Topic: THE WORLD’S Sixteen Crucified Saviors OR, Christianity before Christ 1878

[Prometheus]

alone. It will be observed, then, that the first “inspired” and
“ infallible ” witness testifies there were two women ; the second
that there were four; and the third witness declares there was
but one. What beautiful harmony. No court in the civilized
world would accept such discordant testimony.

3.   And in relation to what took place at the tomb, Matthew
testifies that “ the angel of the Lord ” sat upon a stone at the
door of the sepulcher, and told the women their Lord was
risen. But Luke steps forward here, and aveirs that instead of
an angel they found two men there, not outside, but inside, and
not sitting, but standing. But Mark sets the testimony of both
these “inspired” witnesses aside by affirming there was but
one man there, and he was sitting. While Matthew says “ they,”
St. John says “she” (speaking of the person or persons who
left the sepulcher.) According to Matthew the angel who
rolled away the stone from the sepulcher sent a message to the
disciples. But Mark affirms it was not an “ angel ” outside,
but a “young man” inside, who did this. And here the ques
tion naturally arises, Why was it necessary for a being who
could say, “ I have power to lay down my life and take it up
again ” (John), to have an angel to roll away the stone from
the. sepulcher. Certainly, if he possessed such omnipotent
power, he needed no aid from any being to perform such an act.

4.   And relative to Peter’s visit to the tomb, there is a total
disparity in the testimony of the witnesses. According to
Luke, he did not go into the sepulcher, but only stooped down
and looked in. But Mark affirms he did go in, and that it was
the disciple who went with him who stooped down.

5.   And with respect to the events which occurred immedi-
ately subsequent to the resurrection, there is no less discre-
pancy, no nearer agreement, in the testimony of the evangelical
witnesses. Matthew says that when Christ’s disciples first met
him after the resurrection, they worshiped him, and held him
by the feet. (Matt, xxviii. 9.) Strange, indeed, and wholly in-
credible, if John is a reliable witness, for he affirms he did not
allow even his best and dearest friend (Mary) to touch him.
And then John combats this testimony of his by declaring
lie invited the skeptical Thomas, not only to touch him, but to
thrust his hand into his side for tangible proof of his identity.
 132

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS:

6.   And why, let us ask here, was not the skeptical Thomas
damned for his doubting, when we, who live thousands of miles
from the place, and nearly two thousand years from the time, are
often told by the priesthood we must “ believe or be damned ” ?

7.   And if Thomas was really convinced by this occurrence
or if it ever took place, why have we no account of his subse-
quent life? What good was effected by his convincement if
he never said or did anything afterward ?

8.   John tells us Mary first saw Christ, after his resurrection,
at the tomb, but Matthew says it was on her way home she first
saw him.

9.   We are told by Luke (xxiv. 3G) that when Christ ap-
peared to his disciples on a certain occasion' they were fright-
ened, supposing it to be a spirit. But John (xx. 20) says they
were glad. Which must we believe?

10.   According to Matthew, the disciples were all present on
this occasion ; but according to John, Thomas was not there.

11.   Here let it be noted that none of the narrators claim to
have seen Christ rise from the tomb, nor to have got it from
anybody who did see it. The only proof in this case is their
declaration, “ It came to pass.”

12.   And we are prompted to ask here, how a it came to
pass ” that the chief priests and pharisees cherished sufficient
faith in Christ’s resurrection to set a watch for it, as Matthew
reports, when his own disciples were too faithless in such an
event to be present, or to believe he had risen after the report
reached their ears ; for we are told some doubted. (See Matt*
xxviii.)

13.   And how came Matthew to know the soldiers were
bribed to say Christ’s body was stolen away by his disciples,
when the disclosures of such a secret would have been death
under the Roman government.

14.   And their confession of being asleep, as related by Mat-
thew, would have subjected them to the same fatal penalty by
the civil rulers of Rome.

15.   And if the soldiers were all asleep, can we not suggest
several ways the body may have disappeared without being
restored to life ?
 RESURRECTION OF THE SAVIORS.

135

16.   And here we would ask if Christ rose f~om the dead in
order to convince the world of his divine power, why did not
the event take place in public ? Why was it seen only by a
few credulous and interested disciples?

17.   And if such an astonishing and miraculous event did
occur, why does not one of the numerous cotemporary writers
of those times make any allusion to it? Neither Pliny, Taci-
tus, nor Josephus, who detail the events very minutely, not
only of those times, but of that very country, says a word about
such a wonder-exciting occurrence. This fact of itself entirely
overthrows the credibility of the story.

18.   And the fact that several Christian sects, which flourished
near those times, as the Corinthians and Carpocratians, &c.,
rejected the story in toto, furnishes another powerful argument
for discrediting it.

19.   And then add to this the fact that his own chosen fol-
lowers were upbraided for their unbelief in the matter.

20.   And what was Christ doing during the forty days between
his resurrection and ascension, that he should only be seen a
few times, and but a few minutes at a time, and by but a few
persons, and those interested ?

21.   And we would ask, likewise, What more can be proved
by Christ’s physical resurrection than that of the resurrection
of Lazarus, the widow’s son, and several cases related in the
Old Testament, or the numerous cases reported in oriental his-
tory ?

22.   And what analogy is there in the resurrection of the
dead body of a perfect self-existent God and that of vile
man?

23.   And why should Christ be called “the first fruits of the
resurrection,” when so many cases are reported as occurring
before his ?

24.   And why do Christians build their hopes of immortality
almost entirely upon Christ’s alleged resurrection, in view of
the numerous facts we have cited showing it to be a mere
sandy foundation ?

25.   Of course no person who believes in modern Spiritualism
will discredit the story of Christ being visually recognized
 131

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

after his death as a spirit — for they have ocular proof that
many such cases have occurred within the last decade of
years. But it is the story of his physical resurrection we are
combating — the reanimation of his flesh and bones after hav-
ing been subjected for three days to the laws of decomposition.
Neither science nor sense can indorse such a story.

26.   It was a very easy matter, and very natural to mistake
Christ’s spiritual body for his physical body; for such mis-
takes have been made a thousand times in the world’s history.

27.   Is it not strange, in view of the countless defects in the
story of Christ’s physical resurrection as enumerated above,
that the orthodox Christian world should rely upon it as the
great sheet-anchor of their faith, and as their chief and almost
their only hope of immortal life ?
 REAPPEARANCE OF THE SAVIORS.

135

CHAPTER XX.

REAPPEARANCE AND ASCENSION OF THE
SAVIORS.

Many cases are related by their respective sacred narratives
of the ancient Saviors, and other beings possessing the form of
man, and previously recognized as men reappearing to their dis-
ciples and friends, after having been consigned to the tomb for
three days, or a longer or shorter period of time, and of their
final ascension to the house of many mansions. It is related of
the Indian or Hindoo Savior Chrishna, that after having risen
from the dead, he appeared again to his disciples. 44 He
ascended to Yoiacantha (heaven), to Brahma,” the first person
of the trinity (he himself being the second), and that as he
ascended, 44 all men saw him, and exclaimed,4 Lo, Chrishna’s
soul ascends its native skies.’ ” And it is further related that,
44 attended by celestial spirits, ... he pursued by his own
light the journey between earth and heaven, to the bright
paradise whence he had descended.” Of the ninth incarnation
of India, the Savior Sakia, it is declared, that he 44 ascended to
the celestial regions; ” and his pious and devout disciples point
the skeptic to indelible impressions and ineffaceable footprints
on the rocks of a high mountain as an imperishable proof of the
declaration that he took his last leave of earth and made his
ascent from that point.

It is related of the crucified Prometheus, likewise, that after
having given up the ghost on the cross,46 descended to hell ”
(Christ’s soul was 44 not left in hell,” see Acts ii. 81), 44 he rose
again from the dead, and ascended into heaven.” And then it
is declared of the Egyptian Savior Alcides, that44 after having
 136

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

been seen a number of times, he ascended to a higher life,”
going up, like Elijah, in “ a chariot of fire ; ” and the story of the
crucifixion of Quexalcote of Mexico, followed by his burial,
resurrection, and ascension, is distinctly related in the “holy”
and inspired “ gospels of that country, which Lord Kingsborough
admitted to be more than two thousand years old. Of Laotsi
of China, it is said that when “ he had completed his mission
of benevolence, he ascended bodily alive into the paradise
above.” (Prog, of Rel. Ideas, vol. i. 214.) And it is related
of Fo of the same country, that having completed his glorious
mission on earth, he u ascended back to paradise, where he had
previously existed from all eternity.” It is related also in the
ancient legends, that the Savior or God Xamalxis of Thrace,
having died, and descended beneath the earth, and remained
there three years, made his appearance again in the fourth year
after his death, as he had previously foretold, and eventually
ascended to heaven about 600 B. C. Even some of the Hindoo
saints are reported in their “ holy ” and time-honored books to
have been seen ascending to heaven. “ And impressions on
the rocks are shown,” says an author, “ said to be of footprints
they left when they ascended.”

It is related both by the Grecian biographer Plutarch, in his
life of Romulus, and by a Roman historian, that the great
founder of Rome (Romulus) suddenly ascended in a tempest
during a solar eclipse, about 713 B. C. And Julius Proculus, a
Roman senator of great fame and high reputation, declared,
under solemn oath, that he saw him, and talked with him after
his death.

Astronomical Version of the Story.

Before dismissing this chapter, we may state that, in common
frith most other religious conceptions, the doctrine of the
ascension has in the ancient legends an astronomical represen-
tation.

Having said that a planet was buried because it sunk below
the horizon, when it returned to light and gained its state of
eminence, they spoke of it as dead, risen again, and ascended
 REAPPEARANCE OF THE SAVIORS.

137

into heaven. (Volney, p. 143.) What is the story of the ascen-
sion of Christ worth in view of these ancient pagan traditions
of earlier origin ?

Ascension op the Christian Savior.

1.   The different scriptural accounts of the ascension of Christ
are, like the different stories of the resurrection, quite con-
tradictory, and hence entitled to as little credit. In Luke
(xxiv.) he is represented as ascending on the evening of the
third day after the crucifixion. But the writer of Acts (i. 3)
says he did not ascend till forty days after his resurrection;
while, according to his own declaration to the thief on the cross,
“ This day shalt thou be with me in paradise,” he must have
ascended on the same day of his crucifixion. Which statement
must we accept as inspired, or what is proved by such contra-
dictory testimony ?

2.   Which must we believe, Paul’s declaration that he was
seen by above five hundred of the brethren at opce (1 Cor. xv.
6), or the statement of the author of the Acts (i. 15), that there
were but one hundred and twenty brethren in all after that
period?

3.   How would his ascension do anything toward proving
his divinity, unless it also proves the divinity of Enoch and
Elijah, who are reported to have ascended long prior to that
era ?

4.   As these stories of the ascension of Christ, according to
Lardner, were written many years after his crucifixion, is it not
hence probable they grew out of similar stories relative to the
heathen Gods long previously prevalent in oriental countries ?

5.   As these gospel writers could not have been present to wit-
ness the ascension, as it must have occurred before their time
of active life, does not this fact of itself seriously damage the
credibility of the accounts, and more especially as neither Mark
nor Luke, who are the only reporters of the occurrence, were not
disciples of Christ at the time, while Matthew and John, who
were, say nothing about it ? — another fact which casts a shade
on the credibility of the story.
 138

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

CHAPTER XXL

THE ATONEMENT: ITS ORIENTAL OR HEATHEN

ORIGIN.

There were various practices in vogue amongst the orien-
talists, which originated with the design of appeasing the anger,
and propitiating the favor of a presumed to be irascible deity.
Most of these practices consisted in some kind of sacrifice or
destructive offering called the “ atonement” But here let it
be observed, that the doctrine of atonement for sin, by sacrifice,
was unfolded by degrees, and that the crucifixion of a God was
not the first practical exhibition of it. On the contrary, it
appears to have commenced with the most valueless or cheap-
est species of property then known; and from this starting-
point ascended gradually, so as finally to embody the most
costly commodities; and did not stop here, but reached for-
ward till it laid its murderous hands on human beings, and
immolated them upon its bloody altars. And finally, to cap
the climax, it assumed the effrontery to drag a God off the
throne of heaven, to stanch its bloodthirsty spirit, as evinced
by Paul’s declaration, “ Without the shedding of blood there
can be no remission of sin.” Rather a bloody doctrine, and
one which our humanity rejects with instinctive horror. We
will trace the doctrine of the atonement briefly through its
successive stages of growth and development. The idea seems
to have started very early in the* practical history of the human
race, that the sacrifice and consequent deprivation of earthly
goods, or some terrestrial enjoyment, would have the effect
to mitigate the anger, propitiate the favor, and obtain the
mercy of an imaginary vengeful God. This idea obviously
was suggested by observing that their earthly rulers always
 THE ATONEMENT.

13&

[Prometheus]

smiled, and became less rigorous in their laws, and milder in
their treatment of their subjects, when they made them pres-
ents of some valuable or desirable commodity. They soon
learned that such offerings had the effect to check their cruel
and bloody mode of governing the people; so that when their
houses were shaken down, or swallowed up by earthquakes, the
trees riven by lightning, and prostrated by storms, and their cattle
swept away by floods, supposing it to be the work of an angry
God, the thought arose in their minds at once, that perhaps his
wrath could be abated by the same expedient as that which
had served in the case of their mundane lords — that of making
presents of property. But as this property could not be car-
ried up to the celestial throne, the expedient was adopted of
burning it, so that the substance or quintessence of it would be
conveyed up to the heavenly Potentate in the shape of steam
and smoke, which would make for him, as the Jews express it,
“a sweet-smelling savor.” Abundant and conspicuous is the
evidence in history to show that the custom of burnt-offer-
ings and atonements for sin originated in this way. The
first species of property made use of for burnt-offerings ap-
pears to have been the fruits of the earth, — vegetables, fruits,
roots, &c., — the lowest kind of property in point of value.
But the thought soon naturally sprang up in the mind of
the devotee, that a more valuable offering would sooner
and more effectually secure the divine favor. Hence levies
were made on living herds of cattle, sheep, goats, and other
domestic animals. This was the second step in the ascend-
ing scale toward Gods. And here we find the key to open
and solve the mystery of Jehovah’s preferring Abel’s offer-
ing to Cain’s. While the latter consisted in mere inanimate
substances, the former embraced the firstlings of the flock
— a higher and more valuable species of property, and quite
sufficient to induce the selfish Jehovah to prefer Abel’s offer-
ing to Cain’s, or rather for the selfish Jews to cherish this
conception. In all nations where offerings were made, the con-
clusion became established in the minds of the people that
the amount of God’s favor procured in this way must be pro-
oortionate to the value of the commodity or victim offered up
 140

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

— a conviction which, ultimately led to the seizure of human
beings for the atoning offering, which brings us to the third
stage of growth in the atonement doctrine. Children frequently
constituted the victims in this case. The sacrifice of Jephthah’s
daughter, as related in Judges xi. 30, and other cases cited by
bible writers, Isaiah xxxii. 25, and modern Christian authors,
prove that this practice was in vogue among “God’s holy
people.” One step more (constituting the fourth stage of de-
velopment) brings us to the sacrifice of Gods. The climax is
now reached; the conception can go no higher. The ancient
Birmese taught that while common property in burnt-offerings
would procure the temporary favor of the ruling God, the
sacrifice of human beings would secure his good pleasure for
a thousand years, and cancel out all the sins committed in
that period. And when one of the three Gods on the throne
of heaven was dragged down, or voluntarily came down (as
some of the sects taught), and was put to death on the cross
as an atonement for sin, such was the value of the victim,
such the magnitude of the offering, that it “ atoned for all sin,
past, present, and future, for all the human race.” The Hin-
doos, cherishing this conception, taught that the crucifixion of
their sin-atoning Savior Chrishna (1200 B. C.) put an end to
both animal and human sacrifices, and accordingly such offer-
ings ceased in most Hindoo countries centuries ago. Thus far
back in the mire and midnight of human ignorance, and amid
the clouds of mental darkness, while man dwelt upon the ani-
mal plane, and was governed by his brutal feelings, and “blood
for blood ” was the requisition for human offenses, originated
the bloody, savage, and revolting doctrine of the atonement.

Another mode of adjudicating the sins of the people in vogue
in some countries anterior to the custom of shedding blood as
an expiation, was that of packing them on the back, head, or
horns of some animal by a formal hocus-pocus process, and then
driving the animal into a wilderness, or some other place so
remote that the brute could not find its way back amongst the
people with its cargo of sins. The cloth or fabric used for
inclosing the sins and iniquities of the people was usually of a
red or scarlet color — of the semblance of blood. In fact it
 THE ATONEMENT.

u:

was generally dipped in blood. This, being lashed to the ani-
mal, would, of course, be exposed to the weather and the
drenching rains, would consequently, in the course of time, fade
and become white. Hence we have the key to Isaiah’s decla-
ration, “Though your sins be (red) as scarlet, they shall be-
come (white) as wool.” (See Isaiah, i. 18.) And thus the
meaning of this obscure text is clearly explained by tracing its
origin to its oriental source. And there are many other texts
in the Christian bible which might be elucidated in a similar
manner by using oriental tradition, or oriental sacred books, as
a key to unlock and explain their meaning. We have stated
above that some animal was made use of by different nations
to convey the imaginary load of the people’s sins out of the
country. For this purpose the Jews had their “ scape-goat,” the
Egyptians their “ scape-ox,” the Hindoos their “ scape-horse,”
the Chaldeans their “scape-ram,” the Britons their “scape-
bull,” the Mexicans their “ scape-lamb ” and “ scape-mouse,”
the Tamalese their “ scape-hen,” and the Christians at a later
period their scape- God. Jesus Christ may properly be termed
the scape-God of orthodox Christians, as he stands in the same
relation to his disciples, who believe in the atonement, as the
goat did to the Jews, and performs the same end and office.
The goat and the other sin-offering animals took away the sin
of the nation in each case respectively. In like manner Jesus
Christ takes away the sin of the world, being called “the
Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.” (John i.

29.) And more than two thousand years ago the Mexicans
sacrificed a lamb as an atonement, which they called “the
Lamb of God” — the same title scripturally applied to Jesus
Christ. The conception in each case is, then, the same — that
of the atonement for sin by the sacrifice of an innocent victim. .
The above citations show that the present custom of orthodox
Christendom, in packing their sins upon the back of a God, is
just the same substantially as that of various heathen nations,
who were anciently in the habit of packing them upon the backs
of various dumb animals. If some of our Christian brethren
should protest against our speaking of the church’s idea of
atonement as that of packing their sins upon the back of a
 142

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

God, we will here prove the appropriateness of the terra
upon the authority of the bible. Peter expressly declares
Christ bore our sins upon his own body on a tree (see 1 Peter

ii.   24), just as the Jews declared the goat bore their sins on his
body, and the ancient Brahmins taught that the bulls and the
heifers bore theirs away, &c., which shows that the whole con-
ception is of purely heathen origin. And hereafter, when they
laugh at the Jewish superstition of a scape-goat, let them bear
in mind that more sensible and intelligent people may laugh in
turn at their superstitious doctrine of a scape-God.

These superstitious customs were simply expedients of differ-
ent nations to evade the punishment of their sins — an attempt
to shift their retributive consequences on to other beings. The
divine atonement more especially possessed this character. This
system teaches that the Son of God and Savior of the world
was sent down and incarnated, in order to die for the people,
and thus suffer by proxy the punishment meted out by divine
wrath for the sins of the whole world. The blood of a God must
atone for the sins of the whole human family, as rams, goats,
bullocks, and other animals had atoned for the sins of families
and nations under older systems. Thus taught Brahminism,
Budhism, Persianism, and other religious systems before the
dawn of Christianity. The nucleus of the atoning system is
founded in the doctrine, “ Without the shedding of blood there
is no remission for sin ” (Rom. v. 9) — a monstrous and morally
revolting doctrine — a doctrine which teaches us that some-
body's blood must be shed, somebody’s veins and arteries de-
pleted, for every trivial offense committed against the moral
law. Somebody must pay the penalty in blood, somebody
must be slaughtered for every little foible, or peccadillo, or moral
blunder into which erring man may chance to stumble while
upon the pilgrimage of life, while journeying through the
wilderness of time, even if a God has to be dragged from his
throne in heaven, and murdered to accomplish it. Nothing
less will mitigate the divine wrath. Whose soul, possessing
the slightest moral sensibility, does not inwardly and instinc-
tively revolt at such a doctrine? We would not teach it to the
world, for it is founded in butchery and bloodshed, and is an
 THE ATONEMENT.

