tying, and let Abraham, Isaac, and Peter,
and others, escape after committing the sin several times?
These considerations seriously damage the credibility of the
story.
CHAPTER LXIII.
IDOLATROUS VENERATION FOR BIBLES.
“ Should reason, science, and philosophic lore
Against my faith combine,
I’d clasp the Bible to my breast,
Believing still that it’s divine.
Here I am told how Christ hath died
To save my soul from hell:
Not all the books on earth beside
Such heavenly wonders tell.
IDOLATROUS VENERATION FOR BIBLES.
421
This simple book I’d rather own
Than all the gold and gems
That e’er in monarch’s coffers shone,
Than all their diadems.
Nay, were the seas one chrysolite,
The earth a golden ball,
And diadems the stars of night,
This book were worth them all.”
A Christian writer, in attempting to portray the Protestant
view of the Bible, says, u It is a miraculous collection of mirac-
ulous books. Every word it contains was written by miraculous
inspiration from God, which was so full, complete, and infalli-
ble, that the authors delivered the truth, and nothing but the
truth. The Bible contains no false statements of doctrine or
faith, but sets forth all religious and moral truth which man
needs to know, or which it is possible for him to receive, and not
a particle of error ; and therefore the Bible is the only authorita-
tive rule of faith and practice.” These two pious effusions—one
in prose, the other in poetry— exhibit the views and feelings very
prevalent among the disciples of the Christian faith only a few
centuries ago; and they are cherished yet, to a considerable
extent, by a large portion of Christian professors. This blind,
idolatrous veneration is gradually giving way to the light of
science and general intelligence; and the thick mental gloom
and darkness of superstition out of which they grow is being
dispelled. When the intellectual mind becomes fully devel-
oped and enlightened, the Bible will find its true level, and will
command no more homage than other books. It will be read
and estimated, like other human productions, according to its
real merits. In this enlightened and scientific age, Bible devo-
tees never go to such extreme lengths in pouring fulsome adula-
tions upon the idolized book. They would be laughed at for
their ignorance and superstition if they should attempt it.
But the time has been when every religious nation which pos-
sessed a u Holy Book ” attached extreme sacredness and exalted
holiness to the book and all its contents, and often indulged in
the most extravagant language and the wildest rhapsodies in
their attempts to eulogize and idolize its virtues. In this re-
422
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
spect there was but little difference between Jews, pagans, and
Christians: all idolized their Holy Books. A sacred regard
was shown not onty for the book, but often for every manu-
script, scrap of paper, or text which it contained, or which was
supposed to contain a message or revelation from God. But
few religious nations have existed, even in the remote past, who
have not possessed some kind of Bible or sacred record which
they treated with an enthusiastic veneration bordering on idol-
atry. The Hindoos, the Eg3Tptians, the Persians, the Chinese,
the Mahomedans, and the early Christians were all Bible idola-
ters. The Hindoos, like the Christians, were religiously en-
joined to read and study “the Holy Scriptures;” and the
priests, as those in Christian countries do now, made them a
stud}", and reduced the interpretation of them to an art. And,
like Christians in another respect, they were interdicted from
transcending in knowledge what was taught in their assumed-
to-be divinely illuminated pages. The disciple of the Hindoo
faith was not allowed to become “ wise above what was written ”
in the Yedas (see chapter vi.) ; and the same solemn prohibi-
tion, “ Add not to, or take not from, the word of God,” was
reverently obeyed b}T the devout disciple of the Yedas. The
Mahomedans believe the Koran has been received and trans-
mitted from generation to generation by the direct agency of
God. They claim that it is not only an infallible rule of faith
and practice, but “ God’s last will and testament to man,” and
that it is designed by God for the whole human family; and
the}r pray and hope for its universal extension and adoption.
One pious Mussulman (Sadak), on being asked whjr the Koran
appeared to be newer cveiy time it was read, replied, “ Because
God did not reveal it for any particular age or nation, but for
all mankind down to the Judgment Da}r.” Mahomedans tell
us that, “ such is the innate efficacy of the Koran, it removes
all pains of bodjT and all sorrows of mind. It annihilates what
is wrong in carnal desires, delivers us from the temptations of
Satan and from fears. It removes all doubts raised by satanic
influences, sanctifies the heart, imparts health to the soul, and
produces union with the Lord of holiness.” With the ancient
Persians the great test and touchstone of all faith and all
IDOLATROUS VENERATION FOR BIBLES.