143

old pagan superstition, which originated far back in the mid-
night of mental darkness and heathen ignorance, when the
whole human race were under the lawless sway of their brutal
propensities, and when the ennobling attributes of love, mercy,
and forgiveness had as yet found no place, no abiding home,
in the human bosom. The bloody soul of the savage first gave
it birth. We hold the doctrine to be a high-handed insult to
the All-loving Father, who, we are told, is “long suffering in
mercy,” and “ plentiful in forgiveness,” to charge Him with
sanctioning such a doctrine, much less with originating it.
There is no “mercy or forgiveness” in putting an innocent
being to death for any pretext whatever. And for the Father
to consent to the brutal assassination of His own innocent Son
upon the cross to gratify an implacable revenge toward his
own children, the workmanship of his own hands, rather than
forgive a moral weakness implanted in their natures by a vol-
untary act of his own, and for which consequently he alone
ought to be responsible, would be nothing short of murder in
the first degree. We cherish no such conception. We cannot
for a moment harbor a blasphemous doctrine, which represents
the Universal Father as being a bloody-minded and murderons
being, instead of a being of infinite love, infinite wisdom, and
infinite in all the moral virtues. Such a character would be a
deep-dyed stigma upon any being. And no person actuated by
a strict sense of justice would accept salvation upon any such
terms as that prescribed by the Christian atonement. It is
manifestly too unjust, too devoid of moral principle, besides
being a flagrant violation of the first principles of civil and
criminal jurisprudence. It is a double wrong to punish the
innocent for the guilty. It is the infliction of injustice on the
one hand, and the omission of justice on the other. It inflicts
the highest penalty of the law upon an innocent being, whom
that law ought to shield from punishment, while it exculpates
and liberates the guilty party, whose punishment the moral
law demands. It robs society of a useful man on the one
hand, and turns a moral pest upon community on the other,
thus committing a twofold wrong, or act of injustice. No court
m any civilized country would be allowed to act upon such a
 114

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

principle ; and the judge who should indorse it, or favor a law,
or principle, which punishes the innocent for the guilty, would
be ruled off the bench at once. Here, however, we are some-
times met with the plea, that the offering of Jesus Christ was
a voluntary act, that it was made with his own free will. But
the plea don’t do away with either the injustice or criminality
of the act. No innocent person has a right to suffer for the
guilty, and the courts have no right to accept the offer or admit
the substitute. An illustration will show this. If Jefferson Davis
had been convicted of the crime of treason, and sentenced to be
hung, and Abraham Lincoln had come forward and offered to
be stretched upon the gallows in his place, is there a court in .
the civilized world which would have accepted the substitute,
and hung Lincoln, and liberated Davis ? To ask the question
is to answer it. It is an insult to reason, law, and justice, to
entertain the proposition.

The doctrine of the atonement also involves the infinite ab-
surdity of God punishing himself to appease his own wrath.
For if “ the fullness of the godhead dwelt in Christ bodily ” (as
taught in Col. ii. 9), then his death was the death of God —
that is, a divine suicide, prompted and committed by a feeling
of anger and revenge, which terminated the life of the Infinite
Ruler — a doctrine utterly devoid of reason, science, or sense.
We are sometimes told man owes a debt to his Maker, and the
atonement pays that debt. To be sure ! And to whom is the
debt owing, and who pays it? Why, the debt is owing to
God, and God (in the person of Jesus Christ) pays it — pays it
to himself. We will illustrate. A man approaches his neigh-
bor, and says, “ Sir, I owe you a thousand dollars, but can
never pay it.” “Very well; it makes no difference,” replies the
claimant; “ I will pay it myself; ” and forthwith thrusts his hand
into his right pocket and extracts the money, transfers it to the
left pocket, and exclaims, “ There, the debt is paid! ” A curi-
ous way of paying debts, and one utterly devoid of sense ; and
yet the orthodox world have adopted it for their God. We
find, however, that they carefully avoid practicing this princi-
ple themselves in their dealings with each other. When they
have a claim' against a neighbor, we do not find them ever
 THE ATONEMENT.   145

thrusting their hands into their own pockets to pay it off, but
sue him, and compel him to pay, if he refuses to do it without
compulsion, thus proving they do not consider it a correct prin-
ciple of trade. But we find, upon further investigation, that
the assumed debt is not paid, after all. When a debt is
paid, it is canceled, and dismissed from memory, and nothing
more said about it; but in this case the sinner is told he must
still suffer the penalty for every sin he commits, notwithstand-
ing Christ died to atone for and cancel that sin. Where then
is the virtue of the atonement? Like other doctrines of the
orthodox creed, it is at war writh reason, and common sense,
and every principle of sound morality, and will be marked by
coming ages as a relic of barbarism.

10
 146

[Prometheus]

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

CHAPTER XXII.

THE HOLY GHOST OE ORIENTAL ORIGIN.

Of all the weird, fanciful, and fabulous stories appertaining
to the Gods and other spiritual entities of the olden times,
whose capricious adventures we find so profusely narrated in
oriental mythology, — of all the strange, mythical, and mys-
tical feats, and ever-varying and ever-diverging changes in the
shape, appearance, sex, and modes of manifestation which char-
acterize the hobgoblins or ghostly beings which comprise the
esoteric stock of the ancient mysteries, that appertaining to
the third member of “ the hypostatic union,” the Holy Ghost,
seems to stand pre-eminent. And I propose here to submit
the facts to show that the Holy Ghost story of the Christian
Gospels, like the more ancient pagan versions of the same
story, is marked by the same wild, discordant, and legendary
characteristics which abound in all the accounts of gods and
ghosts found recorded in the religious books of various nations.

The following brief exposition of the history and exploits of
this anomalous, nondescript, chameleon-like being will clearly
evince that the same fanciful, metaphorical, and fabulous changes
in the size, shape, sex, and appearance of this third limb of the
triune God are found in the Christian Scriptures which are
disclosed in the more ancient oriental traditions. We will first
exhibit a classification of the names and characteristics of this
imaginary being drawn from the gospels and epistles of the
Christian bible, by which it will be observed that scarcely any
two references to it agree in assigning it the same character or
attributes.

1.   In John xiv. 26, the Holy Ghost is spoken of as a person
or personal God.^
 THE HOLT GHOST OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN.   147

2.   In Luke iii. 22, the Holy Ghost changes, and assumes the
form of a dove.

3.   In Matt. xiii. 16, the Holy Ghost becomes a spirit.

4.   In John i. 32, the Holy Ghost is presented as an inanimate,
senseless object.

5.   In 1 John v. 7, the Holy Ghost becomes a God — the third
member of the Trinity.

6.   In Acts ii. 1, the Holy Ghost is averred to be “ a mighty,
rushing wind.”

7.   In Acts x. 38, the Holy Ghost, we infer, from its mode of
application, is an ointment.

8.   In John xx. 22, the Holy Ghost is the breath, as we legit-
imately infer by its being breathed into the mouth of the recip-
ient after the ancient oriental custom.

9.   In Acts ii. 3, we learn the Holy Ghost “ sat upon each of
them,” probably in the form of a bird, as at Jesus’ baptism.

10.   In Acts ii. 1, the Holy Ghost appears as “cloven tongues
of fire.”

11.   In Luke ii. 26, the Holy Ghost is the author of a revela-
tion or inspiration.

12.   In Acts viii. 17, the Holy Ghost is a magnetic aura im-
parted by the “laying on of hands.”

13.   In Mark i. 8, the Holy Ghost is a medium or element for
baptism.

14.   In Acts xxviii. 25, the Holy Ghost appears with vocal
organs, and speaks.

15.   In Heb. vi. 4, the Holy Ghost is dealt out or imparted
by measure.

16.   In Luke iii. 22, the Holy Ghost appears with a tangible
body.

17.   In Luke i. 5, and many other texts, we are taught, peo-
ple are filled with the Holy Ghost.

18.   In Matt. xi. 15, the Holy Ghost falls upon the people as
a ponderable substance.

19.   In Luke iv. 1, the Holy Ghost is a God within a God —
“Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost.”

20.   In Acts xxi. 11, the Holy Ghost is a being of the mascu-
line or feminine gender — “ Thus saith the Holy Ghost,” &c.
 118

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

21.   In John i. 32, the Holy Ghost is of the neuter gender —
“It (the Holy Ghost) abode upon him.”

22.   In Matt. i. 18, the Holy Ghost becomes a vicarious agent
in the procreation of another God; that is, this third member
of the Trinity aids the first member (the Father) in the crea-
tion or generation of the second member of the triad of bach-
elor Gods — the Word, or Savior, or Son of God.

Such are the ever-shifting scenes presented in the Scripture
panorama of the Holy Ghost. Surpassing the fabulous changes
of some of the more ancient demigods, the Christian Holy
Ghost undergoes (as is shown by the above-quoted texts) a
perpetual metathesis or metamorphosis — being variously pre-
sented, on different occasions, as a personal and rational being,
a dove, a spirit, an inanimate object, a God, the wind or a wind,
an ointment, the breath or a breath, cloven tongues of fire, a
bird, or some other flying, recumbent animal, a revelator, or
divine messenger, a medium, or element for baptism, an intelli-
gent, speaking being, a lifeless, bodiless, sexless being, a meas-
urable fluid substance, a being possessing a body, ponderable,
unconscious substance, a God dwelling within a God, and, final-
ly— though really first in order — the author or agent of the
incarnation of the second God in the Trinity (Jesus Christ).
That many of these fabulous conceptions were drawn from
mythological sources will be made manifest by the following
facts of history: —

1. The Holy Ghost in the shape of a bird {a dove or pigeon).
This is proven to be a very ancient pagan tradition, as it is
found incorporated in several of the oriental religious systems.
In ancient India, whose prolific spiritual fancies constitute the
primary parentage of nearly all the doctrines, dogmas, and
superstitions found incorporated in the Christian Scriptures,.a
dove was uniformly the emblem of the Holy Spirit, or Spirit
of God. Confirmatory of this statement, we find the declara-
tion in the Anacalypsis, that “ a dove stood for or represented
a third member of the Trinity, and was the regenerator or re-
gen eratory power.” This meets the Christian idea of “ regen-
eration and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” (Titus iii. 5.) A per-
son being baptized under the Brahminical theocracy was said
 THE HOLT GHOST OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN 149

to be 44 regenerated and born again,” or, as the above-quoted
writer expresses it, 44 They were born into the spirit, or the
spirit into them — that is, the dove into or upon them ” (as
vide the case of the Christian’s 44 Holy Ghost descending in
bodily shape like a dove,” and alighting on Christ’s head at
baptism, as related in Luke iii. 22). In ancient Rome a dove
or pigeon was the emblem of the female procreative energy,
and frequently a legendary spirit, the accompaniment of Venus.
And hence, as a writer remarks,44 It is very appropriately rep-
resented as descending at baptism in the character of the third
member of the Trinity.” The same writer tells us, 44 The dove
fills the Grecian oracles with their spirit and power.” We find
the dove, also, in the romantic eclogues of ancient Syria. In
the time-chiseled Syrian temple of Hierapolis, Semiramis is
represented with a dove on her head, thus constituting the pro-
totype of the dove on the head of the Christian Messiah at
baptism. And a dove was in more than one of the ancient
religious systems—44 The Spirit of God (Holy Ghost) moving
on the face of the waters” at creation, as implied in Gen. i. 2,
though a pigeon, was often indiscriminately substituted. In
Howe’s 44 Ancient Mysteries” it is related that 44in St. Paul’s
Cathedral, at the feast of the Whitsuntide, the descent of the
Holy Ghost was performed by a white pigeon being let fly out
of a hole in the midst of the roof of the great aisle.” The
dove and the pigeon, being but slight variations of the same
species of the feathered tribe, were used indiscriminately.

2. As evinced above, the Holy Ghost was the third member
of the Trinity in several of the oriental systems. Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost, or Father, Word, and Holy Ghost (1 John v. 7),
are familiar Christian terms to express the divine triad, which
shows the Holy Ghost to be the acknowledged third member
of the Christian Trinity. And, as already suggested, the same
is true of the more ancient systems. 44 The Holy Spirit and
the Evil Spirit were, each in their turn (says Mr. Higgins),
third member of the Trinity.” We might, if space would
allow, draw largely upon the ancient defunct systems in proof
of this statement. 44 In these triads (says Mr. Hillell) the third
member, as might be supposed, was not of equal rank with the
 150

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

other two.” And hence, in the Theban Trinity, Khonso was
inferior to Arion and Mant. In the Hindoo triad, Siva was
subordinate to Brahma and Yishnu. And a score of similar
examples might be adduced from the fancy-constructed trinities
of other and older oriental religious systems (but for the inflex-
ible rule of brevity which forbids their presentation here), with
all of which the more modern Holy Ghost conception of the
Christian world is an exact correspondence, as this imaginary,
tabulous being is less conspicuous than, and has always stood
third in rank with, the Father, and second to the Son, alias the
Word, and is now seldom addressed in practical Christian devo-
tion ; and thus the analogy is complete. Mr. Maurice says,
“ This notion of a third person in the Deity (the Holy Ghost)
was diffused among all the nations of the earth.” (See Ind.
Antiq., vol. iv. p. 750.) And Mr. Worseley, in his “Voyage”
(vol. i. p. 259), avers this doctrine to be “ of very great antiqui-
ty, and generally received by all the Gothic and Celtic nations.”

8.   The Holy Ghost was the Holy Breath which, in the
Hindoo traditions, moved on the face of the waters at cre-
ation, and imparted life and vitality into everything created.
A similar conception is recognized in the Christian Scriptures.
In Psalms xxxiii. 6, we read, “By the Word of the Lord were
the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of
his mouth.” Here is the Brahminical conception, square out,
of the act of creation by the Divine Breath, which is the Holy
Ghost, the same, also, which was breathed into Adam, by which
he became “a living soul.” M. Dubois observes, “The Prana,
or principle of life, of the Hindoos is the breath of life by
which the Creator (Brahma) animates the clay, and man be-
came a living soul.” (Page 298.)

4.   Holy Ghost, Holy Breath, and Holy Wind appear to have
been synonymous and convertible terms for the living vocal
emanations from the mouth of the Supreme God, as memori-
alized in several of the pagan traditions. The last term (Holy
Wind) is suggested by “ the mighty rushing wind from heaven ”
which filled the house, or church, on the day of Pentecost. (See
Acts ii. 2.) Several of the old religious systems recognize “ the
Holy Wind ” as a term for the Holy Ghost. The doxology
 THE JlOLT GHOST OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN.   151

(reported by a missionary) in the religious service of the Syrian
worship runs thus: —

“Praise to the Holy Spiritual Wind, which is the Holy Ghost;

Praise to the three persons which are one true God.”

Some writers maintain that the Hebrew Huh Aliem, trans-
lated “.Spirit of God” (Gen. i. 2) in our version, should read,
“Wind of the Gods.” And we find that the word pneuma, of
our Greek New Testament, is sometimes translated “Ghost”
and sometimes “ Wind,” as best suited the fancy of the trans-
lators. In John iii. 5, we find the word Spirit, and in verse 8
both Wind and Spirit are found ; and in Luke i. 35, we observe
the term Holy Ghost — all translated from the same word.
Let it be specially noted that in the Greek Testament the word
pneuma is used in all these cases, thus proving that Spirit, Holy
Ghost, and Wind are used in the Christian Scriptures as synony-
mous terms; and proving, also, that an unwarranted license has
been assumed by translators in rendering the same word three
different ways. M. Auvaroff, in his “Essays on the Eleusinian
Mysteries,” speaks of “the torch being ignited at the command
of Hermes of Egypt, the spiritual agent in the workshop of
creation; ” relative to which statement a writer remarks,
“ Hermes appears in this instance as a personification of Wind
or Spirit, as in the bible (meaning the Christian bible), God,
Wind, and Spirit are often interchangeable terms, and the Word
appears to be from the same windy source.”

5.   The Holy Ghost as “ a tongue of fire, which sat upon
each of them” {the apostles). (See Acts ii. 3.) Even this con-
ception is an orientalism. Mr. Higgins tells us that “ Bud ha,
an incarnate God of the Hindoos (three thousand years ago),
is often seen with a glory or tongue of fire upon his head.”
And the tradition of the visible manifestation of the Holy
Ghost by fire was prevalent among the ancient Budhists,
Celts, Druids, and Etrurians. In fact, as our author truly re-
marks, “The Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit, when visible, was
always in the form of fire (or a bird), and was always accom-
panied with wisdom and power.” Hence is disclosed the origin
of the ancient custom amongst the Hindoos, Persians, and
 152

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

Chaldeans, of making offerings to the solar fire, emblem of the
Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit*

6.   Inspiration by the Holy Ghost. (Luke ii. 26.) “ Holy men
of God,” including some of the prophets, are claimed to have
been inspired by the Holy Ghost. (See 2 Peter i. 21; Acts
xxviii. 25.) In like manner, as we are informed by Mr. Cleland
in his “ Specimens” (see Appendix), the ancient Celts were not
only “ moved by the Holy Ghost ” in their divine decrees and
prophetic utterances, but they claimed that their Salic laws
(seventy-two in number) were inspired by the “ Salo Ghost”
(Holy Ghost), known also as “the Wisdom of the Spirit, or
the Voice of the Spirit.” This author several times alludes to
the fact, and exhibits the proof, that the doctrine of the Holy
Ghost was known to this ancient people.

7.   The Holy Ghost imparted by “ the laying on of hands!
This, too, is an ancient oriental custom. “And by the imposi-
tion of hands on the head of the candidate ” says Mr. Cleland,
speaking of the Celts, “the Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit, was con-
veyed.” And thus was the Holy Spirit, Ghost, Gas, Wind,
Electrical Fire, or Spirit of Authority imparted to the hiero-
phant or gospel novitiate. “ And their public assemblies,” con-
tinues our author, “were always opened by an invocation to
the Holy Ghost.”

8.   Baptism by or into the Holy Ghost accompanied with fire.
(Matt. iii. 11.) This rite, too, is traceable to a very ancient
period, and was practiced by several of the old symbolical and
mythological systems. The Tuscans, or Etrurians, baptized
with fire, wind (ghost), and water. Baptism into the first
member of the Trinity (the Father) was with fire; baptism
into the second member of the Trinity (the Word) was with
water; while baptism into the third member of the Trinity
(the Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit) consisted of the initiatory
spiritual or symbolical application of gas, gust, ghost, wind, or
spirit. It appears from “Herbert’s Travels,” that, in “ancient
countries, the child was taken to the priest, who named him
(christened him) before the sacred fire; ” after which ceremony
he was sprinkled with “holy water” from a vessel made of the
sacred tree known as “ The Holme.”
 THE HOLT GHOST OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN 158

9.   The Holy Ghost imparted by breathing. (See John xx. 22.)
w Sometimes,” says Mr. Higgins, relative to this custom among
the ancient heathen, “ the priest blew his breath upon the child,
which was then considered baptized by air, spiritus sanctus, or
ghost — i. e., baptism by the Holy Ghost.” In case of baptism,
a portion of the Holy Ghost was supposed to be transferred
from the priest to the candidate. “ The practice of breathing
in or upon,” says our author, “ was quite common among the
ancient heathen.”

10,   The Holy Ghost as the agent in divine conception, or the
procreation of other gods. Jesus is said to have been con-
ceived by the Holy Ghost (see Matt. i. 18), and we find similar
claims instituted still more anciently for other incarnate demi-
gods. In the Mexican Trinity, Y, Zona was the Father, JBacal
the Word, and Echvah the Holy Ghost, by the last of whom
Chimalman conceived and brought forth the enfleshed god
Quexalcote. (See Mex. Ant., vol. vi. p. 1650.) In the Hindoo
mythos, Sakia was conceived by the Holy Ghost Nara-an.
Other cases might be cited proving the same point.

Thus we observe that the various heterogeneous conceptions,
discordant traditions, and contradictory superstitions appertain-
ing to that anomalous nondescript being known as the Holy
Ghost, are traceable to various oriental countries, and to a very
remote antiquity. We will only occupy space with one or two
more historical citations of a general nature, tending to prove
the prevalence of this ghostly myth in other countries, not yet
cited. “ Tell me, O thou strong in fire! ” ejaculated Sesostris
of Egypt to the oracle, as reported by Manetho, “ who before
me could subjugate all things, and who shall after me?” But
the oracle rebuked him, saying, “ First God, then the Word,
and with them the Spirit.” (See Nimrod, vol. i. p. 119.) “ And
Plutarch, in his ‘Life of Numa,’” says our oft-quoted author,
“ shows that the incarnation of the Holy Spirit was known both
to the ancient Romans and Egyptians.” The doctiine is thus
shown to have been nearly universal.
 154

[Prometheus]

THE' WORLD'S SAVIORS.

Origin of the Holy Ghost Superstition.

The origin of the tradition respecting this fabulous and myth-
ical being is easily traced to the ancient Brahminical trifold
conception of the Deity, in which stands, in Trinity order, first,
the God of power, or might — Brahma, or Brahm (the Father);
second, the God of creation — the Word — answering to John’s
creative Word (see John i. 3) ; and, third, the God of genera-
tion and regeneration — the Holy Spirit, or Holy Ghost. The
last member of the triune conception of the Deity was consid-
ered, under the Brahminical theocracy, the living, vital, active,
life-imparting agent in both the first and second births of men
and the gods. It will be borne in mind by the reader that the
Holy Ghost is represented in the Christian Scripture as being
the active generating agent of Christ’s conception, he being, as
Matthew declares, “ conceived by the Holy Ghost.” The Holy
Ghost was also the regenerating agent at his baptism. Although
the specific object of the descent of the Holy Ghost on that
occasion is not stated by Luke, who relates it; although it is
not stated for what purpose the Holy Spirit, after assuming the
form of a bird, alighted and sat upon his head, yet the motive
is fully disclosed in the older mythical religions, where we find
the matter in fuller detail. Baptism itself is claimed by all its
Christian votaries as regenerating or imparting a new spiritual
life; and this new spiritual life was believed by several nations,
as before stated, to make its appearance in the character and
shape of a bird — sometimes a pigeon, sometimes a dove; and
thus the origin of this tradition is most clearly and unmistak-
ably exposed. As the foregoing historical exposition exhibits
the Holy Ghost as performing several distinct and discordant
offices, so we likewise find it possessing at least two distinct
genders, the masculine and neuter, i. e., no gender — changing,
ghost-like, from one to the other, as occasion seemed to require.