423
moral action was their “ Holy Word of God.” To know
whether a thing was right or wrong, they had only to inquire,
“ Is it taught, or is it forbidden, by the Zenda Avesta? ” The
Persians, like the Jews, had four days set apart in each month
for religious festivals, on which occasions, Mr. Hyde informs
us, “ they met in their temples, and read portions of their Holy
Books, and preached and inculcated morality and virtue ”
(chap, xxxviii. p. 352). But Bible exaltation and adoration ran
much higher than is here indicated in some countries. They
were not only believed to be “words ” or “ the word of God,”
but to have a portion of the spirit of God impressed into every
chapter, every verse, and every word ; and hence the}' received
a portion of that veneration and adoration usually ascribed to
Deity. And here we find both Jews and Christians have been
strict imitators of the heathen in the practical exhibition of this
species of book idolatry. We are told that the ancient Bud-
hists ascribed inherent sacredness and supernatural power to
the identical Sanscrit word of their scriptures. Hence it was
considered sacrilegious to make any alteration in the arrangement
of those words; and, for fear some alteration of this kind
might be made, they objected to the missionaries translating
“the Holy Book” into the English language. Mr. Hyde in-
forms us, they not only read their Bible in their temples, but at
their festivals and in their families; and, like the Jews and
primitive Christians and the Mahomedans, they carried them
in their travels, and slept with the Holy Book under their pil-
lows. Nearly all Bibles in that age were treated with this kind
of veneration. Brahmins, Persians, Jews, Mahomedans, and
Christians, in their earlier history, were in the habit of attaching
texts or detached portions of scripture to their clothes, or insert-
ing them into their hats or shoes, — an act prompted by the
belief that the}' would impart some supernatural charm; and
the Persians, Hindoos, and Mahomedans have been seen cov-
ered from head to foot with scripture texts. In the days of
St. Justin and St. Jerome such scenes were often witnessed
among Christians also. Even the handling of the Bible was
believed to impart a supernatural or miraculous power, mani-
fested in the cure of diseases, driving away devils, &c. Sev-
424
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
eral Bibles were thus deified. In some nations they were kept
under lock and key, or cloistered in a golden box, to prevent
unsanctified hands from opening them. The notion was preva-
lent with the devotees of several Bibles, that they should be
read differently, if not held differently, from other books.
Kissing the “ Holy Book” was also prevalent among the Hin-
doos, Mahomedans, and early Christians,—indeed, in nearly
all religious countries. Bible worship knew no bounds in the
days of ignorance and superstition, when people had more piety
than philosophy. Believing that the spirit of God permeated
their Bibles, nearly all the blessings of life were ascribed to their
influence. Such a belief, fostered from age to age, and trans-
mitted from parent to child, could but operate to blind the judg-
ment of all Bible believers so as to disqualify^ them for detecting
defects or perceiving their errors, though they may abound on
every page. And these Bibles have been read by millions
of their disciples with a kind of solemn awe or holy fervor,
which not only wholly incapacitates the mind for perceiving
its errors, but shuts out the possibility of a doubt of its truth.
Indeed, they glory in assuming it to be “ a perfect embodiment
of divine truth,” u without the shadow of a shade of error from
Genesis to Revelation,” to use the language of Dr. Cheviot with
respect to the Christian Bible. The reasoning faculties are put
to sleep, and the intellect bound fast in chains, before “ God’s
Holy Book ’ ’ is opened; and if the reasoning faculties should
by chance arouse, and rebel against such tyTannj’, and try to
assert their rights by permitting a doubt to spring up in the
mind that some statement or text is not true, the Bible devotee
becomes alarmed, and exclaims, with trembling fear, “ Lord, I
believe : help thou mine unbelief.” In this state of fearful and
prayerful mental strife against reason, doubt, and disbelief, he
again sinks into the “darkness of devotion,” determined still
longer to hug his canonized and idolized book to his bosom with
all its errors and immoralities. This has been virtually the
experience of thousands of Bible believers, to a greater or less
extent, in all ages and all countries in possession of “Holy
Books.” In this way Bibles have been an obstacle to the
progress of mind and the progress of society. An unchangea-
SPIRITUAL OR IMPLIED SENSE OF BIBLES. 425
' ble and infallible book must inevitably cramp the mind, and hold
it in chains. Hence a Bible-believing community can make no
progress in morals, science, or civilization, only so far as they
violate their own principles by transcending its teachings.
Society would remain for ever in an ignorant, uncultured state,
were there not some minds in it possessing a sufficient amount
of intellect to outgrow their Bibles ; and, but for the publication
and perusal of other books, society would make but little
progress. A mind which is religiously and conscientiously
bound to believe in a Bible is bound to all its errors and all its
ignorance, and hence can make no progress while it adheres
rigidly to its own principles or its own scruples; but, thanks
to the progressive genius of the age, the “Holy Books” which
j embody the moral and religious errors of the past are nearly
i outgrown, so that they are seldom read now even by their
professed admirers. People are assuming the liberty of becom-
i ing “wise above what is written” in “God’s Holy Book.”
! Even Christians themselves often assume this liberty: other-
| wise we should have a community characterized by ignorance
{ and superstition; and our writers would be as liable to stum-
| ble into errors and contradictions as the Bible writers when
the}T penned “God’s perfect revelation.” It requires the
acquisition of but little knowledge and intelligence to become
“ wise above that which was written” in that illiterate and ig-
norant age.
The practice seems to have been very early conceived and
adopted in various countries by the disciples of different Bibles,
which have been long extant in the world, of attaching to all
the offensive texts of their sacred books (which, when taken
literally, convey either a vulgar, immoral, or foolish sense)
a new and more acceptable meaning than earlier custom had
CHAPTER LXIV.
SPIRITUAL OR IMPLIED SENSE OE BIBLES.
I
426
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
sanctioned, or more devout minds had ever thought of. As the
growing intelligence of the people was constantly disclosing
long-unnoticed and important errors in the Holy Book, this ex-
pedient was adopted to cover them up, or put them out of sight.
As Jesus, if not Paul, by virtue of the growth of the moral and
intellectual perceptions, was able to distinguish some errors
and moral defects in the first installment of Bible revelation as
found in the Jewish Old Testament, so the people in every
age since, in those countries where any cultivation has been
bestowed upon the mind, have been capable of bringing to light
numerous errors incorporated into the sacred books of past
ages ; and as some of those books called Bibles were claimed
by their disciples to be perfect, divinely inspired, and infallible,
and consequently free from error, some expedient had to be
devised to sustain this claim, and show that the man of science
was guilty of falsehood when he charged u God’s Holy Book ”
with containing errors. The expedient finally adopted was to
take the long-established signification of the words of the text
out, and put in a new meaning, coined by the prolific brain of
the devout defender of the Book for the occasion; and this new
sense was called “the spiritual sense.” It was presumed it
would be more acceptable to the intelligent minds of the age.
In this wa}", whenever a new scientific discovery has been an-
nounced, demonstrating some of the statements of the venerated
volume to be erroneous, the clerg}” have set themselves to work
with their clerical force-pumps to extract the meaning which
our standard dictionaries assign to the words of every text that
seemed to conflict with the newly discovered scientific truth,
and ingraft into it a new meaning of their own invention. This
practice finalty became, and has long been, an established prac-
tice and art in nearly every country where a Bible has been
known, whether Jewish, Pagan, or Christian. In fact, no
nation having a Bible has omitted to practice it.
No matter how vulgar, how disgusting, or how shocking to
the bettor feelings, or how immoral the literal reading of the
text, a hundred ways could be found to get rid of its offensive
signification ; a hundred spiritual interpretations could be thrust
under its verbal coverings. The most senseless, the most in-
SPIRITUAL OR IMPLIED SENSE OF BIBLES. 427
decorous, and the most demoralizing verbiage could thus be
made to pass for great “spiritual truths.” The pagans and
the Jews practiced this art laboriously and extensively; and
the disciples of the Christian faith, in all ages of the Church,
have been their strict imitators. That it is a very ancient heathen
custom is evident from the declaration of “The Nineteenth
Century,” which quotes Plutarch as saying, “The spiritual or
allegorical mode of interpreting words and language was applied
to the poems of Orpheus, the Egyptian writers, and the Phry-
gian traditions ” (p. 337). Grote tells us that the plain and
literal meaning would not have been listened to, as it did not
suit the mental demands of the people. (See Grote’s “History
of Greece.”) He assigns this mode of interpreting sacred
books to ancient Egypt; and Mr. Wilson says the Christians
caught the passion for spiritualizing and allegorizing their Bible
at an early date, and of converting them on all occasions into
spiritual mysteries, from the later Platonists, the example of
Philo, and the Jewish rabbis. “ The Mahomedans,” Mr. Kant
informs us, “ gave a spiritual sense to the sensual descriptions
of their paradise,” and thus the Hindoos also interpreted their
Vedas. “The Mahomedans,” says another writer, “indulge
in glowing allegories concerning love and intoxication, which,
like some of the Hindoo devotional writings, seem sensual to
those who perceive only the external sense, while the initiated
find in them an interior meaning.” The Greeks and Romans,
according to the testimony of Mr. Kant, explained away some
of the silliest legends of their polytheism by spiritualizing
them, or giving them a mystical sense. Speaking in general
terms, Mr. Taylor says, “ An allegorical sense was the apology
offered for the manifest absurdities of paganism.” The Roman
Julian once remarked, that the poetic stories concerning the
Gods, though regarded as fables, he supposed contained a
spiritual treasury. Kant declares, in like manner, that the
ancient pagans “gave a mystical sense to the man}’ vicious
actions of their Gods, and to the wildest dreams of their poets,
in order to bring the popular faith into agreement with their
doctrines of morality;” that is, they resorted to a spiritual
interpretation in order to save them from being condemned as
428
-
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
popular intelligence advanced. “All the learned ancients,”
says Mr. Higgins, “gave their sacred writings two meanings,—
one literal, and the other spiritual.” Philo confessed that the
literal sense of the Old Testament is 4 4 shocking :9 9 hence 4 4 a
divine science, believed by intuition, is necessary to penetrate
the hidden meaning.” The Essenes declared, the literal sense
of their scriptures was devoid of all power. Origen, finding
Moses’ writings replete with error and immoralit}", got rid of
the difficulty by declaring, 44 It is all allegory.” He makes the
remarkable confession, that44 there were some things inserted in
the Bible as history which were never transacted : ’ ’ hence he
concludes they must be interpreted spiritually, or set down as
false. And St. Hillary declares, 44 There are man}7 historical
passages in the New Testament, which, if taken literally, are
contrary to sense and reason ; and therefore there is a necessity
for a mystical interpretation.” Not that we have any evidence
that such an interpretation was ever thought of by the writer;
but this new and forced interpretation is the onl}T alternative to
save the credit of the Book. Any senseless expedient or sub-
terfuge that could be invented was dragged in, rather than admit
the Holy Book contained errors ; for this would prove it to be
the work of man, and not of God. This has been the policy
from time immemorial of the votaries of all sacred books.
Origen — after declaring, 44 There is no literal truth in the story
of Christ driving out the money-changers ” — asserts that it is an
allegoiy, indicating that we are to cast out our evil propensities.