From all these metamorphoses it is shown and demonstrated
that the sexual and other changes of this “mysterious” being
equal many of the demigods of mythology. The primary
windy conception of the Holy Ghost is traceable to that early
 THE HOLT GHOST OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN. 155

period of society when the rude and untutored denizens of the
earth, in their profound ignorance of natural causes, were very
easily and naturally led into the belief that wherever there was
motion there was a God, or the active manifestation of a God,
whether it was in the wind, breath, water, fire, or the sun.
Hence the Buddhists had their god Vasus, who manifested
himself variously in the shape or character of fire, wind, storms,
gas, ghosts, gusts, and the breath, thus constituting a very
nearly-allied counterpart to the Christian Holy Ghost, which
Mr. Parkhurst tells us originally meant “air in motion.” This
god was believed to have sprung from the supreme, primordial
God, which the ancient Brahmins and Budhists generally be-
lieved was constituted of a fine, spiritual substance, — aura,
anirna, wind, ether, igneous fluid, or electrical fire, i. e., fire
from the sun, — giving rise to “ baptism by fire; ” and hence the
third God, or third member of the Trinity, subsequently arising
out of this compound being, was also necessarily composed of,
or consisted of, the same properties — all of which were be-
lieved to be correlative, if not identical.

Such is a complete, though brief, historical elucidation of that
mysterious, imaginary being so corporally intangible that Faus-
tus, of the third century, declared respecting it, “The Holy
Spirit, the third majesty, has the air for his residence.” And
it is a fabulous God whose scriptural biography is invested with
so many ludicrous and abstruse incidents as to incite several
hundred Christian writers to labor hard and with a “godly
zeal,” by a reconstruction of “God’s Word” and a rehabiliment
of the ghostly texts, to effect some kind of a reconciliation of
the story with reason and common sense — with what success
the reader is left to judge.

The Unpardonable Sin against the Holy Ghost.

Before dismissing our ghostly narrative, it may effect some-
thing in the way of mitigating the anxious fears of some of our
Christian brethren and sisters to explain the nature of “the sin
against the Holy Ghost,” and assign the reason for its being
\mpardonable. The sin against the Holy Ghost consisted, ac-
 156

THE WORLD’S SAVIORS.

cording to the ancient Mexican traditions, in resisting its opera-
tions in the second birth — that is, the regeneration of the heart
or soul by the Holy Ghost. And as the rectification of the
heart or soul was a prominent idea with Christ, there is scarcely
any ground to doubt but that this was the notion he cherished
of the nature of the sin against the Holy Ghost. And it was
considered unpardonable, simply because as the pardoning and
cleansing process consisted in, or was at least always accompa-
nied with, baptism by water, in which operation the Holy Ghost
was the agent in effecting a “ new birth,” therefore when the
ministrations or operations of this indispensable agent were
resisted or rejected, there was no channel, no means, no possible
mode left for the sinner to find a renewed acceptance with God.
When a person sinned against the Father or the Word (the
Son), he could find a door of forgiveness through the baptizing
processes, spiritual or elementary, of the Holy Ghost. But an
offense committed against this third limb of the godhead had
the effect to close and bar the door so that there could be “ no
forgiveness, either in this life or that which is to come ” To
sin against the Holy Ghost was to tear down the scaffold by
which the door of heaven was to be reached.

And thus is explained the great “ mystery of godliness,” the
“ unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost,” which, on account
of the frightful penalty annexed to it, while it is impossible to
learn what it consists in, — it being undefined and ?indefinable,—
has caused thousands, and probably millions, of the disciples
of the Christian faith the most agonizing hours of alarm and
despair.
 THE DI VINE WORD OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN. 157

CHAPTER XXIII.

THE DIVINE “WORD” OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN.

The Word as Creator, as Second Person op the
Trinity and its Pre-existence.

The Word of Oriental Origin.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
God, and the Word w^asGod.” (John i. 1.) The doctrine of the
divine creative word (from the Greek Logos) appears to have
been coeval in its origin with that of the Trinity, if not insep-
arably connected with it, as it constitutes the second member
of the Trinity of “Father, Word, and Holy Ghost” in most of
the ancient systems of religion. Works on heathen mythology
show that it was anciently a very prevalent custom to per-
sonify ideas, thoughts, and words into angels and Gods.
Words were first personated, and transformed into men, then
into angels, and finally into Gods. And here is foreshad-
owed the origin of John’s personification of “the Word made
flesh.” It was simply the word of the supreme God as it
escaped from his mouth, assuming the form and characteristics
of a divine being like himself, and taking position as a sec-
ondary God and second member of the Trinity. This was the
orient conception, and it appears to have been John’s. He
evidently had no thought of Christ experiencing human birth,
at first, or being born of a woman, but believed, like some of
the orientalists, that he came out of the mouth of the Father,
and was thus “ made flesh.” (John i. 2.) Not a word of Christ
being born is found in John’s Gospel, till after his existence as
the Word is spoken of. (See first note on page 379.)
 158

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

The Word as Creator.

John also represents the Word as having been the Cieator.
“All things were made by him.” (John i. 3.) And Peter de-
clares, “By the word of God the heavens were of old.” (2
Peter iii. 5.) Now let it be observed here, as a notable cir-
cumstance, that the Chinese bible, much older than the Chris-
tian’s New Testament, likewise declares, “God pronounced the
primeval Word, and his own eternal and glorious abode sprang
into existence.” Mr. Guizot, in a note on Gibbon’s work, says,
“ According to the Zend-Avesta (the Persian bible, more than
three thousand years old), it is by the Word, more ancient than
the world, that Ormuzd created the universe.” In like manner
the sacred writings of the ancient Thibetans speak of “the
Word which produced the world” — an exact counterpart to
John’s declaration, “All things were made by him.” And the
ancient Greek writer Amelias, speaking of the God Mercury,
says, “And this plainly was the Logos (the Word), by whom
all things were made, he being himself eternal, as Heraclitus
would say, . . . He assumed to be with God, and to be God,
and in him everything that was made, has its life and being,
who, descending into body, and putting on flesh, took the
appearance of a man, though still retaining the majesty of his
nature. Here is “the Word made flesh” set forth in most
explicit terms. The Psalmist exclaims, “By the Word of God
were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the Breath
of his mouth.” (Ps. xxxiii. 6.) Here is disclosed not only the
conception of the Word as Creator, but also the Word and the
Breath as synonymous terms, both of which conceptions orien-
tal history amply proves to be of heathen derivation. It was
anciently believed that the Word and Breath of God were the
same, and possessed a vitalizing power, which, as they issued
from his mouth, might be transformed into another being, known
as a secondary God. Both the Jews and the Christians seem
to have inherited this belief, as evinced by the foregoing quota-
tions from their bible. The most ancient tradition taught that
the Word emanated from the mouth of the principal God, and
 THE DIVINE WORD OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN 15D

“became flesh,” that is, took form, as the ancient Brahmins
expressed it, for the special purpose of serving as agent in the
work of creation, that is, to become the creator of the external
universe. St. John evidently borrowed this idea. Read his
first chapter.

Pre-existence op the Word.

The pre-existence or previous existence of the Word, ante-
cedent to the date of its metamorphosis into the human form,
we find taught in several of the ancient systems of religion, as
well as the more modern Christian system. Several texts in
the Christian New Testament set forth the doctrine quite ex-
plicitly. Christ, as the Divine Word, declared, “ Before Abra-
ham was I am,” and that he had an existence with the Father
before the foundation of the world, &c., which is a distinct
avowal of the doctrine of pre-existence. But oriental history
proves the doctrine is much older than Christianity. The
Hindoo very anciently taught that “the Word had existed
with God from all eternity, and when spoken it became a
glorious form, the aggregate embodiment of all the divine
ideas, and performed the work of creation.” And of Chrishna
it is affirmed, that “ while upon the earth he existed also in
heaven.” (See Baghavat Gita.) In like manner it is declared
of an Egyptian God, that “though he was born into the
world, he existed with his father God before the world was
made.” And parallel to this is the statement of the Chinese
bible, that “though the Holy Word (Chang-si) will be born
upon the earth, yet he existed before anything was made.”
Even for Pythagoras it was claimed he existed in heaven be-
fore he was born upon the earth. Mr. Higgins, in summing
up the matter, declares, “All the old religions believed the
world was created by the Word, and that this Word existed
before creation” (Ana. vol. ii. p. 77), which clearly indicates
the source of St. John’s creative Word.

The Dual or twofold Name op the Word.

In most cases the living Divine Word was known by differ-
ent names and titles, prior to the era of its assuming the vnor-
 160

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

tal form, from that by which it was known after its fleshly in*
vestment. Among the ancient Persians, the name for the
divine spiritual Word was Honover. After its human birth, it
was called “Mithra the Mediator.” The Hindoo oriental
term for the primeval Word was Om, or Aum. After assuming
its most important incarnate form, it was known as Chrishna.
The Chinese Holy Interior Word was Om-i-to, and its princi-
pal incarnation was Chang-ti or Ti-en-ti. The Japanese also
proclaimed their belief in a Divine Word before the Christian
era, which, in their language, was Amida. They taught, like
John, that it came forth from the mouth of the Supreme God
(Brahm) to perform the work of creation, after which it was
known as Sakia. And that popular Christian writer, Mr. Mil-
man, informs us that the Jewish founders of Christianity be-
lieved in an original Divine Word, which they called Memra.
When it descended to the earth, and “ became flesh, and dwelt
amongst us” (John i. 4), according to the evangelist John, it
was known as Jesus Christ. Mr. Milman states also, that “the
appellation of the Word is found in the Indian (Hindoo), Per-
sian, the Platonic, and the Alexandrian systems.” (Hist, of
Chr. Book I. chap. 2.) Thus the question is settled by Chris-
tian testimony, that the various conceptions of the Divine Word
are of heathen origin.

The Word as Second Member op the Trinity.

“ There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the
Word, and the Holy Ghost.” (1 John v. 7.) Observe, the Word
is the second person in the Trinity. And this was its post in
the Brahman, Hindoo, Persian, and other systems. “ All reli-
gions,” says a writer, “ which taught the existence of the Word
as a great primeval spirit, represent him as secondary to the
supreme.” (P. R. 3, vol. ii. p. 386.) “The Hindoos reverenced
it next to Brahm.” Mr. Higgins cuts the matter short by de-
claring, “The Logos, or Word, was the second person of the
Trinity in all the ancient systems, as in the Christian system,”
which again indicates its heathen origin.
 THE DIVINE WORD OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN 161

Tiie Word as a Biblical Title.

“The Word,” “the Holy Word,” “the Divine Word,” &c.
are terms now frequently applied to the Christian bible, with-
out any suspicion of their heathen origin. The Zend-Avesta,
the Persian bible, was always called “ The Living Word of
God,” for that is the meaning of the term Zend-Avesta, and the
oldest bible in the world is the Yedas, and it means both Word
and Wisdom. Om, the Egyptian’s Holy Word, they frequently
applied both to their incarnate Gods and to their sacred writ-
ings.

The practice of calling bibles “The Word of God” origi-
nated from the belief, that when the incarnate Word left the
earth, and returned to heaven, he infused a portion of his living
spirit into the divine writings which contained his history and
his doctrines, and which he himself had prompted his disciples
to write as his “Last Revelation to man.” They then must

contain a portion of him, i. e., a portion of the Holy Word,-

hence both were called “The Holy Word.” And this heathen
custom Christians borrowed.

Origin op the Word as Creator.

The motive which prompted a belief in the creative Word
may be styled a theological necessity. It was believed that
the principal God, like the rulers of earth, was too aristocratic
to labor with his own hands. Hence another God was origi-
nated to perform the work of creation, and called “ The Word.”
The origin of the creative Word is still further indicated by
Blackwood’s Magazine. It says, “ Creation became impossible
to a being already infinite, and was a derogation to a being
already perfect. Some lower God, some Avatar, must be inter-
posed (as an emanation from the mouth of the God supreme)
to perform the subordinate task of creation Hence originated
and came forth the Word as Creator.”

11
 162

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

CHAPTER XXIV.

[Prometheus]

CHAPTER XXIV.

THE TRINITY VERY ANCIENTLY A CURRENT
HEATHEN DOCTRINE.

“ There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father,
the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.” (1
John v. 7.) This text, which evidently discloses a belief in the
existence of three separate and distinct beings in the Godhead,
sets forth a doctrine which was anciently of almost universal
prevalence. Nearly every nation, whether oriental or occiden-
tal, whose religious faith has been commemorated in history,
discloses in its creed a belief in the trifold nature and triune
division of the Deity. St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, “ All
the ancient nations believed in the Trinity.” And a volume of
facts and figures might be cited here, if we had space for them,
in proof of this statement. A text from one of the Hindoo
bibles (the Puranas) will evince the antiquity and prevalence
of this belief in a nation of one hundred and fifty millions of
people more than two thousand years ago.

“Oyou three Lords!” ejaculated Attencion, “know that I
recognize only one God. Inform me, therefore, which of you
is the true divinity, that I may address to him alone my vows
and adorations. The three Gods, Brahma, Yishnu, and Siva,
becoming manifest to him, replied, “Learn, O devotee, that
there is no real distinction between us. What to you appears
such is only by semblance. The single being appears under
three forms by the acts of creation, preservation, and destruc-
tion, but he is one.”

Now, reader, note the remark here, that the ancient Christian
fathers almost universally and unanimously proclaimed the
 THE TRINITT A HEATHEN DOCTRINE. 163

doctrine of the Trinity as one of the leading tenets of the
Christian faith, and, as a doctrine derived directly by revela-
tion from heaven. But here we find it most explicitly set forth
by a disciple of a pagan religion more than three thousand
years ago, as the Christian missionary D. O. Allen states, that
the Hindoo bible, in which it is found, was compiled fourteen
hundred years before Christ, and written at a still earlier
period. And we find the same doctrine very explicitly taught
in the ancient Brahmin, Persian, Chaldean, Chinese, Mexican,
and Grecian systems — all much older than Christianity. No
writer ever taught or avowed a belief in any tenet of religious faith
more fully or plainly than Plato sets forth, the doctrine of the
Trinity in his Phaedon, written four hundred years B. C. And his
terms are found to be in most striking conformity to the Chris-
tian doctrine on this subject, as taught in the New Testament.
Plato’s first term for the Trinity was in Greek, 1. To Agathon,
the supreme God or Father; 2. The Logos, which is the Greek
term for the Word; and 3. Psyche, which the Greek Lexicon
defines to mean “soul, spirit, or ghost” — of course, the Holy
Ghost. Here we have the three terms of the Christian Trinity,
Father, Word, and Holy Ghost, as plainly taught as language
can express it, thus making Plato’s exposition of the Trinity and
definition of its terms, published four hundred years B. C., iden-
tical in meaning with those of St. John’s, as found in his Gospel,
and contained in the above quoted text. Where, then, is the
foundation for the dogmatic claim on the part of Christian pro-
fessors for the divine origin of the Trinity doctrine. We will
here cite the testimony of some Christian writers to prove that
the Trinity is a pagan-derived doctrine. A Christian bishop,
Mr. Powell, declares, “ I not only confess, but I maintain, such
a similitude of Plato’s and John’s Trinity doctrines as bespeaks
a common origin.” (Thirteenth letter to Dr. Priestley.) What
is that you say, bishop ? “ A common origin.” Then you con-
cede both are heaven-derived, or both heathen-derived. If the
former, then revelation and heathenism are synonymous terms.
If the latter, then Christianity stands on a level with heathen
mythology. Which horn of the dilemma will you choose ? St.
Aug istine confessed he found the beginning of John’s Gospel
 164

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

in Plato’s Phsedon, which is a concession of the whole ground
Another writer, Chataubron, speaks of an ancient Greek in-
scription on the great obelisk at Rome, which reads, “ 1. The
Mighty God; 2. The Begotten of God (as Christ is declared
to be “the only begotten of the Father” (John i. 14); and 3.
Apollo the Spirit” — the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost; thus
presenting in plain language the three terms of the Trinity.
And Mr. Cud worth, in corroboration of this report, says, “ The
Greeks had a first God, and second God, and third God, and
the second was begotten by the first. And yet for all that,”
continues Mr. Cudworth, “ they considered all these one.” In
the Platonic or Grecian Trinity, the first person was considered
the planner of the work of creation, the second person the
creator, and the third person the ghost or spirit which moved
upon the face of the waters, and infused life into the mighty
deep at creation — the same Holy Ghost which descended
from heaven to infuse life into the waters at Christ’s bap-
tism. Thus the resemblance is complete. Mr. Basnage quotes
a Christian writer of the fifth century as declaring, “ The Athe-
nian sage Plato marvelously anticipated one of the most im-
portant and mysterious doctrines of the Christian religion” —
meaning the Trinity — an important concession truly. The
oldest and probably the original form of the Trinity is that
found in the Brahmin and Hindoo systems—the terms of
which are, 1. Brahma, the Father or supreme God; 2. Vishnu,
the incarnate Word and Creator; 3. Siva, the Spirit of God,
i. e., the Holy Spirit or Ghost — each answering to correspond-
ing terms of the Christian Trinity, and yet two thousand years
older, according to Dr. Smith. We have not allowable space
for other facts and citations (as this work is designed as a mere
epitome), although we have but entered upon the threshold of
the evidence tending to prove that the Christian Trinity was
born of heathen parents, that it is an offspring of heathen my-
thology, like other doctrines of the Christian faith, claimed by
its disciples as the gift of divine revelation.

Here let it be noted as a curious chapter in sacred history,
that the numerous divine Trinities, which have constituted a
part of nearly every religious system ever propagated to the
 THE TRINITY A HEATHEN DOCTRINE.

1G5

world, were composed in every case of male Gods. No female
has ever yet been admitted into the triad of Gods composing
the orthodox Trinity. Every member of the Trinity in every
case is a male, and an old bachelor— a doctrine most flagrantly
at war with the principles of modern philosophy. For this
science teaches us that the endowment of a being with either
male or female organs, presupposes the existence of the other
sex; and that either sex, without the other, would be a ludi-
crous anomaly, and a ludicrous distortion of nature unparalleled
in the history of science. As sexual organs create an imperious
desire for the other sex, no male or female being could long en-
joy full happiness in the absence of the other party. What an un-
happy, lonesome place, therefore, the orthodox heaven must have
been, during the eternity of the past, with no society but old
bachelors ! The Trinity was constituted of males simply because
woman has always been considered a mere cipher in society —
a mere tool for man’s convenience, an appendage to his wants.
Hence, instead of having a place among the Gods, she led the
practical life of a servant and a menial, which accounts for her
exclusion from the Trinity. But the time is coming when she
will rule both heaven and earth with the omnipotent power of
her love-nature. Then we shall have no “war in heaven,’1
and no fighting on earth.
 166

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

CHAPTER XXV.

ABSOLUTION, AND THE CONFESSION OF SINS, OF
HEATHEN ORIGIN.

Some Christian writers have labored to make it appear that
this is exclusively a Christian doctrine, while others have labored
as hard to get it out of their bible, or make the people believe
that it is not therein taught. We shall show, upon scriptural
and historical authority, that both are wrong. There can be no
question as to this rite having existed outside of Christianity,
or of its being much older than Christianity. History proves
both. Nor can it be successfully denied that it is taught in the
Christian Scriptures, both the confessing of sins and that of for-
giving sins. The apostle James, with respect to the former, is
quite explicit. He enjoins, emphatically, “ Confess your faults
one to another, and pray one for another.” (James v. 16.) The
practice of forgiving sins is also enjoined. “Forgiving one an-
other” is recommended both in Ephesians (iv. 32) and Colos-
sians (iii. 13). “And whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall
be loosed in heaven” (Matt, xviii. 18), is interpreted as con-
ferring the power to forgive sins.

And then we remark that the practices both of confessing
and forgiving sins are very ancient pagan rites and customs.
Speaking of their prevalence in ancient India, the author of
the Anacalypsis remarks, “ The person offering sacrifices made
a verbal confession of his sins, and received absolution.” Au-
ricular confession was also practiced among the ancient Mithri-
acs, or Persians, and the Parsees proper of the same country.
Mr. Volney tells us, “They observed all the Christian sacra-
ments, even to the laying on of hands in the confirmation. (211.)
And the Christian Tertullian also tells us that “The priests of
 ABSOLUTION AND CONFESSION.

16?

Mithra promised absolution from sin on confession and bap-
tism,” while another author adds, that “on such occasions Mithra
marked his followers (the servants of God) in their foreheads,”
and that “he celebrated the sacrifice of bread, which is the
resurrection.”

In the collection of the Jewish laws called “The Mishna,”
we are told the Jews confessed their sins by placing their hands
upon a calf belonging to the priest, and that this was called
“the Confession of Calves.” (See Mishna, tom. ii. p. 394.)
Confessing sins was practiced in ancient Mexico; also, under
Numa of Rome, whose priests, we are informed, had to clear
their consciences by confessing their sins before they could
offer sacrifices. The practice of confessing and forgiving sins
as recommended in the Christian bible, and practiced by some
of the Christian sects, has been the source of much practical
evil by furnishing a pretext and license, to some extent, for the
commission of crime and sin. While sins can be so easily
obliterated, they will be committed—perpetrated without much
remorse or restraint. “ In China (says the Rev. Mr. Pitrat, 232),
the invocation of Omito is sufficient to remit the punishment
of the greatest crimes.” The same author tells us, “ The an-
cient initiations of the pagans had tribunals of penance, where
the priests, under the name of Hoes, heard from the mouth of
the sinners themselves the avowal of their sins of which their
souls were to be purified, and from the punishment of which
they wished to be exempted.” (Page 37.) The granting of
absolution for sin or misconduct among the early primitive
Christians was so common, St. Cyprian informs us, that “ thou-
sands of reprieves were granted daily,” which served as an
indirect license to crime. And thus the doctrine of divine for-
giveness, as taught by pagans and Christians, has proved to be
demoralizing in its effects upon society.
 168

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

CHAPTER XXVI.

ORIGIN OF BAPTISM BY WATER, FIRE, BLOOD,
AND THE HOLY GHOST.

Baptism, in some of its various forms, is a very ancient rite,
and was extensively practiced in several oriental countries. It
was administered in a great variety of forms, and with the use
of different elements. Water was the most common, but fire
and air, wind, spirit, or ghost, were also used; and both the
living and the dead were made the subjects of its solemn and
imposing ceremonies. We will notice each of these modes of
baptism separately — appropriating a brief space to each.

I.   Baptism by Water.

“ Baptism by water,” says Mr. Higgins, “ is a very old rite,
being practiced by the followers of Zoroaster, by the Romans,
the Egyptians, and other nations.” It was also in vogue among
the ancient Hindoos at a still earlier date. Their mode of ad-
ministering it was to dip the candidate for immersion three
times in the watery element, in the same manner as is now
practiced by some of the Christian sects, during the perform-
ance of which the hierophant would ejaculate the following
prayer and ceremony: “ O Lord, this man is impure, like the
mud of this stream ! But do thou cleanse and deliver his soul
from sin as the water cleanses his body.” They believed that
water possessed the virtue of purifying both soul and body —
the latter from filth, and the former from sin. The ancient
Mexicans, Persians, Hindoos, and Jews were in the habit of
baptizing their infants soon after they were born. And the
water used for this purpose was called “ the water of regenera-
 ORIGIN OF BAPTISM.

169

tion.” Paul speaks of being “ saved by the washing of regen-
eration.” (See Titus iii. 5.) Those who touched these infants
before they were baptized were deemed impure. And as this
was unavoidable on the part of the mothers, they were required,
as in the cases of the mothers of Chrislma and Christ, to pre-
sent themselves on the eighth day after accouchement to the
priest in the temple to be. purified. The Romans chose the
eighth day for girls and the ninth for boys. The child was
usually named (christened) at the time it was baptized. And
in India, the name, or God’s name, or some other mark, was
engraven or written on the forehead. This .custom is several
times recognized in the Christian bible, both in the Old and in
the New Testament. (See Ezek. ix. 4; Rev. xiv. 9; xix. 20, &c.)
John speaks of a mark being made on the forehead. (See Rev-
xiii. 16.) Also of the name of God being written on the fore-
head. (Rev. iii. 12.)

The Dove Descending at Baptism.

At this stage of our inquiry it may be stated that several of
the ancient religious orders had the legend of a dove or pigeon
descending at baptism — a counterpart to the evangelical story
of “ the Spirit of God descending in bodily shape like a dove,”
and alighting on the head of Jesus Christ while being baptized
by John in Jordan. (See Luke iii. 22.) It will be observed
here that the spirit, or soul, of God descended not only in the
manner, but in “ bodily shape like a dove.” This accords with
the tradition anciently prevalent among the Hindoos, Mexicans,
Greeks, Romans, and Persians, or Babylonians, that all souls, or
spirits, possessed, or were capable of assuming, the form of a
dove. Hence it is reported of Polycarp, Semiramis, Caesar,
and others, that at death their souls, or spirits, were seen to
leave the body in “bodily shape like a dove” and ascend to
heaven. “ The Divine Love, or Eros,” says Mr. Higgins, “ was
supposed by the oriental heathen to descend often in the form
of a dove to bless the candidate for baptism.” These tradi-
tions, doubtless, gave rise to the story of the dove descending
at Christ’s baptism — that is, God in the shape of a dove, for
 170

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

that is clearly the meaning of the text. We are also informed
by our author just quoted, that a dove stood for and represent-
ed, among the orientalists, the third person of the Trinity, as
it does in the gospel story of Christ — he being the second
member of the Christian Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost. It was considered “the regenerator, or regenerating
spirit,” and persons being baptized were said to be “ born again ”
into the spirit or the spirit into them; that is, the dove into or
upon them.

What a master-key is furnished by these oriental religions
for solving the mysteries of the Christian bible! IIow much
more lucid than Divine Revelation, so called ! We will quote
again from Higgins. “ Among all nations, from the very earli-
est period, water has been used as a species of religious sacra-
ment. Because, as it dripped from the clouds, it was observed
to have the power of reviving drooping nature and creating
anew, or regenerating, the whole vegetable kingdom in spring,
it was hence chosen as an emblem of spiritual regeneration and
a medium of baptism. Water was the element by means of
which everything was born again through the agency of the
Eros, Dove, or Divine Love.” And hence the ceremony of dip-
ping, or plunging (or, as it is modernly termed, baptizing), came
into vogue for the remission of sins and “the regeneration into
a new and more holy life.” Some streams were supposed to
have more efficacy in these respects than others. Hence nearly
all religious nations had their “Holy Rivers,” “Holy Water,”
“ Sacred Pools,” &c. The Hindoos resorted to the “ Holy Gan-
ges,” the Egyptians to the “ Holy Nile,” the Chaldeans and
Persians to their “ Holy Euphrates,” the Greeks to their “Holy
Lustral Water,” the Italians to the river Po, and the Jews and
Christians to their holy river Jordan. If Jordan was not called
“ holy,” it was undoubtedly considered so, else why did Elisha
order Naaman to wash seven times in that stream instead of
Damascus, which was much nearer and more accessible ? And
why was Christ baptized in Jordan? “And all the land of
Judea, and they of Jerusalem, were baptized in Jordan, con-
fessing their sins.” (Matt. iii. 6.) Why, as several streams were
handier to a large portion of the candidates, simply because
 ORIGIN OF BAPTISM.

[Prometheus]

 ORIGIN OF BAPTISM.

171

Jordan was considered to be “ more holy.” And Christians
had their sacred pool of Bethesda, as the Hindoos had their
Sahar.

The rite of baptism was at first generally practiced in caves,
as were also other religious rites; and as these caves were often
difficult of access, and their mouths, doors, or gates narrow and
difficult to enter, they fully exemplify Christ’s declaration,
“ Strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto
life.” (Matt. vii. 14.) And when he declared, “Except a man
be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter the king-
dom of heaven” (John iii. 5), he was only seconding the exhor-
tation of the priests to enter these subterranean vaults and be
baptized after the oriental and Jewish custom. Thus originated
baptism by water in the form of dipping, or immersion.

Baptism by Sprinkling.

Owing to the scarcity of water in some countries, and its en-
tire absence in others, and the fatal effects sometimes resulting
from the practice of baptizing infants and invalids by immer-
sion, a new mode of baptism eventually sprung up, now known
as “sprinkling,” in which sometimes water and sometimes blood
was used. Virgil, Ovid, and Cicero all speak of its prevalence
amongst the ancient Romans, or Latins. We are informed that
the ancient Jews practiced it upon their women while in a state
of nudity, the ceremony being administered by three rabbis, or
priests. But the custom finally gave way to one more conso-
nant with decorum. Blood, being considered “the life thereof”
of man, was deemed more efficacious than water, and hence was
often used in lieu of that element. The Greeks kept a “ holy
vessel” for this purpose, known as the Facina. The Romans
used a brush, which may now be seen engraven upon some of
their ancient coins, and sculptured on their ancient temples.
The Hindoos and Persians used a branch of laurel or some
other shrub for sprinkling the repentant candidate, whether
water or blood was used. In some countries the rite was prac-
ticed as a talisman against evil spirits. The Mexicans never
approached their altars without sprinkling them with blood
 172

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

drawn from their own bodies, as the Jews sprinkled the walls
and door-posts of their temples with blood under the requisition
of the Levitical code. This mode of fancied purification by
sprinkling either with water or blood we find recognized, and
apparently sanctioned, in the Christian bible, both in the Old
and New Testaments. Ezekiel says, “I will sprinkle clean water
on you.” (Ezek. xxxvi. 25.) Peter uses the phrase, “ The
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter i. 2.) And
Paul makes use of the expression, “ The blood of sprinkling,
that speaketh better things than that of Abel” (Heb. xii. 24),
which we regard as an indirect sanction of the senseless hea-
then idea of effecting spiritual purification by drops of blood.
(See Potter’s Antiquities and Herbert’s Travels.)

Baptism by Fiee.

Baptism by fire was a form or mode of application which
seems to have been introduced from the belief that it was pro-
ductive of a higher degree of purification. There were sev-
eral ways of using fire in the baptismal rite. In some cases the
candidate for immortality ran through blazing streams of fire —
a custom which was called “ the baptism of fire.” M. de Hum-
boldt, in his “ Views of the Cordilleras and Monuments of Amer-
ica,” informs us it prevailed in India, Chaldea, and Syria, and
throughout eastern Asia. It appears to have been gotten up
as a substitute for sun-worship, as this luminary was believed
to be constituted of fire, though in reality there never was any
such thing as sun or solar worship. Christian writers represent
the ancient Persians as having been addicted to solar worship.
But Firdausi, Cudworth, and other authors declare that neither
they nor any other nation ever worshiped the sun, but merely
an imaginary Deity supposed to reside in the sun. Heathen
nations have been charged with many things of which they were
not guilty; though it is true that in the spirit of Christ’s exhor-
tation, “ Whosoever loseth his life for my sake shall find it,”
some of the candidates for the fiery ordeal voluntarily sacrificed
their lives in the operation, under the persuasion that it was
necessary to purify the soul, and would enable them to ascend
 ORIGIN OF BAPTISM.

173

to higher posts or planes of enjoyment in the celestial world.
And some of them were taught that sins not expurgated by
fire, or some other efficaciously renovating process in this life,
would be punished by fire in the life to come. Here we will
mention that there is a seeming recognition of this ancient hea-
then rite in both departments of the Christian’s bible. Isaiah
says, “When thou wTalkest through fire thou shalt not be
burned.” (lxiii. 2.) And the Baptist John recognizes three
modes of baptism: “I indeed baptize you with water, but he
that cometh after me shall baptize you with fire and the Holy
Ghost.” (Matt. iii. 11.) And Paul teaches the necessity of
being purified by fire. (See 1 Cor. iii. 15.) So it is both a hea-
then and a Christian idea.

Baptism by the Holy Ghost.

This fanciful ceremony is both a Christian and a heathen rite,
and is undoubtedly of heathen origin. The mode of applying
it was to breathe into or upon the seeker for divine favors. This
was done by the priest, who, it was believed, imparted the Spirit
of God by the process. The custom, Mr. Herbert informs us,
was anciently quite common in oriental countries, and was at a
later date borrowed by Christ and his apostles and incorporated
into the Christian ceremonies. We find that Christ not only
sanctioned it, but practiced it, as it is declared that when he
met his disciples after his resurrection “he breathed on them,
and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.” (John xx. 22.)
And the following language of Ezekiel is evidently a sanction
of the same heathen custom : “Thus saith the Lord God, Come
from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain,
that they may live.” (xxxvii. 9.) Let it be borne in mind here
that breath, air, wind, spirit, and ghost were used as synonymous
terms, according to Mr. Parkhurst (see Chap. XXII.), and this
breathing was supposed to impart spiritual life, being nothing
less than the Spirit of God, the same as that breathed into
Adam when “he became a living soul.” (See Gen. ii. 7.) For
a fuller exposition see Chapter XXII.
 174

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

Baptism op or for the Dead.

It was customary among the Hindoos and other nations to
postpone baptism till near the supposed terminus of life, in
order that the ablution might extinguish all the sins and mis-
deeds of the subject’s earthly probation. But it sometimes
happened that men and women were killed, or died unexpect-
edly, before the rite was administered. And as it would not do
for these unfortunate souls to be deprived of the benefit of this
soul-saving ordinance, the custom was devised of baptizing the
defunct body, or more commonly some living person in its stead.
The method of executing the latter expedient, according to St.
Chrysostom, was to place some living person under the bed or
couch on which the corpse was reclining, when the defunct was
asked if he would be baptized. The living man, responding for
the dead, answered in the affirmative. The corpse was then
taken and dipped in a vessel prepared for the purpose. This
silly practice was in vogue among the early Christians, and Paul
seems to regard it as an important custom. “ Else what shall
they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at
all.” (1 Cor. xv. 9.) The inference derivable from this text is,
that Paul held that the labor of baptizing the dead would be
lost in the event of the falsification of the doctrine of the res-
urrection, but otherwise it would be valid — which evinces his
faith in the senseless and superstitious practice. It will be ob-
served from the historical exposition of this chapter that all the
various ancient heathen modes and rites of baptism have been
practiced by Christians, and are sanctioned by their bible.
 THE SACRAMENT OF HEATHEN ORIGIN. 175

CHAPTER XXVII.

THE SACRAMENT OR EUCHARIST OE HEATHEN
ORIGIN.

At the feast of the Passover, Christ is represented, while
distributing bread to his disciples, to have said, “ Take, eat; this
is my body ” (Matt. xxvi. 26); and while handing round the
consecrated cup, he enjoined, “ Drink ye all of it, for this is my
blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the re-
mission of sins” (xxvi. 27). Here is a very clear and explicit
indorsement of what Is generally termed “ the Eucharist or
Sacrament.” And nothing can be more susceptible of proof
than that this rite or ordinance is of pagan origin, and was prac-
tically recognized many centuries prior to the dawn of the
Christian era. So we observe, by the text above quoted, the
Christian Savior and Lawgiver copied, or reproduced, an old
pagan rite as a part of his professedly new and spiritual system,
one of the most ancient and widely-extended formulas of pagan-
dom. And stranger still, the catechisms of the Christian church
represent this ordinance as having originated in the design and
motive to keep the ancient Christian world in remembrance of
the death, and sufferings, and sacrifice of Christ, while we find it
existing long prior to his time, both among Jews and pagans,
this being virtually admitted in the Bible itself, so far as re-
spects the pagans, thus proving that it did not originate with
Christ, and therefore is not of Christian origin. For in Gen.
xiv. 18, we read, “ And Melchisedek, king of Salem, brought
forth bread and wine, and he was the priest of the Most High
God.” Because the Melchisedek here spoken of is represented
as being “ a priest of the Most High God,” and showed so
 176

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

much respect to Abraham, it is presumed and assumed, by
Christian writers, that he was a Jewish priest and king; and
Mr. Faber (vol. i. p. 72) calls him “an incarnation of the
son of God.” But there is no intimation throughout the
Jewish Scriptures of the Jews ever having had a king or
priest by that name. And besides, Eupolemus (vol. i. p. 39),
tells us that the temple of Melchisedek was the temple of Jupi-
ter, in which Pythagoras studied philosophy. Then, again,
according to some writers, the name is synonymous with
Moloch, the God of war among the Greeks. Strange, then,
that Melchisedek should be claimed as a priest and king among
the Jews. Be this as it may, the case proves that the cere-
mony of offering bread and wine existed long before the era of
Jesus Christ. And then we have much more and much stronger
proof of this fact than is here furnished. The Christian Mr.
Faber virtually admits it, when he tells us, “The devil led
the heathen to anticipate Christ with respect to several things,
as the mysteries of the Eucharist,” &c. w And this very so-
lemnity (says St. Justin) the evil spirit introduced into the
mysteries of Mithra.” (Reeves, Justin, p. 86.) Mr. Higgins
observes, “It was instituted hundreds of years before the
Lord’s death took place.” Amongst the ancient religious
orders and nations who practiced this rite, we may name the
Essenes, Persians, Pythagoreans, Gnostics, Brahmins, and
Mexicans. For proof of its existence and antiquity among
the last-named nation, we refer the reader to the “ Travels ”
(chap, ii.) of that Christian writer, Father Acosta. Mr. Ma-
rolles, in his Memoirs (p. 215), quotes Tibullus as saying,
“The pagan appeased the divinity with holy bread.” And
Tibullus, in a panegyric on Marsella, wrote, “ A little cake, a
little morsel of bread, appeased the divinities.” And here we
discover the idea which originated the ceremony. It was
started, like animal sacrifices, for the purpose of appeasing the
wrath or propitiating the favor of the angry Gods. Tracing
the conception still further in the rear of its progress, and
apparently to its primary inception, Mr. Higgins observes, “ The
whole paschal supper (the Lord’s supper with the Christians)
was in fact a festival of joy to celebrate the passage of the sun
 THE SACRAMENT OF HEATHEN ORIGIN 177

across the equinox of spring” We find one pagan writer who
had intelligence enough to ridicule this senseless ceremonial
custom, called “ the sacrament.” Cicero, some forty years
before Christ, shows up the doctrine of the sacrament, or sub-
stantiation, in its true light. He asks, “ IIow can a man be so
stupid as to imagine that which he eats to be a God?” A
writer quoted above says, “Mass, or the sacrifice of bread and
wine, was common to many ancient nations.” (Anac. vol. ii.
p. 62.) According to Alnetonae, the ancient Brahmins had a
kind of Eucharist called “prajadam.” And the same writer
informs us that the ancient Peruvians, “after sacrificing a
lamb, mingled his blood with flour, and distributed it among
the people.” Writers on Grecian mythology relate that Ceres,
the goddess of corn, gave her flesh to eat, and that Bacchus, the
God of wine, gave blood to drink. Nor is there any evidence
that Christ and his followers made a better use, or different
use, or a more spiritual application, of the sacrament, or cere-
monial offering of bread and wine, than the pagans did, though
some have claimed this. It was a species of symbolism with
both, notwithstanding Mr. Glover, a Christian writer, de-
clares, that “in the sacrament of the altar are the natural body
and blood of Christ, verily and indeed.” (See Glover’s Remarks
on Bishop Marsh's Compendious Review.) It may be noted
here, that the Persians, Pythagoreans, Essenes, and Gnostics
used water instead of wrine, and that this mode of practice was
less objectionable than that of the Christians, who (as sad ex-
perience proves) have too often laid the foundation for the
ruin of some poor unsuspecting devotee, by luring him to the
fatal fascination of the intoxicating bowl, by holding the sacred
and ceremonial wine to his lips, while administering the sacra-
ment, or the Lord’s supper.

12
 178

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

[Prometheus]

CHAPTER XXVIII.

ANOINTING WITH OIL OF ORIENTAL ORIGIN.

The custom and ceremony of anointing with oil by way of
imparting some fancied spiritual power and religious qualifica-
tion, seem to have been extensively practiced by the Jews
and primitive Christians, and still more anciently by various ori-
ental nations. Mark (xiv. 4), reports Jesus Christ as speaking
commendingly of the practice, by which it is evident he was in
favor of the superstitious custom. The apostle James not only
sanctions it, but recommends it in the most specific language.
“ Is any sick among you, let him call for the elders of the
church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in
the name of the Lord.” (James v. 14.) The practice of
greasing or smearing with oil, it may be noted here, was in
vogue from other motives besides the one here indicated. We
find the statement in the New American Cyclopedia (vol. i. p.
620), that “ anointing with perfumed oil was in common use
among the Greeks and Romans as a mark of hospitality to
guests. And modern travelers in the East still find it a custom
for visitors to be sprinkled with rose-water, or their head, face,
and beard anointed with olive oil.” “Anointing, we are also told,
is an ancient and still prevalent custom throughout the East,
by pouring aromatic oils on persons as a token of honor. . . .
It was also employed in consecrating priests, prophets, and
kings, and the places and instruments appointed for worship.”
{Ibid.) Joshua anointed the ten stones he set up in Jordan,
and Jacob the stone on which he slept at the time of his great
vision. The early Christians were in the habit of anointing
the altars, and even the walls of the churches, in the same man-
ner as the images, obelisks, statues, &c., had long been conse-
 ORIGIN OF ANOINTING WITH OIL.

170

crated by the devotees of the oriental systems. Aaron, Saul,
David, Solomon, and even Jesus Christ were anointed with
oil in the same way. David Malcom, in his “Essay on the
Antiquity of the Britons,” p. 144, says, “ The Mexican king
was anointed with Holy Unction by the high priest while
dancing before the Lord.” ( Vide the case of David “ dancing
before the Lord with all his might.”) Dr. Lightfoot, in his
“Harmony of the New Testament,” speaks of the custom
among the Jews of anointing the sick on the Sabbath day (see
Works, vol. i. p. 883; also Toland, Sect. Naz. p. 54), as after-
wards recommended by the apostle James, as shown above.
This accords exactly with the method of treating the sick in
ancient India and other heathen countries several thousand
years ago. For proof, consult Hyde, Bryant, Tertullian, and
other writers. The custom of anointing the sick, accompanied
with prayer and other ceremonies, was quite fashionable in the
East long before the birth of either Jesus or James. One
writer testifies that “ the practice of anointing with oil, so
much in vogue among the Jews, and sanctioned by Christ and
his followers, was held in high esteem in nearly all the Eastern
religions.” The foregoing historical facts furnish still fuither
proof that Christianity is the offspring of heathenism.
 180

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

CHAPTER XXIX.