He says the early Christians seldom used the literal sense of the
scriptures, because it taught something objectionable ; and, ever
since the inauguration of this mode for concealing the errors and
defective moral teachings of the Bible, all kinds of ridiculous
interpretations of scripture have been resorted to ly orthodox
writers to make it teach what each one desired. Since they
arrogated to themselves the liberty to depart from the literal
meaning of the text, hundreds of meanings have been ingrafted
upon the same text by as many writers and readers; thus
launching all scripture import upon the quicksands of uncer-
tainty. The Rev. Mr. McNaught of England points to one
text in Galatians — on which, he says, two hundred and forty
SPIRITUAL OR IMPLIED SENSE OF BIBLES. 429
meanings have been saddled by different Bible interpreters — as
a specimen of this land of license, that is, two hundred and
forty guesses at the meaning: thus making Bible interpretation,
and the s}'stem of salvation founded on it, an entire system of
guess-ivork ; and I would suggest, that, if we have thus to guess
our way to heaven, we can do so as well without the Bible as
with it. A God who is so ignorant of human language as to
give forth a revelation to the world couched in such unintelli-
gible and ambiguous terms that no two people can understand
it alike, it seems to us, should not have attempted it. All will
be chaos and confusion and wild guess-work with respect to
the meaning of a large portion of the Bible, while its readers
are allowed to depart from the established meaning of words as
defined by our dictionaries, and fabricate new meanings of their
own. As for example: St. Andrew tells us, that, when Christ
spoke of removing mountains, he meant the Devil; and, when
he spoke of selling two sparrows for a farthing, Bishop Hillary
says he meant “ sinners selling themselves to the Devil.” The
red heifer offered by Moses on the day of Pentecost was “ spir-
itualty Jesus Christ; ” thus identifying Gods with beasts. The
wool and hyssop used for sprinkling the-people, we are told,
means spiritualty, “ the cross of Christ.” Christ’s injunction
to hate father, mother, brother, and sister, &c., we are told,
means that we must love them; and many similar examples
of manufacturing new meanings for obnoxious texts might be
cited.
Now, we ask, of what practical value can the Bible be, when
there is no certain clew to its meaning, or when any of its read-
ers, on finding a word or text whose literal signification does not
suit their religious fancy, can assume the liberty to renounce
the dictionary, ignore the common and established acceptation
of words, and fabricate a new meaning contrary to, and in di-
rect conflict with, the common signification? To get rid of some
obvious error in the text, they bestow upon it an}' kind of fan-
ciful, and sometimes ridiculous, signification their imagination
can invent, and then insist with a godly zeal that it is the in-
tended meaning of the writer. If such lawless license in the
use of words is to be tolerated, as Bible believers are in the
430
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
habit of assuming, in order to make it teach something which
they devoutly desire it should teach, then all rules with respect
to the employment of language and the use of words are at an
end: our dictionaries may be banished from the schoolroom.
We will no longer have use for them if words are no longer
the symbols of ideas, which must be the case if people are
allowed to attach any signification to them they please, or as-
sign them a meaning at variance with common custom; and a
person can learn as much by casting his eyes over the blank
pages of the book as by tracing its printed lines. And the art
and labor of printing, so far as he is concerned, is superseded;
for, as he fabricates his own meaning, this can be done as well
without type as with it. Mr. Ernstein, in his u Principles of
Biblical Interpretation” (p. 37), affirms that ua proposition
ma}r be strictty true which is not contained in the words of the
text; ” which is tantamount to saying, “ The meaning exists in-
dependent of the text, and is to be found outside of it:” so
the text is not needed, and is of no practical use ; for the sen-
timent of the text can be traced as well on the blank page.
The unwarrantable license which Bible adherents assume of
ingrafting new meanings into the words of a text when its
literal reading shocks their moral sense by its immodesty, its
falsity, or its puerility, would not be tolerated with respect to
an}T other book ; and, if it is just and warrantable in this case,
wh}r not adopt it for interpreting the pagan Bibles, and thus
spiritualize them into truth and harmony ? It would take every
objectionable statement out of them, and make them pure, un-
mixed truth. With this kind of license a book can be made to
teach any thing desired. Grant me the liberty that Christians
assume in deviating from the established use of language, and
coining a new meaning for words, and I will take all the infidel-
ity out of 44 Tom Paine’s writings,” and make them chime with
the smoothest and soundest orthodoxy.
It should be borne in mind that the custom of spiritualizing
the apparently immoral and obscene portions of the Bible is
something the common people know nothing about, but suppose
that Bible writers, in all cases, mean just what they say. Hence
it is evident the practice has been attended with no practical
SPIRITUAL OR IMPLIED SENSE OF BIBLES. 431
benefit to society; and Infinite Wisdom should have foreseen
(and would if it had been his production) that the use of such
language would have a demoralizing effect upon the world, and
consequentty would have made use of better language. Bishop
Holbrook says that the notion of an inner sense to the Bible is
a mere creation of fancy, and will take the errors out of airy
book. And, as different writers differ in their mode of spirit-
ualizing the Bible, it proves it is a mere invention and forced
expedient to save the credit of the Book. The resort to a
spiritual sense for the Bible was simply an attempt to conceal
its bad sense,—its nonsense, its vulgarity, its immoral teach-
ings, and its numerous contradictions, which scientific and pro-
gressive minds are constantly bringing to light. But it is as
illusory and ineffectual as the ostrich hiding its head in the
sand to evade its pursuers. In both cases the danger is blinked
out of sight, but not removed.
Any sense of a text not clearly expressed or unequivocally
indicated by the language, we claim, is a slander and a deroga-
tion upon Infinite Wisdom, as it assumes he was too ignorant
of language to be able to say what he meant, thus placing him
lower in the scale of intelligence than a common schoolbo}^; and
assumes his priesthood are infinitely wiser, as they are able to
reveal his u Holy Book ” all over again, and thus make the nu-
merous blunders of Infinite Wisdom plain and intelligible to
common sense and the poorest understanding.