HOW MEN, INCLUDING JESUS CHRIST, CAME
TO BE WORSHIPED AS GODS.

Jesus Christ a Demigod according to Christian
Writers.

It is truly surprising to observe the damaging concessions
of some of the early Christian writers, ruinous to the dogmas
of their own faith with respect to the divinity of Jesus Christ,
placing him, as they do, on an exact level with the heathen
demigods, proving that the belief in his divinity originated in
the same manner the belief in theirs did, by which it is clearly
shown to be a pagan-derived doctrine. Several Christian
writers admit the belief in earth-born Gods (called Sons of
Gods), and their coming into the world by human birth was
prevalent among the heathen long prior to the time of Christ.
Hear the proof. We will first quote St. Justin relative to the
prevalence of the belief among the ancient Greeks and Romans.
Addressing them, he says, “The title of Son of God (as applied
to Jesus Christ) is very justifiable upon the account of his
wisdom, considering you have your Mercury in your worship,
under the title of Word or Messenger of God.” (Reeves Apol.
p. 76.) Here is the proof that the tradition of the Son of God
coming into the world, and “the Word becoming flesh,” was
established amongst the ancient Greeks and Romans long
prior to the era of Christianity, or the birth of Christ. And
yet more than a hundred millions of Christian professors can
now be found, who, in their historic ignorance, suppose St.
John was the first writer who taught the doctrine of “the
Word becoming flesh,” and that Jesus Christ was “the first
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GODS.

181

and only begotten Son of God ” who ever made his appearance
on earth. How true it is that “ ignorance is the mother of
devotion” to creeds. How “the man Christ Jesus” came to
be worshiped as a God, is pretty clearly indicated by Bishop
Horne, who shows that the doctrine of the incarnation was of
universal prevalence long before Jesus Christ came in the
flesh. He says, “ That God should, in some extraordinary man-
ner, visit and dwell with man, is an idea, which, as we read
the writings of the ancient heathen, meets us in a thousand
different forms.” If, then, the tradition of God being born into
the world was so universally established in heathen countries
before the Christian era, as here shown, why should not, and
why will not, our good Christian brethren dismiss their preju-
dices, and tear the scales from their eyes, so as to see that this
universal belief wTould as naturally lead to the deification and
worship of “the man Christ Jesus” as water flows down a
descending plane ? And, certainly, a thousand times more
reasonable is the assumption that his deification originated in
this way, than that, with all his frailties and foibles, he was en-
titled to the appellation of a God — a conclusion strongly cor-
roborated by the testimony of that able Christian writer, Mr.
Norton, who tells us that “many of the first Christians being
converts from Gentileism, their imaginations were familiar with
the reputed incarnation of heathen deities.” How natural it
would be for such converts to worship “ the man Christ Jesus ”
as a God on account of his superior manhood l Again, that
ancient pillar of the Christian church, St. Justin, concedes that
the ancient oriental heathen held all the cardinal doctrines of
the Christian faith relating to the incarnation long prior to the
introduction and establishment of Christianity. Hear him.
Addressing the pagans, he says, “For by declaring the Logos
the first begotten Son of God, our Master, Jesus Christ, to be
born of a virgin without any human mixture,* and to be cruci-
fied, and dead, and to have risen again into heaven, we say no
more in this than what you say of those whom you style the
sons of Jove ” (Reeves, Apol. vol. i. p. 69.) Now, Christian
reader, mark the several important admissions which are made
here: —
 182

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

1.   Here is traced to ancient heathen tradition the belief in
an incarnate Son of God.

2.   The doctrine of a “first begotten Son of God.”

3.   Of his being born of a virgin.

4.   Of his crucifixion.

5.   Of his resurrection.

6.   Of his final ascension into heaven.

All these cardinal doctrines of Christianity are here shown
to have been in existence, and to have been preached by pagan
priests long anterior to the Christian era, thus entirely overset-
ting the common belief of Christendom that these doctrines
were never known or preached in the world until heralded by
the first disciples of the Christian religion. A fatal mistake,
truly ! This suicidal admission of St. Justin (a standard Chris-
tian writer) thus entirely uptrips all pretensions to originality
in the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, and shows
it to be a mere travesty of the more ancient heathen systems.
And we have still other testimony to corroborate this conclu-
sion. The French writer Bazin says, “ The most ancient his-
tories are those of Gods becoming incarnate in order to govern
mankind.” Again he says, “The idea sprang up everywhere
from confused ideas of God, which prevailed everywhere among
mankind that Gods formerly descended upon earth. The fertile
imagination of the people of various nations converted men
into Gods.” And to the same effect is the declaration of Mr.
Higgins, that “ there were incarnate Gods in all religions.”
Sadly beclouded and warped indeed must be that mind which
cannot see that here is set in as plain view as the cloudless sun
at noonday, the origin of the deification of “the man Christ
Jesus.” No unbiased mind can possibly stave off the conclu-
sion that such a universal prevalence of the practice of God-
making throughout the religious world would cause such a
man as Jesus Christ to be worshiped as a God—especially
when we look at the various motives which promoted men to
Gods, which we will now present.
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GODS.

183

Motives to Incarnation, or the Cause of Men being

WORSHIPED AS GODS.

The causes which led to the conception of Gods and Sons
of God becoming clothed in human flesh — the manner in
which the absurd idea originated of an infinite being descend-
ing from heaven, assuming the form of a man, being born of a
pure and spotless virgin, and finally being killed by his own
children, the subjects of his own government, are palpably plain
and easily understood in the light of oriental history. And at
the same time it is so shockingly absurd, that the rapid march
of science and civilization will soon inaugurate the era when
the man or woman who shall still be found clinging to these
childish and superstitious conceptions — the offspring of igno-
rance, and the relics of barbarism, and a certain proof of unde-
veloped or unenlightened minds — will be looked upon as deplo-
rably ignorant and superstitious. We will proceed to enumer-
ate some of the causes which promoted men to the dignity
of Gods.

1.   God must come down to suffer and sympathize with the
people.

The people of all ancient religious countries were so exter-
nally-minded, that they demanded a God whom they could
l<now by virtue of his corporeity, really sympathized with their
sorrows, their sufferings, their wrongs, and their oppressions,
and, like Jesus Christ, “ touched with a feeling of our infirmi-
ties” (Heb. iv. 15) — a God so far invested with human attri-
butes, human frailties, and human sympathies, that he could
shoulder their burdens and their infirmities, and take upon
himself a portion of their sufferings. Hence it is said of Christ,
“himself took our infirmities.” (Matt. iii. 17.) The same
conception runs through the pagan systems. One writer sets
forth the matter thus: “ The Creator occasionally assumed a
mortal form to assist mankind in great emergencies ” (as Jesus
Christ was afterward reported as being the Creator. See Col.
i. 16.)   “ And as repealed sojourners on earth in various capa-

cities, they (the Saviors) became practically acquainted with all
 184

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

the sorrows and temptations of humanity, and couldjustly judge
of its sins while they sympathized with its weaknesses and
its sufferings. When they again returned to the higher regions
(heaven), they remembered the lower forms they had dwelt
amongst, and felt a lively interest in the world they had once
inhabited. They could penetrate even the secret thoughts of
mortals ” The people then demanding a God of sympathy and
suffering (as shown above), their credulous imaginations would
not be long in finding one. Let a man rise up in society en-
dowed with an extraordinary degree of spirituality and sym-
pathy for human suffering; let him, like Chrishna, Pythag-
oras, Christ, and Mahomet, spend his time in visiting the
hovels of the poor, or consoling their sorrows, laboring to miti-
gate their griefs, and in performing acts of charity, disinterested
alms and deeds of benevolence, kindness and love, and so cer-
tain would he sooner or later command the homage of a God.
For this was always the mode adopted, in an ignorant, unde-
veloped, and unenlightened age, for accounting not merely for
moral greatness, but for every species of mental and physical
superiority, as will be hereafter shown. We will proceed to
notice the second cause of men being invested with divine
attributes.

2.   The people must and would have an external God they
could see, hear, and talk to.

All the oriental nations, as well as Christian, taught that
“God was a spirit,” but no nation or class of people, not even
the founders of Christianity, entertained a consistent view of
the doctrine. Only a few learned philosophers saw the scien-
tific impossibility of an infinite spirit being crowded into the
human form. Hence they alone were contented to “ worship
God in spirit and in truth.” Every religious nation went counter
to the spirit of this injunction in worshiping for a God a being
in the human form. Even the founders of Christianity, though
making high claims to spirituality, were too gross, too sensuous
in their conceptions, too externally-minded, and too idolatrous
in their feelings and proclivities, to be content to “ worship God
in spirit.” Hence their deification of the “man Christ Jesus91
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GOBS.

185

to answer the requisition of an external worship, by which
they violated the command to “ worship God as a spirit”

That the practice of promoting men to the Godhead origi-
nated with minds on the external plane, and evinces a want of
spiritual development, is clearly set forth by the author of
“The Nineteenth Century” (a Christian writer), who tells us.
“The idea of the primitive ages were wholly sensuous, and the
masses did not believe in anything except that which they
could touch, see, hear, and taste.” A true description, no
doubt, of the ancient pagan worshipers of demigods. But we
warn the Christian reader not to cast anchor here, for we have
at our elbow abundance of Christian testimony from the pens
of the very oracles of the church to prove that the same state
of things, the same state of society, the same state of mind, the
same proclivity for God-making, existed with the people among
whom Christ was born, and that it was owing to this sensuous,
idolatrous state of mind among his disciples that he received
the homage and title of a God. Hence the famous Archbishop
Tillotson says, “Another very common notion, and rife in the
heathen world, and a great source of their idolatry, was their
deification of great men fit to be worshiped as Gods.” . . .
“ There was a great inclination in mankind to the worship of a
visible Deity. So God was pleased to appear in our nature,
that they who were so fond of a visible Deity might have one,
even a true and natural incarnation of God the Father, the
express image of his person.” Now, we enjoin the reader to
mark this testimony well, and impress it indelibly upon his
memory. According to this orthodox Christian bishop, Jesus
Christ appeared on earth as a God in condescension to the
wishes of a people too devoid of spirituality, and too strongly
inclined to idolatry, to worship God as a spirit. For he
admits the worship of a God-man or a man-God is a species of
idolatry. This tells the whole story of the apotheosis of “the
man Christ Jesus.” We have no doubt but that here is sug-
gested one of the true causes of his elevation to the Deityship.
Again he says, “ The world was mightily bent on addressing
their requests and supplications, not to the Deity immediately,
but by some Mediator between the Gods and men.” (See
 186

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

[Prometheus]

Wadsworth’s Eccles. Biog. p. 172.) Here, then, we ha^e the
most conclusive proof that the belief in mediators is of pagan
origin. We will now hear from another archbishop on this
subject. In his “ Caution to the Times ” (p. 71), Archbishop
Whately says, “ As the Infinite Being ijs an object too remote
and incomprehensible for our minds to dwell upon, he has
manifested himself in his Son, the man Jesus Christ.” Precisely
so! just the kind of reasoning employed to account for the
worship of man-Gods among the heathen. This logic fits one
case as well as the other. The Christian writer F. D. Maurice
declares in like manner, “We accept the fact of the incarnation
(of Jesus Christ), because we feel that it is impossible to know
the absolute invisible God without an incarnation, as man needs
to know him, and craves to know him.” (Logical Essay, p. 79.)
Here is more pagan logic — the same reasoning they employed
to prove the divinity of their Saviors and demigods. And the
Rev. Dr. Thomas Arnold declares, “It (the incarnation of
Christ) was very necessary, especially at a time when men
were so accustomed to worship their highest Gods under the
form of men” (Sermon on Christian Life, p. 61.) Let the
reader attentively observe the explicit avowal here made, and
mark well its pregnant inferences. He makes Jesus Christ
come into the world in condescension to the idolatrous rivalry
of the Jews to be up with the heathen nations in worshiping
God in the form of man ; that is, the founders of Christianity,
having been Jews, disclosed the true Jewish character in run-
ning after and adopting the customs of heathen countries then
so rife — that of hunting up a great man, and making him a God
— which was only one case out of many of the Jews adopting
some of the numerous forms of idolatry and other religious
customs of their heathen neighbors. Their whole history, as
set forth in the Bible, proves, as we have shown in another
chapter, that they were strongly prone to such acts. It is not
strange, therefore, that they should and did convert “the man
Christ Jesus” into a God. We will now listen to another
Christian writer, the notable and noteworthy Dr. T. Cham-
bers. “ Whatever the falsely or superstitiously fearful imagina-
tion conjures up because of God being at a distance, can only be
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GODS.

187

dispelled by God being brought nigh to us. . . . The vail which
hides the unseen God from the eyes of mortals must be some-
how withdrawn.” (Select Works, vol. iii. p. 161.) Most significant
indeed is thi3 species of reasoning. It is the same kind of
logic which had led to the promotion of more than a score of
great men to the Godhead among the ancient heathen. “ The
vail which hides the unseen God must be removedsays Dr.
Chambers ; and so had reasoned in soliloquy a thousand pagans
long before, when determined to worship men for Gods. It is
simply saying, “ We are too carnally-minded to worship God in
spirit; we must and will have a God of flesh and blood — a God
who can be recognized by the external senses ; he must “ become
flesh, and dwell amongst us.” (See John i. 14.) Our author
continues: “ Now all this (removing the vail from the unseen
God) has been done once, and done only once in the person of
Jesus Christ.” {Ibid.) Mistake, most fatal mistake, brother
Chambers! It has been done more than a score of times in
various heathen countries — a fact which proves you ignorant of
oriental history. Now let the reader mark the foregoing cita-
tions from standard Christian authors, setting forth some of
the reasons which led the founders of Christianity to adopt a
visible man-God in their worship in the person of Jesus Christ.
Language could hardly be used to prove more conclusively
that the whole thing grew out of an idolatrous proclivity to
man-worship, — that is, the gross,sensuous, carnally-minded pro-
pensity to worship an external, visible God, — proving, with the
corroborative evidence of many other facts, that they were not
a whit above the heathen in spiritual development. The reason
employed by the Thibetan for the worship of the Hindoo
Chrishna as a God, tells the whole story of the worship and
deification of Jesus Christ. “ We could not always have God
behind the clouds; so we had him come down where we could
see him.” This is the same kind of reasoning made use of by
the Christian writer above quoted, all of which discloses a state
of mind among both heathen and Christians that would not
long rest satisfied without deifying somebody, in order to have
a visible God to worship. And hence Christians deified “ the
man Christ Jesus ” for this purpose. “ The more externally
 188

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

minded (says Fleurbach), the greater was the determination to
worship a personal God ”— God in the form of man. And as
the Jewish founders of Christianity (as every chapter of their
history demonstrates) were dwelling on the external plane, it
was not an act of direct innovation, therefore, for them to fall
into the habit of worshiping the personal Jesus as a God. It
involved no serious incursion on previous thoughts or habits*
And warped and blinded, indeed, must be that mind which
cannot here discover the true key to the apotheosis of Jesus —
one of the real causes of his being stripped of his manhood, and
advanced to the Godhead. It was as naturally to be expected
from the then state of the religious world, and the state of the
Jewish mind concerned in the founding of Christianity, as that
an autumnal crop of fruit should succeed the bloom of spring.
Let it be specially noted, that all the Christian writers above
cited tell us, in effect, that God sent his Son Jesus Christ into
the world to be worshiped as a God in condescension to the
ignorance and superstitious tendencies, and we will add, idola-
trous proclivities of the people. From this stand-point we
challenge the world to show why God may not have sent the
oriental Saviors into the world for the same reason — that is,
in condescension to the prejudices of the devout worshipers
under the heathen systems. Why, then, is there not as much
probability that he did do so? Why would he not be as likely
to accommodate their ignorance and prejudices in this way as
those of the founders of the Christian system. This question
we shall keep standing before the Christian world till it is
answered, and we challenge them to meet it, and overthrow it
if they can.

3.   Men deified on account of mental and moral superiority.

The ancient nations, in their entire ignorance of the philoso-
phy of the human mind, and the laws controlling its actions,
always accounted for the appearance of great men amongst
them by supposing them to be Gods. Every country occasion-
ally produced a man, who, by virtue of natural superiority, rose
so high in the scale of moral and intellectual greatness as to
fill the ideal of the people with respect to the characteristics of
a God. So low, so limited, so narrow, so greatly circumscribed
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GODS.

180

were the conceptions of deity, of the undeveloped and Ir tel-
lectually dwarfed minds of all religious countries in that age,
that a man had to rise but a few degrees above the common
level of the populace to become a God. He could “ easily fill
the bill,” and exhibit all the qualities they assigned to the
highest God in the heavens. And this is as true of the Jewish
mind as that of any other nation, a portion of whom adored
Jesus as a God. Or if they lacked anything in natural inclina-
tion, they made it up by imitation, a propensity which they
possessed in no small degree, that is, a proneness to imitate the
customs of other nations. Mr. Higgins tells us that “ men of
brilliant intellects and high moral attainments, and great heal-
ers (of which Christ was one), were almost certain to be dei-
fied.” In like manner Archbishop Tillotson says, “ They dei-
fied famous and eminent persons by advancing them after their
death to the dignity of an inferior kind of Gods fit to be wor-
shiped by men on earth.” Mark the expression, “ after their
death” We have shown in another chapter that Jesus Christ
was not generally considered a God, even by his followers, till
more than three hundred years after his death, when Constan-
tine declared him to be “ God of very God ” — a circumstance
of itself sufficient to establish the conclusion that he did not
possess this character. A God would be adored as such by
everybody while living, but a man’s worshipers rise up after his
death, as in the case of “ the man Christ Jesus.” Great men-
tal endowments, or great moral attainments, would, in most
countries, bring the most ignorant down on their knees to wor-
ship such a man as a God. But it required years, and some-
times centuries, to get him fully established among the Gods.
This is as true of Jesus Christ as the other human-descended
deities. Whatever amount of homage Jesus might have re-
ceived while living, any person who will institute a thorough,
unbiased scrutiny in the case will discover that it was his great
healing powers and superior mental qualities which finally dei-
fied him. His ignorant admirers knew no way of accounting
for such extraordinary qualities but to suppose him to be the
embodiment of infinite wisdom. Like the Chinaman who ex-
claimed, “See the God in that man,” when an Englishman
 190

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

cured a young woman of partial blindness by anointing he!
eyes with kerosene. Such a deed would deify almost any man,
in almost any country, before the dawn of letters and the rec-
ognition of the science of mind. The missionary Rev. D. O.
Allen’s method of accounting for the deification of the Hindoo
God Chrishna is so suggestive, that we here present it. He
tells us that, “as the exploits ascribed to Chrishna exceed mere
human power, the difficulty was removed by placing him among
the incarnations of Vishnu.” (India, Ancient and Modern, p.
26.) Exactly so! We are glad of such historic information.
We hope the Christian reader will note the lesson it suggests.
For certainly, every reader, who has not had his reason ship-
wrecked on the shoals of a blind and dogmatic theology, can
see here a key to unlock the great mystery of the Christian
incarnation—the divinity of Jesus Christ? As some of the
exploits of Chrishna were supposed to “exceed mere human
power,” we are told the difficulty was explained by imagining
him to be a God. How powerful the suggestion! how conclu-
sive the explanation, not only for the Godhood of this sin-aton-
ing Savior, but for that of “our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,”
and all the other Lords, and Gods, and Saviors of antiquity!
A single hint will sometimes explain whole volumes of obscure
history, as does this of the Rev. Christian Hindoo missionary
D. O. Allen. And surely, most deplorably blinded by super-
stition must be the two hundred millions of Christ worshipers,
the three hundred millions who worship Chrishna, the one
hundred and twenty million adorers of Confucius, the fifty
millions of suppliants of Mithra the Mediator, and the one
hundred and fifty millions of followers of Mahomet, who cannot
see here a satisfactory solution of the deityship of all these
Gods, and all the other man-Gods of antiquity.

The question is sometimes asked, How could two hundred
millions of people come to believe that Jesus was a God merely
because of his superiority as a man? We will answer by point-
ing to the history of the Hindoo Chrishna, and by asking the
same question with respect to his Godhead. How could three
hundred millions of people be brought to believe in his divinity,
and worship him as a God, merely because he was a superior
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GODS.

191

human being? One question is as easily answered as the other,
and posterity will answer both questions alike. When we ob-
serve it taught as an important and easily learned lesson of his-
tory, and one based on a thousand facts, that no man could rise
to intellectual greatness or moral distinction in the era in which
Christ was born without being advanced to the dignity of a
God, and worshiped as such, it is really a source of humility
and sorrow to every unshackled lover of truth and humanity
to reflect that there are so many millions of people whose men-
tal vision is so beclouded by a dogmatic and inexorable theol-
ogy that they cannot see the logical potency of these facts, —
that they cannot be even moved by this great and overwhelm-
ing amount of evidence against the divinity dogma, and ob-
serve that it explodes it into a thousand fragments, but still
cling to the delusion that u the man Christ Jesus,” with all the
human qualities and human frailties with which his own history
(the Gospels) invest him, was nevertheless a God, — ay, the
monstrous delusion that any being possessing a finite form
could be an infinite being — a most self-evident and shocking
absurdity. And we challenge all Christendom to show, or ap-
proximate one inch toward showing, that there was sufficient
difference between Christ and Chrishna to require us to accept
one as a man and the other as a God. It cannot be done.

We have shown, then, by the foregoing exposition, that one
cause of the deification of men was simply an attempt to solve
the problem of human greatness, — an attempt to account for
the moral and intellectual superiorty of men which enabled
them to perform deeds and otherwise exhibit a character far
above the capacity of the multitude to comprehend, and which
they could find no other way to account for than to suppose
them to be Gods, while the low and groveling conceptions
which most religious nations, and especially the Jews, had
formed of the character and essential attributes of the Infinite
Deity (often investing him with the most ignoble human attri-
butes, human passions, and human imperfections), made it per-
fectly easy to convert their great men by imagination into Gods.
The Jews represented God not only as coming down from heav-
en in propria persona, and walking, talking, wrestling, &c., as
 192

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

a man (on one occasion we are told he and Jacob scuffled all
night), but he is often represented as acting the part of a
wicked man, such as lying (see 2 Chron. v. 22), getting mad (see
Deut. i. 37), swearing, sanctioning the high-handed and demor-
alizing crimes of stealing (see Ex. iii. 2), of robbery (see Ex. xii.
36), of murder (see Deut. xiii. 2), and even fornication (see Gen.
xxxi. 1, and Num. xxxi.), and thus they invested Deity with such
mean, low, despicable attributes as to reduce his moral char-
acter to a level with the most immoral man in society. So that
it was very easy, if not very natural, to elevate their great men
(if it really required any elevation) to a level with their God.
Men and Gods were in character and conception so nearly alike,
that it was easy to bring them on a level, or to mistake one for
the other. And hence it is we find an incarnated God, Savior,
Son of God, Redeemer, &c., figuring in the early history of
nearly every oriental religious nation whose name and history
has descended to us. Indeed, the practice of deifying men, or
mistaking men for Gods, was once so common, so nearly univer-
sal, that it must require a mind very ignorant of oriental his-
tory to adore Jesus Christ as having been the only character of
this kind who figured in the religious world. It was, as before
suggested, deemed the most rational way of accounting for the
marked superiority among men, to suppose that some men had
a divine birth, and were begotten by the great Infinite Deity
himself, and descended to the earth through the purest human
(virgin) channel. As Mr. Higgins remarks, “ Every person who
possessed a striking superiority of mind, either for talent or
goodness, was supposed anciently to have a portion of the di-
vine mind or essence incorporated or incarnated in him.” The
Jews had a number of men whose names imply a participation
in the divine nature, among which we will cite Elijah and Eli-
sha (El-i-jah and El-i-sha), El being the Hebrew name or term
for God, while Jah is Jehovah (see Ps. lxviii. 4), and Sha
means a Savior. Elijah, then, is an approximation to God —
Jehovah, and Elisha is God — a Savior. The character of men
and Gods were cast in molds so approximately similar, so nearly
identical, as to make the transition, or change from one to the
other, so slight and easy, either of men into Gods or Gods into
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GODS.

193

[Prometheus]

men, that several nations went so far as to teach that a man
might by his own natural exertions, his own voluptary powers,
raise himself to a level with the Deity, and thereby become a
God. Mr. Ritter, in his “History of Ancient Philosophy”
(Chap. II.), tells us that some of the Budhist sect held that “ a
man by freeing himself by holiness of conduct from the obsta-
cles of nature, may deliver his fellows from the corruption of
the times, and become a benefactor and redeemer of his race,
and also even become a God”— a “Budha” — i. e., a Savior and
Son of God. Singular enough that the Christian should object
to this doctrine as being rather blasphemous, when his own
bible abundantly and explicitly teaches the same doctrine in
effect! We find the same thing substantially taught over and
over again in the Christian Scriptures. “ Be ye perfect even
as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Matt. v. 18), requires a
man to become morally perfect as God, which is all that the
Budhist precept requires or contemplates, and no man can be-
come perfect as God without becoming a God. But we are not
left to mere inference in the matter. We have the doctrine
several times expressed and unquestionably taught in the Chris-
tian bible of man’s power and prerogative to become either a
God or Son of God. “ Said I not that ye are Gods ? ” (Ex.
iv. 16.) “ Behold, now, we are the sons of God.” (1 John i. 2.)
Here is the Budhist doctrine as explicitly stated as it can be
taught. It is, then, a Christian bible doctrine as well as a pagan
doctrine, that man can become a God, and that God can be born
of woman, and thereby invested with all the frail and imperfect
attributes of man. It cannot be considered a matter of marvel,
therefore, that so many of the good, the great, and the wise men
of almost every country, including “the man Christ Jesus,”
should be honored and adored with the titles of Deity, and
worshiped as God absolute, “Son of God,” “Savior,” “Re-
deemer,” “ Intercessor,” Mediator,” &c.

4. God comes down and is incarnated to fight and conquer
the devil. We will proceed to enumerate other causes and
motives which conspired in various cases to invest some one or
more of the great men of a nation with divine honors, and
adore them as veritable Gods and Saviors “ come down to us
13
 194

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

in the form of men.” It was a tenet of faith with most of the
ancient religions, that almost at the dawn of human existence
a devil or evil principle found its way into the world, to the
great discomfiture of man and the no small annoyance of the
Supreme Creator himself, and that hence there must needs be
a Savior, a Redeemer, an Intercessor to combat and if possible
“ destroy the devil and his works.” For this purpose appeared
the Savior Chrishna, in India, the Savior Osiris, in Egypt, the
God or Mediator Mithra, in Persia, the Redeemer Quexalcote,
m Mexico, the Savior Jesus Christ, in Judea, &c. In the initia-
tory chapter on the transgression and fall of man, some of the
oriental bibles graphically describe the scene of “ the war in
heaven ” — a counterpart to the story of St. John, as found in
the twelfth chapter of Revelation, wherein Michael and the
dragon are represented as the captains and commanders-in-
chief of their respective embattled hosts, and in which the for-
mer was crowned as victor in the contest, as he succeeded in
vanquishing and “ casting out the evil one.” In the pagan mil-
itary drama the scene of the war in heaven is transferred to the
earth. A God, a Savior (a Son of God), comes down to put a
stop to the machinations of the “ Evil One,” i. e., to u destroy
the devil and his works,” as we are told Christ came for that
purpose. (1 John iii. 8.) See the Author’s “ Biography of
Satan.”

The Egyptian story runs thus: “ Osiris appeared on earth
to benefit mankind, and after he had performed the duties of
his mission, and had fallen a sacrifice to Typhon (the devil, or
evil principle), which, however, he eventually overcame (‘over*
came the wicked one,’ 1 John ii. 11), by rising from the dead,
after being crucified, he became the judge of mankind in a fu-
ture state.” (See Kerrick’s “Ancient Egypt; ” also Wilkinson’s
“Egypt”)

The Budhist, or Hindoo, version of the story is on this wise:
“ The prince (of darkness), or evil spirit, Ravana, or Mahesa,
got into a contest and a war with the divine hero Rama, in
which the latter proved victorious, and put to flight the army
of ‘the wicked one,’ but not till after considerable injury had
been done to the human family, and the whole'order of the urn*
 WORSHIP OF MEN AS GODS.

195

verse subverted; to rectify which, and to achieve a final and
complete triumph over Ravana (the devil) and his works, and
thus save the human race from utter destruction, the gods be-
sought Yishnu (the second person of the Trinity) to descend
to the earth and take upon himself the form and flesh of man.
And it was argued that as the mission appertained to man, the
God Yishnu, when he descended to the earth in the capacity
of a Savior, should become half man and half God, and that
the most feasible way to accomplish this end was for him to be
born of a woman. And that the glory and honor of his tri-
umph over Ravana, the devil, would be greater if achieved in
this capacity than if he were to come down from heaven and
conquer Ravana wholly with his attributes as a God, or wholly
in his divine character — i. e., as absolute God, uninvested with
human nature. The suggestion was approved by Vishnu, who
descended and took upon himself the form of man ” ( “the form
of a servant” — Phil. ii. 7). And that his metamorphosis or
earth-born life might be the purer, it was decided that he should
be born of a woman wholly uncontaminated with man — that
is, a virgin. And thus, far back in the midnight of mythology
and fable, originated the story of divine Saviors and Gods be-
ing born of virgins — a conception now found incorporated in
the religious histories of various ancient nations.

And now let us observe how substantially the Christian story
of a Savior conforms to the above. Jesus, like the Saviors of
India and Egypt, was believed to be a man-God — half man
and half God, and reputedly he came into the world, like them,
to'u destroy the devil and his works,” or the works of the devil —
that is, to put an end to the evil or malignant principle intro-
duced into the world by the serpent in the garden of Eden ; as
it is declared “the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s
head ” (Gen. iii. 15) — which is interpreted as referring to
Christ. And like these and various other pagan Saviors Jesus
is assigned the highest and most ennobling human origin — a
birth from a virgin. And, as in the instances above named,
Jesus had also several encounters with tire devil; first in the
wilderness, then on a mountain, and finally, like them, falls a
sacrifice to his insidious, malignant power acting through the
 196

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

agency and mediumship of Judas Iscariot; for his betrayA is
ascribed wholly to Satan, whom John calls the serpent, entering
into Judas and prompting the act. (See Rev. xii. 3.) And thus
Christ, like the other Saviors, falls a victim to the serpentine or
satanic power acting through the instrumentality of a Judas
Iscariot; but finally triumphed, like the Savior of Egypt
(Osiris), by rising from the dead — “ the first fruits of immor-
tality.” And thus the stories run parallel — the more modern
Christian with the more ancient pagan.

(For a full exposition of the belief and traditions respecting
a devil and a hell in all ages and all countries, see the Author’s
:i Biography of Satan.”)
 SACRED CYCLES.

197

CHAPTER XXX.

SACRED CYJLES EXPLAINING THE ADVENT OF
THE GODS,

THE MASTER-KEY TO THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.

Extraordinary Revelations in History and Science.

Recent explorations in the field of oriental sacred history
have revealed to the antiquarian some curious and deeply inter-
esting facts appertaining to traditions founded on, and growing
out of, astronomical phenomena and changes in the visible
heavens, which throw much light on, and go far toward eluci-
dating and furnishing a satisfactory explanation of many of
the a mysteries ” of the Christian bible. The works which we
have consulted, containing the reports and results of researches
of this character, tend to elucidate and establish the following
conclusions: —

1.   That anciently, in religious countries, time was divided
into Cycles, Aetas, or Neros.

2.   That these measures of time grew out of, and represented
periodical changes, or periodically occurring phenomena in the
astronomical heavens.

3.   That some religious nations had three Cycular periods of
different lengths, representing three orders and degrees of mi-
raculous births. In India the length of the first or shorter
Cycle was thirty days, the length of one moon or month.
Every change of the moon marked an important event in their
religious history. Each change was supposed to denote the
birth of some angel or celestial being, known as an Eon. The
second Cycular period was of six hundred years’ duration, and
was founded on a text of the sacred book of India, known as
 198

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

the Surya Sidhanta, which declares“ the equinoctial point moves
eastward one degree in thirty times twenty years” (thirty
times twenty being 600). At every occurrence of this equi-
noctial change, hightened by an eclipse of the sun or moon, or
some other wonder-exciting phenomenon, a God was supposed
to be born. Such a marvelous and terror-inspiring event, in
the apprehensions of the credulous and superstitious populace
of an unscientific age, could not be designed for anything less
than the birth of a God or Divine Savior. Their theology
teaches that such was the wickedness of man, that a God had
to descend from heaven, and suffer and die for the people, in
some way, every six hundred years. And this period was
announced by the God’s causing a collision of the sun and
moon, or some other terror-exciting phenomena in the heavens
above, or the earth beneath. When one of these six hundred
Cycular periods was about to expire, and another commence,
every remarkable phenomenon in the heavens was watched and
interpreted as being connected with it. And some person born
at that period, who exhibited any remarkable or extraordinary *
traits of character, was certain to be promoted to the Godhead,
as being miraculously born and brought forth for the special
occasion. He was the Avatar Savior or Messiah for that
Cycle. There were two extraordinary events to be accounted
for — one was the display of unusual and terror-exciting phe-
nomena in the heavens, and the other the birth of extraordinary
men on earth. And it was natural for an ignorant age to asso-
ciate them together, and make one aid in accounting for the
other. And as these celestial phenomena were only witnessed
at intervals distant apart, the thought naturally arose, and the
conclusion was easily established, that they came periodically,
and for the special purpose of heralding the birth of a God. And
as tradition reported that similar events were witnessed six hun-
dred years before the conviction was fixed in the popular mind,
this was the established period intervening between these
great epochs. And thus the six hundred year Cycular tradi-
tion became established in India, and finally spread through all
the Eastern countries. We find traces of it in Egypt, Syria,
Persia, Chaldea, China, Italy, apd Judea. And the proof that
 SACRED CYCLES.

199

the deification of great men in some countries grew out of this
Cycular tradition is found in the fact that many of them were
born at the commencement of Cycles. The Hindoos are able
to recount the names of ten sin-atoning Saviors who made their
appearance on earth at these regular intervals of six hundred
years. The name of the first Avatar Mediator and Savior who
forsook the throne of heaven to come down and die for the peo-
ple was Matsa. Tradition and the sacred books fix his birth
at about six thousand years B. C. The names and advent of
the other sin-atoning Saviors occur in the following order: 2.
Vurahay, 3. Kurma, 4. Nursu, 5. Waman, 6. Pursuram, 7.
Kama, 8. Chrishna, 9. Sakia, 10. Salavahana. The last named
Savior was cotemporary with Jesus Christ. The God and
Savior Sakia was born six hundred years B. C. “ Our Lord
and Savior” and “Son of God,” Chrishna, was immaculately
conceived and miraculously born, according to Higgins, 1200
B. C.

A circumstance strongly confirming the conclusion that
Cycular periods had much to do with the promotion of men to
the dignity of Gods is, that most of the deified personages re-
ported in history were, according to the best authorities, born
near the commencement of Cycles. Recurring back to the
eighth Cycle, we observe the advent at that period of
Chrishna, Zoroaster 2d, Bali, Thammuz, Atys, Osiris, and sev-
eral others. At the commencement of the ninth Cycle ap-
peared Sakia, Quexalcote, Zoroaster 2d, Xion, Quirinus, Prome-
theus, Mithra, and many others. The tenth Cycle brought in
Jesus Christ, Salavahana, Apollonius, and others that might be
named. Mahomet succeeded Jesus Christ just six hundred
years (he was born in the year 600 A. D.}, which inaugurated
another Cycle. Many facts are recorded in history proving the
prevalence and sacredness of the Cycle idea in different coun-
tries. The story in Egypt of the bird called the Phoenix, being
hatched, according to tradition, just 600 years B. C., and living
to be just six hundred years old, and having the power to re-
new itself every six hundred years, shows the prevalence of the
Cycular tradition in that country. We have the statement
upon the records of history that when the first six hundred
 200

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

years after the foundation of Rome were about to expire, the
people became greatly excited with the apprehension that some
extraordinary event must attend the occasion. And but for
the influence of the philosophers, some extraordinary man
would have been hunted up and promoted to divine honor as
being the God born for that Cycle. The writings of Plato,
Plutarch, Ovid, Cicero, Virgil, and Aristotle, all evince a belief
in Cycles, and the belief that ten Cycles, or Aetas, were the
measure for the duration of the world. According to M. Faber,
a new-born Savior was always expected to make his appearance
at the commencement of one of these Cycles. Hence the deifi-
cation of those personages above named, and many others that
might be named. It is a remarkable circumstance that the
Jewish bible should speak of Noah as being six hundred years
old at the commencement of the flood, when it was a tradition
amongst the ancient Egyptians that the ushering in of the six
hundredth year Cycle was to be attended with a flood. And
the time antecedent to Noah after creation, was the measure
of three Cycles, according to the chronology of the Samari-
tan bible, it being 600 + 600 + 600 = 1800 years from Adam
to Noah. It is an interesting fact that those enigmatical
figures made use of by Daniel, as also some of those found
in the Apocalypse, are susceptible of a Cycular explanation.
These occult prophecies, as they are supposed to be, which have
puzzled and bewildered many thousands of Christian minds
and bible expounders in their attempt to evolve their signifi-
cation, are susceptible of a Cycular explanation. They are of
easy solution on a Cycular basis, or with the Cycular key.
Take, for example, Daniel’s famous prophecy (so called) of the
seventy weeks, as found in the ninth chapter, announcing the
advent of a Messiah at the end of that period. We find by a cal-
culation based on Tyson’s “ Historical Atlas,” and Haskell’s
“ Chronology and Universal History,” that Daniel lived in the
hundred and tenth year of the ninth Cycle, at which time the
prefigure seems to have been used. Assuming this as a basis,
and multiplying seventy weeks by seven, to convert it into
years, as Christian essayists are accustomed to doing, and we
have as the result 70 X 7 =490, which being added to one
 SACRED CYCLES.

201

hundred and ten, the year that gave birth to the prophecy,
makes six hundred, which exactly completes the Cycle, and
furnishes a simple and beautiful explanation of a mystical
figure, on which many thousands of conjectures, speculations,
and guesses have been founded, but on which they have failed
to throw any light.

The 70x7 = 490 years, were wanting to complete the
Cycle; and when this rolled away, it brought a new Cycle,
and with it a new sin-atoning Savior was always expected in
some countries (the country in which Daniel lived being one
of this number) ; a new Messiah (or sin-atoning Savior), and
some great man born at that time, was fixed upon and dei-
fied as being that Messiah. Hence the Jews, in imitation of
their neighbors, yielding to their strong proclivities to bor-
row from and copy after heathen nations, selected “ the man
Christ Jesus” as their Messiah and Savior. The mystical era
of Daniel, signified by “a time, times, and the dividing of time”
(Dan. vii. 25), or, as St. John has it, “a time, times, and a half
time (see Rev. xii. 14), is explainable by the same Cycular
key. Some writers have conjectured that Daniel was a Chal-
dean priest. If so, he must have had a knowledge of their
astronomical Cycle of two thousand one hundred and sixty
years, which completed the period of the precession of the
equinoxes. Explained by this Cycle, his “time, times, and
dividing of time, or half time, or “a time, another time, and a
half time,” as some writers have rendered it, would be 2160 +
2160 + 1080 = 5400; nine Cycles exactly, as 600x9 = 5400.
Add this to the Cycle in which he lived, and we have 5400 +
600 = 6000, the great Millennial Cycle, when not only a new
Savior and Messiah was to be born, but a new world also. Both
the long and short Cycle (and one was a measure of the
other) were expected to expire at that time, according to a
Chaldean tradition. And thus is beautifully explained another
“ deep, dark, and unfathomable mystery,” which thousands of
devout minds have exhausted their ingenuity in trying to find
a meaning for. Again, look at the frightful nightmare visions
of Daniel and the author of the Apocalypse, in which they saw
a monstrous beast with seven heads and ten horns, though
 202

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

[Prometheus]

aniel mentions only the horns. The seven heads were, in all
probability, the seven auspicious months of the year in which
some of the nations reveled in the enjoyment of, and praised
and celebrated their fruitful, bountiful blessings, the year being
divided into two seasons, seven summer months and five winter
months. Now, let it be noted, St. John lived near the tenth
Cycle, which answers to the ten horns of the beast. Hence is
most forcibly suggested that interpretation of the figure.
Daniel’s ten horns should have been translated eleven horns,
as he lived in the ninth Cycle, though so near the tenth
that he probably constructed his figure on the tenth. And
Daniel’s prophetic declaration (so considered), found in the
eighth chapter, that it would be two thousand three hundred
days until the sanctuary should be closed, is explainable in the
same manner. According to Mr. Irving, Mr. Frere, and other
writers, there was a large fraction over the three hundred days,
making it nearer four hundred, and hence might have been so
rendered, which would make 2000 + 400 = 2400 ; the exact
length of four Cycles, 600x4=2400. And there are other
mystical figures, frightful visions, and occult metaphors found
in the Apocalypse susceptible of a Cycular solution. The
Cycle is the true key for unlocking many of the ancient mys- .
teries of various religions. The Chinese have always reckoned
by Cycles of sixty years, instead of by centuries. (See New
Am. Encyclop., vol. v. p. 105.)

We will now bestow a brief notice on the Millennial Cycle:
the sacred period of 6000 years, composed of ten of the smaller
Cycles, 600x10=6000. Dr. Hales says, “A tradition of Mil-
lennial ages prevailed throughout the east, and finally reached
the west.” (Chron. vol. i. p. 44.) We are told by astronomers
that if the angle which-the plane of the ecliptic forms with the
plane of the equator had decreased gradually, as it was once
supposed to do, the two planes would coincide in about six
thousand years — a period which comprises ten of the smaller
Cycles, 600 X10 = 6000. And it was very easy and very natural
for an ignorant and superstitious age to conclude that such a
prodigious, astounding, and awful event as that of two stupen-
dous orbits or planes coming in contact with each other, should
 SACRED CYCLES.