I can not conclude this chapter without bestowing my thanks
upon Emanuel Swedenborg for the service he has rendered the
cause of truth and theological reform by an improved system
of theology he has made out of the Bible, or rather out of his
own brain. Being a man of unusual intellect and moral aspira-
tions, and a man of considerable literary attainments, he could
not brook the absurd system of theology taught in the pulpits,
professedly drawn from the Bible. . And whether his system is
more conformable to the teachings of “ the Holy Book’’ is a
matter of no importance. It is in many respects a rational
and beautiful system, and is thus far very acceptable, and must
be very beneficial as a substitute for the irrational, and in some
respects immoral, system taught by the orthodox churches;
432
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
and, were it universally adopted by Christian professors, it
would be a great improvement on the popular system, and a
step toward the attainment of a true and perfect system.
CHAPTER LXY.
WHAT SHALL WE SUBSTITUTE EOR THE BIBLE?
The disbelievers in Christianity in all past time, when object-
ing to it as being fraught with too many moral defects to consti-
tute a basis or guide for the religious opinions and moral actions
of men in an age more free from superstition, and much farther
advanced in a knowledge of the true science of morals and the
general principles of philosophy, have been met with the reply,
u Show us a better system before you pull down Christianity
and throw aside the Bible. Let us know what you are going to
substitute in their place.” Very well, good friend, we will
meet }Tour objection, and hope we can remove the difficulty.
We think that either of the following answers should prove
satisfactory, and, all taken together, more than satisfactory : —
1. We do not propose or desire to destroy or supersede any
valuable truth, precept, principle, or doctrine taught in the
Bible, or to set aside an}T thing that can in any way prove to be
practicalty useful. We only propose to sift out the errors from
the truth, rejecting the former and retaining the latter, and to
employ as many of the old timbers in constructing the new
superstructure as are not rotten or otherwise defective.
2. Truth can not be u pulled down” or destroyed, as it pos-
sesses an omnipotency of principle that is indestructible. Like
gold in the refiner’s crucible, it shines the brighter for every
effort to destroy it.
3. It must be presumed, therefore, that whatever portion of
your religion is susceptible of destruction is false, and should
he destroyed.
4. It is the nature of truth to spring up voluntarily the mo-
ment error is removed, as naturally as air or water rushes in to
RELIGIOUS RECONSTRUCTION.
433
fill a vacuum. The instant the clouds are rifted, the sun darts
down its vivifying rays upon the earth. You want no substi-
tute for weeds when exterminated from your garden. When
eradicated, those plants which are more useful and beautiful, and
which they have been choking and repressing the growth of,
will then assume a more healthy appearance. You ask no sub-
stitute for sickness or disease, but desire it removed that you
may again enjoy the blessings of health. Moral health will
likewise ensue by the removal of noxious weeds from the mind.
And, finally, you can find a complete answer to this objection
in your own Bible : “ Cease to do evil, and (then) learn to do
well; ” that is, the moment you discover an error in your faith or
practice, abandon it, and you will soon “ learn ” what its proper
substitute is. Truth is always at hand as a substitute for error.
We may assume, then, that, if any of the erroneous doctrines
now propagated were abandoned, they would find their own
substitute immediately, as sickness finds its substitute in health.
But we will not leave the pious Christian in this negative condi-
tion, but will furnish him with a “ substitute ” which holds out
much better hopes and promises than he has anchored in his
idolized system, whether those hopes appertain to a virtuous and
happy life here, or to an ever-blessed eternity beyond the con-
fines of time. That substitute will be found fully explained in
Chapter XIV., under the head of “ The Infidel’s Bible.” Or,
if he desires a system in fuller detail, and one possessing great
beauty, let him examine the principles of “The Harmonial
Philosophy.”
CHAPTER LXVI.
RELIGIOUS RECONSTRUCTION; OR, TIE MORAL NECES-
SITY EOR A SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR RELIGION.
A philosophical analysis of the human mind, viewed in con-
nection with the practical history of man from the early morn-
ing of his existence, fully demonstrates it as an important truth,
that individual happiness and the moral welfare of society de-
434
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
pend essentially upon the uniform action and harmonious co-
operation of all the mental faculties; and that, on the other
hand, their individually excessive and inharmonious action con-
stitutes the primary source of nearly all the crime, miser}-, and
discord of society. And it may be well to note here, as another
important preliminary truth, that the progressive development
of the science of mental philosophy has settled the division of
the mental faculties into the following classification: viz.,
1. The animal, which imparts energy and impulsive strength to
the whole character, mental and ph}Tsical. 2. The social, which
is the source of famil}r ties and the social and co-operative insti-
tutions of societ}^. 3. The moral, which makes us regardful
of the happiness and welfare of other beings than ourselves.
4. The intellectual, which is the great pilot-chamber or light-
house of the whole mind; though it is but recentty that dis-
coveries in mental philosophy have fully disclosed this as being
its natural and legitimate office. It has thus demonstrated it to
be the most important department of the mind. Its position in
the cerebrum — occupying, as it does, the superior frontal lobe
of the brain — might, however, have suggested this. Now this
is no fanciful delineation, no mere ideal mapping of the mind, but
has been demonstrated thousands of times, since the discoveries
of Gall, to be the true condition and classified analysis of the
mental faculties. The religious faculties constituting that de-
partment of the mind which often controls our actions and
conduct toward others, and being situated at the apex of the
brain,—the point where the most intensified feelings and im-
pulses are supposed to concentrate their misdirection or ab-
normal exercise, is consequently attended with more direful
consequences to societ}' than that of an}T other portion of the
mind. All history demonstrates this as a tragical fact; for
religion, more especially, is always born blind. This being a
tenable fact, and the religious faculties being awakened to ac-
tion at an early period of human societ}’, — before the intellectual
chambers of the mind were lighted up by the illuminating rays of
science, or supplied by a philosophical education and a thorough
and untrammeled stud}’ of nature's laws,—their natural inten-
sity of feeling, thus uncurbed and unenlightened, drove their
RELIGIOUS RECONSTRUCTION.