20S

be attended with some direful and calamitous event, and with
a tremendous display of divine power. Nothing less than an
entire revolution, if not the total destruction of the world, could
comport with the majesty and magnitude of such an event.
And this great crisis was to bring down the Omnipotent Divine
Judge from the throne of heaven; that is, the Almighty
Being who caused it was to come down, or send his Son to
call the nations to judgment, and drown the world, or set it on
fire. The first destruction, according to the tradition of the
Chaldeans, Persians, Assyrians, Mexicans, and some other
nations, was to be by water, and the next by fire, when the
oceans, seas, and lakes were to be converted into ashes. And
Christ’s apostles seem to have cherished this tradition. Peter
says, “whereby the world that was then, being overflowed by
water, perished. But the heavens and the earth which are now,
by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against
the day of judgment.” (2 Peter iii. 6.) This was a pagan belief
long prior to the era of Peter. Josephus says, “ A lam predicted
that the world would be twice destroyed, once by water, next
by fire.” A writer says, “ A glorious, blissful future attends
the destruction of the world by fire, and the re-appearance of
Vishnu (i. e., eleventh incarnation of Vishnu) has been for
several thousand years the hopeful anticipation of India.” “The
last coming of Vishnu in power and glory,” says another writ-
er, “to consummate the final overthrow of evil, sin, and death,
is so firmly fixed in the minds of the devotees, that they have
an annual festival in commemoration of their prophecy referring
to it, at which they exclaim, in a loud voice, “ When will the
Divine Helper come? when will the Deliverer appear?” At
the consummation of this event, “ a comet will roll under the
moon and set the world on fire; ” so affirms their bible. And
the Persian bible, the Zend-Avesta, in like manner predicts that
“a star, with a tail in course of its revolution, will strike the
earth and set it on fire.” Seneca predicts that “ the time will
come when the world will be wrapped in flames, and the oppo
site powers in conflict will mutually destroy each other.”

Ovid prophesies poetically,—
 204

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS. p

“ For thus the stern, unyielding Fates decree,

That earth, air, heaven, with the capacious sea,

All shall fall victims to devouring fire,

And in fierce flames the blazing orbs expire.”

Lucian, in a b’ke spirit, exclaims, —

“ One vast, appointed flame, by Fate’s decree,

Shall waste yon azure heavens, the earth and sea.”

The Egyptians marked their houses with red, to indicate that
the world would be destroyed by fire. Orpheus, 1200 B. C.,
at the inauguration of the eighth Cycle, entertained fearful
forebodings of the speedy destruction of the world by water or
tire. Some nations held that the alternate destruction of the
world by water and fire had already occurred, and would occur
again. Theopompus informs us that some of the orientalists
believed that “the God of light and the God of darkness
reigned by turn every six thousand years (commencing with
an astronomical Cycle of course), and that during this period
the other was held in subjection, which finally resulted in “ a
war in heaven ; ” a counterpart to St. John’s story. (See Rev.
chap, xii.) This accords with Yolney’s statement, that “it
was recorded in the sacred books of the Persians and Chaldeans
that the world, composed of a total revolution of twelve thou-
sand periods, was divided into two partial revolutions of six
thousand years each — one being the reign of good, and the
other the reign of evil.” (Ruins, p. 244.) This belief was dis-
seminated through most of the nations. One of these revolu-
tions was produced, some believed, by a concussion of worlds,
which displaced the oceans and seas, and thus produced a
general flood, which drowned every living thing on the earth.
The next revolution will be caused by a collision of worlds,
which will produce fire, and burn the earth to ashes. Now,
let it be noted that all these grand epochs were founded on
Cycles, and accompanied by the tradition of a God being born
upon the earth (conceived by a virgin maid), or descending in
person ; that is, men were promoted to the Godhead. And
in this way Jesus Christ was deified. Volney explains the
matter thus: “Now, according to the Jewish computation, six
 SACRED CYCLES.

205

thousand years had nearly elapsed since the supposed creation
of the world (according to their chronology). This coinci-
dence produced considerable fermentation in the minds of the
people. Nothing was thought of but the approaching termina-
tion. The great Mediator and Final Judge was expected, and
his advent desired, that an end might be put to their calami-
ties.” (Ruins, 'p. 168.) Mr. Higgins corroborates this state-
ment, when he tells us that “ about the time of the Caesars there
seems to have been a general expectation that some Great One
was to appear. And finally, when the Cycle had passed, the
people, the Jew-Christians, began to look about to see who
that Great One was. Some fixed on Herod, some on Julius
Caesar, and some on others. But finally public opinion settled
on one Jesus of Nazareth, on account of his superiority in
morals and intellect, while the Hindoos deified Salavahana, the
Greeks Apollonius, &c. And thus science and history join
hand in hand to explain most beautifully and conclusively the
greatest mystery that ever brought two hundred mil ions of
people daily upon their knees—the apotheosis, or deification
of “ the man Christ Jesus.”
 206

THE WORLD ’S SAVIORS.

CHAPTER XXXI.

CHRISTIANITY DERIVED FROM HEATHEN AND
ORIENTAL SYSTEMS.

More than twenty thousand sermons are preached in the
Christian pulpits, on every recurring Sabbath, to convince the
people that the religion and morality taught and practiced by
Jesus Christ was of divine emanation, and was never before
taught in the world, — that his system of morality was without
a parallel, and his practical life without a precedent, — that the
doctrine of self-denial, humility, unselfishness, benevolence, and
charity, — also devout piety, kind treatment of enemies, and
love for the human race, which he preached and practiced, had
never before been exemplified in the life and teachings of any
individual or nation. But a thorough acquaintance with the
history and moral systems of some of the oriental nations, and
the practical lives of piety and self-denial exemplified in their
leading men long anterior to the birth of Christ, and long be-
fore the name of Christianity was anywhere known, must
convince any unprejudiced mind that such a claim is without
foundation. And to prove it, we will here institute a critical
comparison between Christianity and some of the older sys-
tems with respect to the essential spirit of their teachings, and
observe how utterly untenable and groundless is the dogmatic
assumption which claims for the Christian religion either any
originality or any superiority. Of course if there is nothing
new or original, there is nothing superior.

We will first arrange Christianity side by side with the an-
cient system known as Essenism — a religion whose origin has
never been discovered, though it is known that the Essenes exist-
ed in the :lnys of Jonathan Maccabeus, B. C. 150, and that they
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION.   207

were of Jewish origin, and constituted one of the three Jewish
sects (the other two being Pharisees and Sadducees). We have
but fragments of their history as furnished by Philo, Josephus,
Pliny, and their copyists, Eusebius, Dr. Ginsburgh, and others,
on whose authority we will proceed to show that Alexandrian
and Judean Essenism was identically the same system in spirit
and essence as its successor Judean Christianity; in othei
words, Judean Christianity teaches the same doctrines and
moral precepts which had been previously inculcated by the
disciples of the Essenian religion.

A Parallel Exhibition of the Precepts and Practical
Lives of Christ and the Essenes.

We will condense from Philo, Josephus, and other authors.

1.   Philo says, “It is our first duty to seek the kingdom of
God and his righteousness;” so the Essenes believed and
taught.

Scripture parallel. “ Seek first the kingdom of God, and his
righteousness, and all else shall be added.” (Matt. vi. 88; Luke
xii. 31.)

2.   Philo says, “ They abj ured all amusements, all elegances,
and all pleasures of the senses.”

Scripture parallel. “Forsake the world and the things
thereof.”

3.   The Essenes say, “Lay up nothing on earth, but fix your
mind solely on heaven ”

Scripture parallel. “ Lay not up treasures on earth,” &c.

4.   “ The Essenes, having laid aside all the anxieties of life,”
says Philo, “ and leaving society, they make their residence in
solitary wilds and in gardens ”

Scripture parallel. “ They wandered in deserts, and in
mountains, and in dens, and in caves of the earth.” (Heb.
xi. 38.)

5.   Josephus says, “They neither buy nor sell among them-
selves, but give of what they have to him that wanteth.”

Scripture parallel. “ And parted them (their goods) to all
men as every man had need.” (Acts ii. 45.)
 203

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

6.   Eusebeus says, “Even as it is related in the Acts of the
Apostles, all (the Essenes) . . . were wont to sell their posses-
sions and their substance, and divide among all according as
any one had need, so that there was not one among them in
want.”

Scripture parallel. “Neither was there any among them
that lacked, for as many as were possessors of lands or houses
sold them, and brought the price of the things that were sold,”
&c. (Acts iv. 34.)

7.   Eusebius says, “ For whoever, of Christ’s disciples, were
owners of estates or houses, sold them, and brought the price
thereof, and laid them at the apostles’ feet, and distribution was
made as every one had need. So Philo relates things exactly
similar of the Essenes.”

Scripture parallel. (The text above quoted.)

8.   w Philo tells us (says Eusebius) that the Essenes forsook
father, mother, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, for their
religion.”

Scripture parallel.   “ Whosoever forsaketh not father and

mother, houses and lands,” &c., “ cannot be my disciples.”

9.   “ Their being sometimes called monks was owing to their
abstraction from the world,” says Eusebius.

Scripture parallel. “ They are not of the world, even as I
am not of the world.” (John xvii. 16.)

10.   “ And the name Ascetics was applied to them on account
of their rigid discipline, their prayers, fasting, self-mortification,
&c., as they made themselves eunuchs.”

Scripture parallel. “ There be eunuchs which have made
themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”

11.   “They maintained a perfect community of goods, and an
equality of external rank.” (Mich. vol. iv. p. 83.)

Scripture parallel. “ Whosoever will be chief among you,
let him be your servant.” (Matt. xx. 27.)

12.   “ The Essenes had all things in common, and appointed
one of their number to manage the common bag.” (Dr. Gins-
burg.)

Scripture parallel. “And had all things in common.” (Acts

ii.   44; see also Acts iv. 32.)
 CHRISTIANITIES ANCIENT DERIVATION. 209

13.   “ All ornamental dress they (Essenes) detested.” (Mich,
vol. iv. p. 83.)

Scripture parallel. “ Whose adorning let it not be that out-
ward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, and
putting on of apparel.” (1 Peter iii. 3.)

14.   “ They would call no man master.” (Mich.)

Scripture parallel. “ Be not called Rabbi, for one is your

Master. (Matt, xxiii. 8.)

15.   u They said the Creator made all mankind equal.” (Mich.)

Scripture parallel, “ God hath made of one blood all them

that dwell upon the earth.”

16.   “They renounced oaths, saying, He who cannot be be-
lieved without swearing is condemned already.” (Mich.)

Scripture parallel. “ Swear not at all.”

17.   “ They would not eat anything which had blood in it, or
meat which had been offered to idols. Their food was hys-
sop, and bread, and salt; and water their only drink.” (Mich.)

Scripture parallel. “ That ye abstain from meat offered to
idols, and from blood.” (Acts xv. 29.)

18.   “ Taking nothing with them, neither meat nor drink, nor
anything necessary for the wants of the body.”

Scripture parallel. “Take nothing for your journey; neither
staves nor scrip; neither bread, neither money, neither have
two coats apiece.”

19.   “ They expounded the literal sense of the Holy Scriptures
by allegory.”

Scripture parallel. “ Which things are an allegory.” (Gal.

iv.   24.)

20.   “They abjured the pleasures of the body, not desiring
mortal offspring, and they renounced marriage, believing it to
be detrimental to a holy life.” (Mich.)

Scripture parallel. It will be recollected that neither Jesus
nor Paul ever married, and that they discouraged the marriage
relation. Christ says, “ They that shall be counted worthy of
that world and the resurrection neither marry nor are given in
marriage.” And Paul says, “The unmarried careth for the
things of the Lord.” (1 Cor. vii. 32.)

21.   “They strove to disengage their minds entirely from the
world.”

14
 210

[Prometheus]

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

Scripture parallel. “ If any man love the world, the love of
the Father is not in him.”

22.   “ Devoting themselves to the Lord, they provided not for
future subsistence.”

Scripture parallel. “ Take no thought for the morrow, what
ye shall eat and drink,” &c.

23.   “ Regarding the body as a prison, they were ashamed to
give it sustenance.” (c. ii. 71.)

Scripture parallel. “ Who shall change our vile bodies ? ”
(Phil. iii. 21.)

24.   “They spent nearly all their time in silent meditation
and inward prayer.” (c. ii. 71.)

Scripture parallel. “ Men ought always to pray.” (Luke
xviii. 1.)   “ Pray without ceasing.” (1 Thess. v. 17.)

25.   “ Believing the poor were the Lord’s favorites, they vowed
perpetual chastity and poverty.” (c. ii. 71.)

Scripture parallel. “ Blessed be ye poor.” (Luke vi. 20.)
“ Hath not God chosen the poor ? ” (James ii. 5.)

26.   “ They devoted themselves entirely to contemplation in
divine things.” (c. ii. 71.)

Scripture parallel. “ Meditate upon these (divine) things;
give thyself wholly to them.” (1 Tim. iv. 15.)

27.   “ They fasted often, sometimes tasting food but once in
three or even six days.”

Scripture parallel. Christ’s disciples were “ in fastings often.”
(2 Cor. xi. 27; see also v. 34.)

28.   “ They offered no sacrifices, believing that a serious and
devout soul was most acceptable.” (c. ii. 71.)

Scripture parallel. “ There is no more offering for sin.”
(Heb. x. 18.)

29.   “They believed in and practiced baptizing the dead.”
(c. ii. 71.)

Scripture parallel. “ Else what shall they do which are bap-
tized for the dead.” (1 Cor. xv. 29.)

30.   “ They gave a mystical sense to the Scriptures, disregard-
ing the letter.”

Scripture parallel. 4 The letter killeth, but the spirit maketh
alive.” (1 Cor. iii. 6.)
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION 211

31.   “ They taught by metaphors, symbols, and parables.”

Scripture parallel. “ Without a parable spake he not unto

them.” (Matt. xiii. 34.)

32.   “ They had many mysteries in their religion which they
were sworn to keep secret.”

Scripture parallel.   “ To you it is given to know the myste-

ries of the kingdom; to them it is not given.” (Matt. xiii. 11.)
“ Great is the mystery of godliness.”

33.   “ They had in their churches bishops, elders, deacons, and
priests.”

Scripture parallel. “ Ordained elders in every church.” (Acts
xiv. 23.) For “ deacon,” see 1 Tim. iii. 1.

34.   “ When assembled together they would often sing psalms.”

Scripture parallel. “ Teaching and admonishing one another

in psalms.” (Col. iii. 16.)

35.   “ They healed and cured the minds and bodies of those
who joined them.”

Scripture parallel. “ Healing all manner of sickness,” &c.
(Matt. iv. 23.)

36.   “ They practiced certain ceremonial purifications by
water.”

Scripture parallel. “ The accomplishment of the days of
purification.” (Acts xxi. 26.)

37.   “ They assembled at the Sabbath festivals clothed in
white garments.”

Scripture parallel. “ Shall be clothed in white garments.”
(Rev. iii. 4.)

38.   “They disbelieved in the resurrection of the external
body.”

Scripture parallel. “ It is sown a natural body, it is raised
a spiritual body.” (1 Cor. xv. 44.)

39.   Pliny says, “ They were the only sort of men who lived
without money and without women.”

Scripture parallel. “ The love of money is the root of all
evil.” (1 Tim. vi. 10.) Christ’s disciples travelled without
money and without scrip, and “ eschew the lusts of the flesh.”

40.   “ They practiced the extremest charity to the poor.”
(c. ii. 71.)
 212

THE WORLD9S SAVIORS.

Scripture parallel. “ Bestow all thy goods to feed the poor.*
(1 Cor. xiii. 3.)

41.   “ They were skillful in interpreting dreams, and in fore*
telling future events.”

Scripture parallel. “Your sons and daughters shall proph-
esy, and your old men shall dream dreams.” (Acts ii. 17.)

42.   “ They believed in a paradise, . . . and in a place of
never-ending lamentations.”

Scripture parallel. “Life everlasting.” (Gal. viii. 8.) “Weep-
ing, wailing, and gnashing of teeth.” (Matt. xiii. 42.)

43.   “ They affirmed,” says Josephus, “that God foreordained
all the events of human life.”

Scripture parallel. “ Foreordained before the foundation of
the world.” (1 Peter.)

44.   “ They believed in Mediators between God and the souls
of men.”

Scripture parallel. “One Mediator between God and men.”
(1 Tim. ii. 5.)

45.   “ They practiced the pantomimic representation of the
death, burial, and resurrection of God ” — Christ the Spirit.

Scripture parallel. With respect to the death, burial, and
resurrection of Christ, see 1 Cor. xv. 4.

46.   “ They inculcated the forgiveness of injuries.”

Scripture parallel. “Father, forgive them; for they know

not what they do.” (Luke xxiii. 34.)

47.   “ They totally disapproved of all war.”

Scripture parallel. “ If my kingdom were of this world,
then would my servants fight.” (John xviii. 36.)

48.   “ They inculcated obedience to magistrates, and to the
civil authorities.”

Scripture parallel. “ Obey them which have the rule over
you.” (Heb. xiii. 17; xxvi. 65.)

49.   “ They retired within themselves to receive interior rev-
elations of divine truth.” (c. ii. 71.)

Scripture parallel. “ Every one of you hath a revelation.”
(1 Cor. xiv. 26.)

50.   “ They were scrupulous in speaking the truth.”

Scripture parallel. “ Speaking all things in truth.” (2 Cor

vii.   14.)
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION.   213

51.   “ They perform many wonderful miracles.”

Scripture parallel. Many texts teach us that Christ and his
apostles did the same.

52.   “Essenism put all its members upon the same level,
forbidding the exercise of authority of one over another.”
(Dr. Ginsburg.)

Scripture parallel. Christ did the same. For proof, see
Matt. xx. 25 ; Mark ix. 35.

53.   “ Essenism laid the greatest stress on being meek and
lowly in spirit.” (Dr. Ginsburg.)

Scripture parallel. See Matt. v. 5 ; ix. 28.

54.   “ The Essenes commended the poor in spirit, those who
hunger and thirst after righteousness, and the merciful, and the
pure in heart.” (Dr. Ginsburg.)

Scripture parallel. For proof that Christ did the same, see
Matt.

55.   “.The Essenes commended the peacemakers.” (Dr. Gins-
burg*)

Scripture parallel. “ Blessed are the peacemakers.”

56.   “ The Essenes declared their disciples must cast out evil
spirits, and perform miraculous cures, as signs and proof of their
faith.” (Dr. Ginsburg.)

Scripture parallel. Christ’s disciples were to cast out devils,
heal the sick, and raise the dead, &c., as signs and proof of their
faith. (Mark xvi. 17.)

57.   “ They sacrificed the lusts of the flesh to gain spiritual
happiness.”

Scripture parallel. “You abstain from fleshly lusts.” (1 Peter
ii. 11.)

58.   “ The breaking of bread was a veritable ordinance among
the Essenes.”

Scripture parallel. “ He (Jesus) took bread, and gave thanks,
and brake it.” (Luke xxii. 19.)

59.   “ The Essenes enjoined the loving of enemies.” (Philo.)

Scripture parallel. So did Christ say, “Love your ene-
mies,” &c.

60.   The Essenes enjoined, “Doing unto others as you would
have them do unto you.”
 214

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

Scripture parallel. The Confucian golden rule, as taught
by Christ.

This parallel might be extended much further, but we will
proceed to present the reader with a general description of
Essenism, as furnished us by Philo, Josephus, and some Chris-
tian writers. Philo, who was born in Alexandria 20 B. C., and
lived to 60 A. D., and who was himself an Essenian Jew, in his
account of them, says, “ They do not lay up treasures of gold
or silver, . . . but provide themselves only with the necessities
of life.” Paul afterwards, having caught the same spirit, advises
the same course of life. “Having food and raiment, therewith
be content.” Contentment of mind they regarded as the
greatest of riches. They make no instruments of war. They
repudiate every inducement to covetousness, None are held
as slaves, but all are free, and serve each other. They are in-
structed in piety and holiness, righteousness, economy, &c.
They are guided by a threefold rule: love of God, love of virtue,
and love of mankind. Of their love of God they give innumer-
able demonstrations, which is found in their constant and un-
alterable holiness throughout the whole of their lives, their
avoidance of oaths and falsehoods, and their firm belief that
God is the source of all good, but of nothing evil. “ Of their
love of virtue they give proof in their contempt for money, fame,
and pleasures, their continence, easy satisfying of their wants,
their simplicity, modesty,” &c. Their love of man is proved
by their benevolence and equality, and their having all things
in common, which is beyond all deception. They rever-
ence and take care of the aged, as children do their parents.
(Condensed from Philo’s treatise, “Every Virtuous Man is
Free”)

Josephus, 37 A. D., and who was also at one time a member
of the Essenian Brotherhood, furnishes another fragmentary
account of the Essenes in his “Jewish Wars,” of which the fol-
lowing is the substance : —

“ They love each other more than others (that is, are “ par-
tial to the household of faith ” ) ; they despise riches, and havo
all things in common, so that there is neither abjectness of
poverty nor distinction of riches among them; they change
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION.   215

neither garments nor shoes till they are worn out or become
unfit for use; they neither buy nor sell among themselves;
their piety is extraordinary; they never speak about worldly
matters before sunrise; they are girt about with a linen apron,
and have a baptism of cold water; they eat but one kind of
food at a time, and commence with a prayer, and the priest
must say grace before any one eats (that is, breaks and blesses as
Christ did) ; they also return thanks after eating, and then put
off their white garments; strangers were made welcome at
their tables, without money and without price; they give food
to the hungry and the needy, and show mercy to all; they
curb their passions, restrain their anger, and claim to be min-
isters of peace; an oath they regard as worse than perjury;
they excommunicate offenders (‘ Go tell it to the churches,’
says Christ) ; they condemn finery in dress; though condemn-
ing in most solemn terms oaths, members were admitted to the
secret brotherhood by an oath (c See thou tell no man,’ said
Christ); they endured pain with heroic fortitude, and regarded
an honorable death as better than long life; they read and
study their Holy Scriptures from youth, often prophesy, and it
was very seldom they failed in their predictions.”