-
435
nonest but dark-minded possessors into the most senseless and
childish superstitions, the most absurd doctrines, the most re-
lentless intolerance of belief, and the most bloody and murder-
ous persecutions; thus proving that conscience unenlightened
is a very unsafe and a very dangerous moral and religious
guide. The popular Christian proverb, that “man can not be
too religious,” comprehends a very fatal error in moral ethics:
for the man who possesses more religion than intellect, or more
devotional piety than intellectual cultivation and philosophical
enlightenment, is sometimes a more dangerous man to society
than the highway robber or the midnight assassin; because,
always finding many accomplices to aid him in his direful deeds
of blood}" persecutions, and frequently being able, also, to in-
voke the strong arm of the law, his work of defamation and
spoliation, if not of open persecution and bloodshed, is wider
spread than that of the burglar or the stealthy assassin.
A review of history shows us : 1. That, up to the installation
of the era of science, which dates back less than three centuries
ago, the world—that is, the Christian world — was literally a vast
prison-house of chains, and a theater of butcher}" and blood, —the
result of a practical effort of men, devoutly pious, to “ promote
the glory of God,” and the establishment of a supposed-to-be-
true religion. 2. The perpetrators of those tragical deeds upon
men and women were, many of them, as religiously honest and
conscientious “ as ever breathed the breath of life; ” and they
verily believed they were doing God sendee in thus punishing
and exterminating dissenters and heretics. The very fact that
some of these pious persecutors perished themselves at the fiery
stake in the conscientious and unflinching maintenance of their
principles, shouting “ Hallelujah ” while the burning fagots con-
sumed their bodies, leaves no possible ground for doubt that
a deep religious conviction had actuated them in the work of
persecuting and punishing the enemies of their religion, and in
attempting to convert the world to its “ saving truth” by the
sword. Much is said about “ conscience,” “ the internal mon-
itor,” “ the still, small voice,” &c., as a guide for man’s moral
actions; but, if experience and history ever proved or can prove
any thing, they demonstrate most conclusively that conscience,
436
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
unenlightened by the intellectual department of the mind, or a
conscience grown up amid the weeds of scientific ignorance, is
as dangerous a pilot upon the moral ocean as the helmsman of
a ship, in midnight darkness, surrounded by dangerous shoals
and resistless whirlpools. Conscience without science or phil-
osophy is a lamp without oil, which consequently*, being without
light, is more likely to lead us astray than to guide us to the
temple of truth. Science is the pilot-lamp by which we discern
our way on the pilgrim-voyage of life; while religion is the
feeling, the motive-power, which impels us onward. Hence the
latter should at all times be subservient to the former, and
should be checked and restrained from spontaneous develop-
ment and exercise until the former is duly installed upon the
mental throne as ruler of the moral empire. It is as dangerous
to cultivate and stimulate the religious feelings, until the fires
of science or practical philosophy have been kindled up in the
intellectual chambers to furnish the light necessaiy to guide them
in their impulsive course, as it would be to steam up the boilers
of a boat when approaching a precipice in the night, with the
pilot asleep upon his hammock, and all the lights extinguished
in his chamber. Neither religion nor conscience possesses pri-
mordialty any light of its own. Both are born blind; and all
the light they ever possess is by reflection from the intellectual
light-house. Prolific, indeed, of the proof of this statement,
are human nature, human experience, and universal history.
Let the polic}r, then, be, in all cases, to cultivate science before
religion. The intellectual mind, we repeat, should be thorough-
ly cultivated and enlightened before the religious feelings are
called into action.
Query. Reader, what do you now think of Dr. Cheviot’s
statement, “ The Bible does not contain the shadow of a shade
of error from Genesis to Revelation
CONCLUSION.
437
CONCLUSION.
SEVERAL IMPORTANT POINTS.
1. As this work was announced several }7ears ago, it seems
proper to explain the causes of the long delay in its pub-
lication. Want of health for completing it, and want of means
for publishing it, furnish the true explanation. But by the prac-
tical application of a remedy constituting a new and extraordi-
nary discovery in the healing art, the author’s health has so far
improved as to enable him to resume the work, and re-write
nearly the whole of it in a few weeks time. The work advei-
tised embraced but forty pages. The present volume comprises
nearly eleven times that number of pages, and includes only
two chapters of the original, except the small portion which has
been re-written.
2. While u The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors ” was de-
signed principally to trace the doctrines, traditions, and miracu-
lous events of the Christian Bible to their primary pagan or
Oriental origin, the main object of u The Bible of Bibles ” is to
expose their logical absurdity, and the evils resulting from their
propagation and practical application.
3. The objection is frequently raised in this work against
placing the Bible in the hands of children, and also in posses-
sion of the heathen. This would, of course, keep it out of our
common schools; and the author rejoices in knowing, that,
although the Bible was used as a regular school-book in his
youthful da}Ts, it has been banished as a text-book from nearly
every schoolroom throughout the country. This denotes prog-
ress.
4. Christian professors regard it as a sufficient refutation of
all the arguments and facts designed to prove and demonstrate
the immoral influence of the Bible upon society, to assert that
438
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
Christian countries are superior in morals to those not in posses-
sion of their Bible. But many facts cited in this work tend to
prove, that, if the assumption were correct, it could not with any
show of reason or sense be attributed to the influence of the
Bible. It is clearly, if not self-evidently, impossible that such
* moral or immoral lessons as are derived from the history of such
characters as the father and founder of the Jewish nation (Abra-
ham), who is represented as living up to all the commands, all
the statutes, and all the laws of God (see Gen. xxvi. 5), while
practicing the abominable crimes of treachery, deceit, falsehood,
incest or adulteiy, and potygam}", &c, — I say it is moralty impos-
sible for such examples and such lessons to exert other than a
demoralizing influence upon society; or that of David, pro-
nounced u the man after God's own heart,” while practicing a
long catalogue of the most shocking crimes (see chap. xxx).
Such cases blasphemously represent God as sanctioning the
most atrocious crimes and the most revolting deeds, which is a
virtual licence to the whole human race to practice them. If a
book containing such lessons does not exert an immoral influence
upon society, then human language, when employed in writing
Bibles, fails to make its ordinary impression upon the mind.
But we will here cite three cogent and incontrovertible historical
facts, which will settle the matter at once and for ever, bj^ proving
the truth of our oft-repeated proposition, that the Christian Bible,
notwithstanding the apparent improvement in morals of most
Christian countries in modern times, has, on the whole, tended
to demoralize every nation where it has been generally read, be-
lieved, and practiced. First, look at the moral condition of the
whole Christian world during the period known as u the Dark
Ages,” and 3011 will see the proof in overwhelming torrents.
During that long night of moral darkness and human depravity,
which lasted nearly a thousand years, all Christendom was reek-
ing with moral corruption, and practicing the most abominable
crimes. Ljdng, deceit, hypocrisy, moral treason, licentious-
ness, adultery, fornication, lighting, and drunkenness were the
order of the day among all classes, including the clerg}r and the
deacons, simply because the light of science had not reached
them, and the Bible was their sole guide in morals and religion.
CONCLUSION.
439
This state of things continued until the introduction of Greek
literature dispelled the thick clouds of mental darkness, and ar-
rested the swift tide of moral corruption. Second, the Greeks
without our Bible were both morally and intellectually superior
to any Christian nation. Third, “ the Dark Ages ” were brought
to a close by the introduction of Greek learning and Greek mor-
als into Christian nations. This dates their first tendency to
rise out of the sloughs of heathen barbarism, and their first ap-
pearance of moral improvement. And thus the proposition is
proved and demonstrated by the facts of history that the Bible
continued to demoralize society till its influence was arrested by
the dawn of moral and physical science. In no nation has there
been an}’ marked improvement in morals with the use of the
Bible alone.
5. It will doubtless be regarded as an extraordinary circum-
stance that so many thousand biblical errors as are disclosed in
this work should have passed from age to age unnoticed by the
millions of disciples of the Christian faith, and more especially
the startling fact that all the cardinal doctrines of the Christian
religion are founded in error. But it should be borne in mind
that it was regarded and taught as a religious duty to suppress
and conceal all such errors, and absolutely wicked, sinful, and
dangerous to admit the possibility that the Holy Book can con-
tain errors. And this negative policy alone was sufficient to
keep them concealed and out of sight.
6. It is stated in chapter thirty that none of the Old Testa-
ment writers teach the doctrine of immortality or the doctrine of
future rewards and punishments. The proof and a full elucida-
tion of this subject will be found in u The Biography of Satan.”
7. It is stated in chapter fifty-five that all human language
is more or less ambiguous and uncertain, and in chapter fifty-two
that skillful linguists of this age can construct language whose
meaning can not be misunderstood ; and hence God should
have been able to do so when the Bible was written. The first
statement refers to language as ordinarily used when the Bible
was written, and especially the imperfect Hebrew of the Bible.
The last statement implies that with the modern improvements
language can be so employed as to leave no doubt of its mean-
ing in any case. Both statements, then, are correct.
440
THE BIBLE OF BIBLES.
8. The author, in abridging citations from history and the
Bible, has in some cases deviated from custom in using quota-
tion-marks. This is especially true of chapter twenty-two (on
Bible contradictions).
9. It is believed that no errors of any importance can be
found in this work, unless some mistakes have been committed
in making scriptural references.
10. £@r”Each reader of this work is desired to examine care-
fully and critically the author’s exposition of “ The Twelve Car-
dinal Doctrines of the Christian Faith,” and report to him his
views .of that exposition. Those twelve leading doctrines are
embraced in the twelve chapters commencing at chapter 38 (on
revelation) and ending at chapter 44 (on a personal God).
THE 'WORLD’S
SIXTEEN CRUCIFIED SAVIORS;
Or, Christianity Before Christ.
CONTAINING
New, Startling, and Extraordinary Revelations in Religious History
which disclose the Oriental origin of all the Doctrines, Principles,
Precepts and Miracles of the Christian New Testament, and
furnishing a hey for unloching many of its Sacred
Mysteries, besides comprising the History of
Sixteen Oriental Crucified Gods, etc,, etc,
BY KERSEY GRAVES,
Author of “The Biography of Satan,” and “The Bible of Bibles; or, Twenty-
Seven ‘Divine Revelations.* ”
This wonderful and exhaustive volume by Mr. Graves will, we are certain, take
high rank as a book of reference in the field which he has chosen for it. The
amount of mental labor necessary to collate and compile the varied information
contained in it must have been severe and arduous indeed, and now that it is in
such convenient shape the student of free thought will not willingly allow it to go
out of print. But the book is by no means a mere collation of views or statistics;
throughout its entire course the author follows a definite line of research and argu-
ment to the close, and his conclusions go, like sure arrows, to the mark.
Printed on fine white paper, large l2mo, 384 pages, with portrait of author, $2,00,
postage 10 cents.
COLBY & RICH, Publishers,
No. 9 Montgomery Place, Boston, Mass.
THE
Biography of Satan:
OR,
A HISTORICAL EXPOSITION
OF
THE DEVIL AND HIS FIERY DOMINION.
BY IT GRAVES,
Author of “The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” “The Bible of Bibles; or,
Twenty-Seven ‘ Divine Revelations,* ” etc.
This work discloses the Oriental origin of the belief in a Devil and Future
Endless Punishment. Also, the Pagan origin of the Scriptural terms, Bottomless
Pit, Lake of Fire and Brimstone, Keys of Hell, Chains of Darkness, Casting out
Devils, Everlasting Punishment, The Worm that Never Dieth, etc., all explained.
Paper. Price 35 cents, postage 3 cents.
COLBY & RICH,
No. 9 Montgomery Place, Boston, Mass.
BANNER OF LIGHT:
A
POPULAR FAMILY PAPER.
The Oldest Journal devoted to the
SPIRITUAL PHILOSOPHY
I2ST THE -WOELD.
ISSUED WEEKLY,
At No. 9 Montgomery Place, Boston, Mass.
COLBY & RICH, .... Proprietors.
THE BANNER LIGHT is a first-class, eight-page Newspaper, containing for-
ty COLUMNS OF INTERESTING AND INSTRUCTIVE READING, Classed as follows:
LITERARY DEPARTMENT.—Original Novelettes of reformatory tenden-
cies, and translations from French and German authors.
REPORTS OF SPIRITUAL LECTURES.—By able Trance and Normal
Speakers.
ORIGINAL ESSAYS.—Upon Spiritual, Philosophical and Scientific Subjects.
EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT,—Subjects of General Interest, the Spiritual
Philosophy, Current Events, Entertaining Miscellany, Notices of New Publi-
cations, etc., etc.
SPIRIT-MESSAGE DEPARTMENT.—Spirit-Messages from the departed
to their friends in earth-life, proving direct spirit-intercourse between the Mun-
dane and Super-Mundane worlds.
CONTRIBUTIONS, Original and select, by the most talented writers in the
world, etc., etc.
All which features render this journal a popular Family Paper, and at the same
time the Harbinger of a Glorious Scientific Religion.
TERMS OP SUBSCRIPTION IN ADVANCE:
Per Year, $3,00. . Six Months, $1,50. . Three Months, 75 Cents.
Postage 15 cents per year, which must accompany the subscription.
In remitting by mail, a Post Office Order or Draft on Boston or New York pay-
able to the order of COLBY & RICH, is preferable to Bank Notes, since, should
the Order or Draft he lost or stolen, it can be renewed without loss to the sender.
Subcriptions discontinued at the expiration of the time paid for.
J&g* Specimen Copies sent free.
Advertisements inserted at twenty cents per line for the first, and fifteen
cents per line for each subsequent insertion.
J8$r*All communications intended for publication, or in any way connected with
the Editorial department should he addressed to the Editor. Letters to the Edi-
tor, not intended for publication, should he marked “private ” on the envelope.
COLBY &. RICH,
Publishers and Booksellers,
NO. 9 MONTGOMERY PLACE, BOSTON, MASS.,
KEEP FOR SALE ALL
Spiritual, Progressive and Reformatory Publications.
For Prices, &c., see Catalogues, and advertisements in the Banner of Light.
I
COLBY «£ RICH,
No. 9 MONTGOMERY PLACE,
BOSTON,
fNibli^tief^ kqd Sook^ellef^
KEEP A COMPLETE ASSORTMENT OF
SPIRITUAL, PROGRESSIVE, REFORM,
AND
MISCELLANEOUS BOOKS,
AT WHOLESALE AND RETAIL.
AMONG THE AUTHORS ARE,—
ANDREW JACKSON DAVIS, Judge J. W. EDMONDS,
Hon. ROBERT DALE OWEN, Prof. S. B. BRITTAN,
WILLIAM DENTON,
JAS. M. PEEBLES,
HENRY C. WRIGHT,
ERNEST RENAN,
GILES B. STEBBINS,
WARREN CHASE,
D. D. HOME,
T. R. HAZARD,
A. E. NEWTON,
Rev. M. B. CRAVEN,
ALLEN PUTNAM,
EPES SARGENT,
W. P. EVANS,
HUDSON TUTTLE,
A. P. CHILD,
P. B. RANDOLPH,
WARREN S. BARLOW,
Rev. T. B. TAYLOR,
J. O. BARRETT,
Rev. WM. MOUNTFORD,
Mrs. EMMA HARDINGE,
Mrs. J. S. ADAMS,
ACHSA W. SPRAGUE,
BELLE BUSH,
Miss LIZZIE DOTEN,
Mrs. MARIA M. KING,
Mrs. L. MARIA CHILD,
Mrs. LOIS WAISBROOKER.
TERMS CASII. — Orders for Books must be accompanied by all or part cash.
When the money sent is not sufficient to fill the order, the balance must be paid
C.O.D.
Any Book published in England or America, not out of print, will be sent by
mail or express.
Catalogues of Books giving prices, &c.9 sent free*
t
l
I
I
t
Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process.
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide
Treatment Date: Feb. 2005
PreservationTechnologies
A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION
111 Thomson Park Drive
Cranberry Township. PA 16066
(724) 779-2111