Dr. Ginburg’s testimony, abridged, is as follows: —

“The Essenes had a high appreciation of the inspired law
of God. The highest aim of their lives was to become fit
temples of the Holy Ghost (see 1 Cor. vi. 19); also to perform
miraculous cures, and to be spiritually qualified for forerunners
of the Messiah. They taught the duty of mortifying the flesh
and the lusts thereof, and to become meek and lowly in spirit;
they answered by yea, yea, and nay, nay (see Matt.), scrupu-
lously avoiding oaths; they avoided impure contact with the
heathen and the world’s people, and lived retired from the
world, being in numbers about four thousand ; they strove to
be like the angels of heaven ; there were no rich and poor, or
masters and servants, amongst them; they lived peaceably
with all men; a mysterious silence was observed while eating;
a solemn oath was required on becoming a member of the
secret order, which required three things: 1. Love to God ; 2.
Merciful justice to all men, and to avoid the wicked, and help
 216

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

the righteous; 3. Purity of character, which implied love of
truth, .hatred of falsehood, and strict observance of4 the mys-
teries of godliness’ to outsiders — that is,‘heathen and publi-
cans;’ they endured suffering for righteousness’ sake, with
rejoicings, and even sought it; regarding the body as a prison
for the soul, they desired the time to come to escape from it;
they recognized eight different stages of spiritual growth and
perfection: 1. Bodily purity; 2 Celibacy; 3. Spiritual purity;
4. The suppression of anger and malice, and the cultivation of a
meek,lowly spirit; 5. The attainment of true holiness; 6. Be-
coming fit temples for the Holy Ghost; 7. The ability to per-
form miraculous cures, and raise the dead; 8. Becoming fore-
runners of the Messiah; and finally, they took a solemn vow
to exercise piety toward God and justice toward all men, to
hate the wicked, assist the good to keep clear of theft and un-
righteous gains, to conceal none of their 6 mysteries of godli-
ness’ from each other, or disclose them to others. c Great is the
mystery of godliness ’ (‘ See thou tell no man ’); they w’ere
to walk humbly with God, shun bad society, forgive their ene-
mies, sacrifice their passions, and crucify the lusts of the flesh ;
they disregarded bodily suffering, and even gloried in martyr-
dom, preaching and singing to God amid their sufferings ; but
in their domestic habits they were extremely filthy; they wore
their clothes till they became ragged, filthy, and offensive, never
changing them till they were worn out; their food consisted
of bread and water, and wild roots and fruits of the palm tree ;
they enjoined the duty, not only of forgiving enemies, but of
seeking to benefit them, and of even blessing the destroyer
who took life and property.” Such was the religion, such the
moral system, such the devout piety, and such the practical
lives of the Essenian Jews, a religious sect which flourished in
Alexandria and Judea several hundred years before the birth of
Christ, and went out of history the hour Christianity came in.

Now, as the foregoing exposition shows that Essenism and
Christianity are most strikingly alike in all their essential
features, that the former system contains nearly every impor-
tant doctrine and precept of the Christian religion, the question
occurs here as one of momentous import, How is this striking
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION. 217

resemblance, this identity of character of the two religions, to
be accounted for ? Does it not go far toward proving that
Christianity is an outgrowth, a legitimate offspring, of Judean
Essenism ? Indeed, are we not absolutely driven to such a con-
clusion? Let us briefly recite some of the important facts
brought to light by the investigation of the character and his-
tory of these two religions, and see if those facts do not bring
them together, and weld them as one system — as one and the
same religion.

1.   Both are alike, and Essenism is much the older system.

2.   Both religions are an outgrowth of Judaism.

3.   Both were known and taught in Judea and in Alexan-
dria.

4.   Josephus living in Judea, and Philo in Alexandria, neither
of them speaks of Christianity, or refers to any such religion
by that name, and yet both describe a religion inculcating
the same doctrines and moral precepts, which they call Esse-
nism.

Is not this very nearly conclusive proof that Essenism was only
another name for Christianity — that it had not yet changed its
name to Christianity ? That famous standard author, Mr. Gib-
bon, was evidently of this opinion when he said, “ Whether,
indeed, the first of that sect (the Essenes) took the name of
Christian when the appellation of Christian had as yet been
nowhere announced, it is by no means necessary to discuss.”
(Book II. chap, xvi.) Here is evidence that Gibbon believed
that the Essenes, after having borne that name for centuries,
changed the appellation to Christian. And we find still stronger
language than this in the writings of the same author expres-
sive of this opinion. In a note to chapter xv. he says, “It is
probable that the Therapeuts (Essenes) changed their name to
Christians, as some writers affirm, and adopted some new arti-
cles of faith.” Here the position is assumed that the Christian
religion is an outgrowth of Essenism, that is, merely a continu-
ation of that religion under a change of name, with a slight
modification of its creed.

5.   And then we have the declaration of Christian writers,
expressed in the most positive terms, that Essenism and Chris-
 ‘^18

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

[Prometheus]

tianity were the same religion, the former name being used
at an earlier period. Hear Eusebius, a standard ecclesiastical
writer of the fourth century. He asserts positively, “ Those
ancient Therapeuts (Essenes) were Christians, and their ancient
writings were our Gospels.” (Eccl. Hist. p. 63.) Hark! hark !
my good Christian reader, here is one of your own sworn wit-
nesses testifying that the Essenes originated and established the
Christian religion; i. e., the religion now known by that name.
Will you then give it up? If not, we have other testimony of
a similar character, rendering the proposition still stronger.
Robert Taylor declares, “The learned Basnage has shown
that the Essenes were really Christians centuries before
Christ, and that they were actually in possession of those very
writings which are now our Gospels and Epistles.” (P. 81.)
And then we have the declaration of the author of “Christ the
Spirit” (p. 110), that “the Christians were the later Essenes —
that is, the Essenes of the time of Eusebius under a changed
name, that name having been made at Antioch, where the dis-
ciples were first called Christian ” The same writer suggests
that “ their sacred books are our sacred books.” We will now
hear Eusebius again: “It is highly probable that their (the
Essenes’) ancient commentaries, which Philo says the Essenes
have, are the very Gospels and writings of the apostles.” Based
upon this conclusion, he calls the Essenes “the first heralds
of the gospel” “I find it, therefore, most probable,” says Mr.
Weilting, “that Jesus and John belonged literally to the society
of the Essenes.” And then the New American Cyclopedia
furnishes us with the testimony of a very able English author
of the last century (De Quincy), who concurs with all the
writers cited above. “Mr. De Quincy (it says; identified the
Essenes as being the early Christians; i. e., the early Christians
were known as Essenes. Such testimony, coming from such a
source, is entitled to much weight.” (Yol. i. p. 157.) And to
the same effect is the testimony of Bishop Marsh, who admits
that our Gospels were drawn from those of the Essenes. (See
his edition of Michaelis’ translation of the New Testament.)

Thus far historical writers. We will now lay before the reader
some historical facts, fraught with unanswerable logical potency,
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION 219

and pointing to the same conclusion. It is a fact, and one of
deep logical import, and tending to corroborate the conclusion
of some of the writers cited above, who tell us the Christian
Gospels were first composed by the Essenes; that the language
in which those Gospels were originally written was Greek, the
language in which the Alexandrian Essenes always wrote,
while the evangelical writers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John,
being illiterate fishermen, could have had no knowledge of any
but the Jewish, their own mother-tongue, — at least it is suscep-
tible of satisfactory proof that they never wrote in any other
language. Hence the conclusion is irresistible that they were
not the original authors of the Gospels. The works of several
authors are now lying at our elbow, who express the conviction
unequivocally that the Gospels were copied, if not translated,
from older writings. Mr, Le Clerc, one of the ablest writers of
his time, maintained this position, and did it ably. Another
writer, a Mr. Hatfield, was awarded a prize in 1793, by. the
theological faculty of Gottingen, for an essay, in which the
position was ably argued that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
were not the authors of the books which bear their names, but
were mere copyists. Dr. Lessing and others concur with him
in this conclusion. A circumstance confirming this verdict is
found in the fact that the word church occurs in our Gospels,
which were written before such an institution was established
by those who were then called Christians.

“ Go tell it to the church ” (Matt, xviii. 17) was uttered before
any steps had been taken by the then representatives of the
Christian faith to organize such a body — an evidence this,
that he alluded to the church of the Essenes, as there were
no other churches in existence at the time; which leaves the
inference patent and irresistible that he and his disciples were
Essenes, perhaps then under the changed name of Christians.
Centuries prior to that era the Essenes had not only churches,
but their whole ecclesiastical nomenclature of bishops, deacons,
elders, priests, disciples, scriptures, gospels, epistles, psalms,
hymns, mystery, allegory, &c. If Christianity was re-established
in the days of Christ and his apostles, they had nothing to
originate, either with respect to doctrines, precepts, church
 220

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

polity, or ecclesiastical terras — all being established for them
centuries before that era. With these facts in view, it seems
impossible that the two religious orders — Essenes and Chris-
tians— could have been in existence at the same time as sepa-
rate institutions. The former must have ended when the latter
commenced. Josephus says “ The Essenes were scattered far
and wide, and were in every city,” being quite numerous in
Judea in his time. But he makes no reference to any sect or
religious order by the title of Christian — a strong inferential
evidence, upon sound priori reasoning, that Christianity as yet
was sailing under another name. Josephus must have known
and named the fact, had there been a Christian sect or disciple
there bearing that name. Impossible otherwise. We are then
(upon the logical force of these and many other facts) driven
to the conclusion that Christianity began when Essenism
ended, and the change was only in name. I challenge the
whole Christian world to find the historical proof that Christian-
•ity commenced one hour before the termination of Essenism,
or of Essenism overlapping the Christian religion so far as to
survive one day beyond or after its birth. I will confront them
with the logic of dates, and defy them to find any proof except
their own unauthorized, unauthenticated, and fictitious chro-
nology, that a Christian was ever known in any country by that
name prior to the time of Tacitus, 104 A. D., who is the first
of the three hundred writers of that era that makes any men-
tion of Christianity, Christ, or a Christian. This was long after
Josephus’ time, which accounts most satisfactorily for his
omitting any allusion to Christ or Christianity. That religion
had not yet dropped the name of Essenism and adopted that of
Christianity.

Now, hard indeed must distorted reason fight the ramparts
of logic and history to resist the conviction, in view of the fore-
going facts, that Christianity is simply an outcropping of Esse-
nism, either direct or through Budhism. And even if it were
possible to prove that the two religions never became welded
together, yet it is not possible to disprove the striking iden-
tity of their doctrines, and the spirit of their precepts, and
the practical lives of their disciples. And this identity, coupled
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION 221

with the fact that Essenism is the older system, is of itself most
superlatively fatal to all pretension or claim to originality for
the doctrines of the Christian faith. It is a matter of no impor-
tance whether Christianity was originally known by another
name, so long as it can be shown that its doctrines had all been
preached and proclaimed to the world centuries prior to the
date assigned for its origin. And this is proved by the long
list of parallelisms presented in the incipient pages of this chap-
ter. And this proof explodes the pretensions of Christianity
to an “ original divine revelation,” and brings it down to a level
with pagan orientalism. And the fact that it sprang up in a
country where its doctrine had long been taught by pagans
and orientalists, must produce the conviction, deep and indeli-
ble, in all unbiased minds, that orientalism was the mother and
heathenism the father of the Christian religion, even in the
absence of any other proof. In fact, no other proof can be
needed. And what are the arguments, it may be well here to
inquire, with which orthodox Christians attempt to meet, com-
bat, and vanquish the overwhelming mass of historical facts
and historical testimonies we have presented in preceding
pages, tending to prove and demonstrate the oriental origin of
their religion and its identity with Essenism? Their whole
argument is comprised in the naked postulate of the Rev. Mr.
Prideaux, D. D., that “ the Essenes did not believe in the resur-
rection of the physical body (but believed in a spiritual resur-
rection), and omit from their creed the Trinity and Incarna-
tion doctrine, and therefore they could not have been the
originators of the Christian religion; ” but this argument is as
easily demolished as a cobweb, as the following facts will
prove: —

1.   We have but a fragment of the Essenian religion, — but
one end of their creed, — mere scraps furnished us by Philo,
Josephus, and Pliny. We have none of their sacred books
apart from the Christian New Testament.

2.   They had secret books, as we have shown, in which doc-
trines were taught which they regarded as too sacred to be
thrown before the public, as “ pearls before swine.” And no
doctrines were regarded as more sacred or secret in that age
 222

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

than the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation. Christ’s
injunction, “See thou tell no man,” was probably their motto,
which prevented the publicity of a portion of their doctrines.
And as their sacred books, containing their doctrines, perished
with the extinction of the sect (except those now found in the
Christian New Testament), a full knowledge of their doctrines,
therefore, never reached the public mind. All religious sects
had secret doctrines, designated as “ Mysteries of Godliness,”
including the principal Jewish sects and the earliest Christian
churches. It is, therefore, highly probable that if we were in
possession of all their sacred books, we would be in possession
of the proof that they believed and taught in their monasteries
the doctrines above named. But we are not left to mere infer-
ence that the Essenes’ creed did include the doctrines of the
Trinity and the Divine Incarnation. We find skeletons of
these doctrines scattered along the line of their history. Philo
himself, an Essene teacher, most distinctly teaches the doctrine
of “the Incarnation of the Divine Word or Logos.” And “Son
of God,” “ Mediator,” “ Intercessor,” and “ Messiah,” were
familiar words with him. The idea often reappears in his
writings, that the “Word could become flesh;” that the Son
of God could appear as a personality, and return to the bosom
of the Father. Moreover, one writer informs us that the
Essenes celebrated the birth and death of a Divine Savior as a
“Mystery of Godliness.” And they claimed in their earlier
history to be “forerunners of the Messiah” — a claim which
would soon bring a Messiah before the world, that is, lead
them to deify and worship some great man as “ The Messiah
As for the doctrine of the Trinity, we have the authority of
Eusebius that they taught this doctrine too. So that it is not
true that they did not recognize these two prime articles of
the Christian faith, the Incarnation and Trinity doctrines. Some
modern Christians assert that the Essenes not only omitted to
teach these doctrines, but that, on the other hand, they taught
other doctrines not taught in the Christian New Testament.
This is not improbable. For the Christian religion has been
characterized by frequent changes in its doctrines in every
stage of its practical history, as was also the Jewish religion
 CHRISTIANITY'S ANCIENT DERIVATION 225

which preceded it, and from which it emanated. Judaism is a
perpetual series of changes. It changed even the name of
its God from Elohim to Jehovah. Its leader and founder
Abram was changed to Abraham, and his grandson and suc-
cessor from Jacob to Israel. And we have the works of many
Christian writers in our possession who prove by their own
bible that the Jews made many changes in their religious polity
and religious doctrines. This is more especially observable
when they came in contact with nations teaching a different re-
ligion. Their whole history shows they were prone to imitate,
and borrow, and always did borrow on such occasions, and
engraft the new doctrines thus obtained into their own creed,
and thus effected important changes in their religion. We
have the authority of Dr. Campbell for saying the Jews never
believed and taught the doctrine of future punishment (and
other doctrines that might be named) till after they were
brought in contact with Persians in Babylon who had long
taught these doctrines. (See Dissertation VI.) And Dr. En-
field declares their theological opinions underwent thorough
changes during this period of seventy years’ captivity. Even
their national title was changed at one period from Israelites to
Jews. With all these changes of names, titles, and doctrines
in view, it is not incredible that one of the Jewish sects should
change its name from Essenes to Christians, and with this
change modify some of the doctrines. And more especially
as their title, according to Dr. Ginsburg, had been changed
before from Chassidim to Essenes. And PLilo at one period
calls them Therapeuts, while Eusebius say^j the Therapeuts
were Christians. Put this and that together, and the question
is forever settled.

Now, with all this overwhelming mass of historical evidence
before us, “ piled mountain high,3’ tending to prove the truth of
the proposition that Christianity is the offspring and out-
growth of ancient Judean Essenism, we feel certain that
no sophistry, from interested charlatans or stereotyped creed
worshipers, can stave off or obliterate the conviction in un-
prejudiced minds, that the proposition is most amply proven.
 224

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

We will now collate Christianity with another ancient re«
ligious system, which we are certain it will not be disputed,
after the comparison is critically examined, contains the sum
total of the doctrines and teachings of Christianity in all their
details.
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

225

CHAPTER XXXII.

THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY-SIX STRIKING
ANALOGIES BETWEEN CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

I.   Their Miraculous History and Leading Principles.

1.   The advent of each Savior was miraculously foretold by
prophets.

2.   The fallen and degenerate condition of the human race is
taught in the religion of each.

3.   A plan of restoration or salvation is provided for in each
case.

4.   A divine Savior is considered necessary in both cases.

5.   The necessity of atoning for sin is taught in the religion
of each.

6.   A God, or Son of God, is selected as the victim for the
atoning sacrifice in each case.

7.   This God is sent down from heaven in each case in the
form of a man.

8.   The God or Savior in each case is the second person of
the Trinity.

9.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was held to be really God in-
carnate.

10.   The mission of each Savior is the same.

11.   There is a resemblance in name — Chrishna and Christ.

12.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was incarnated and born of a
woman.

13.   The mother in each case was a holy virgin.

14.   The same peculiarities of a miraculous conception and
birth are related of each.

15.   Each had an adopted earthly father.

15
 226

[Prometheus]

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

16.   The father of Chrishna, as well as that of Christ, was a
carpenter.

17.   God is claimed as the real father in both cases.

18.   A Spirit or Ghost was the author of the conception of
each.

19.   There was rejoicing on earth when each Savior was born.

20.   There was also joy in heaven at the birth and advent of
each.

21.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was of royal descent.

22.   Their mothers were both reputedly pious women.

23.   The names of two mothers are somewhat similar — Mary
and Maia.

24.   Each has a special female friend — Elizabeth in the one
case, and the wife of Nanda in the other.

25.   Neither Savior was born in a house, but both in obscure
situations.

26.   Both were born on the 25th of December.

27.   Both, at birth, were visited by wise men and shepherds.

28.   The visitors conducted by a star in each case.

29.   The rite of purification observed by the mothers of each.

30.   An angel warning of impending danger in each case.

31.   The incumbent ruler was hostile in each case.

32.   A bloody decree in each case for the destruction of the
infant Savior.

33.   A flight of the parents takes place in both cases.

34.   The parents of one sojourned at Muturea, the other at
Mathura.

35.   Each Savior had a forerunner—John the Baptist in one
case, Bali Rama in the other.

36.   Both were preternaturally smart in childhood.

37.   Each disputed with and vanquished learned opponents.

38.   Both became objects of search by their parents.

39.   And both occasioned anxiety, if not sorrow, to their
parents.

40.   The mother of each had other children — that is, chil-
dren begotten by man as well as God.

41.   Both Saviors retired to, and spent considerable time in,
\he wilderness.
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

227

42.   The religious rite of “fasting” was practiced by each
Savior.

43.   Each delivered a noteworthy sermon, or series of moral
lessons.

44.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was called and considered
God.

45.   Each was both God and the Son of God (so regarded).

46.   “ Savior ” was one of the divine titles of each.

47.   Each was designated “ the Savior of man,” “ the Savior
of the world,” &c.

48.   Both expressed a desire to “ save all.”

49.   Each sustained the character of a Messiah.

50.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was a Redeemer.

51.   Each Savior was called “ Shepherd.”

52.   Both were believed to be the Creator of the world.

53.   Each is sometimes spoken of, also, as only an agent in
the creation.

54.   Both were the “ Light and Life ” of men.

55.   Each “ brought life and immortality to light.”

56.   Both are represented as “ the seed of the woman bruis-
ing the serpent’s head ”

57.   Was Christ a “ Dispenser of grace,” so was the Hindoo
Savior.

58.   One was “the lion of the tribe of Judah,” the other “the
lion of the tribe of Sakia.”

59.   Christ was “the Beginning and the End,” Chrishna “ the
Beginning, the Middle, and the End.”

60.   Both proclaimed, “ I am the Resurrection.”

61.   Each was “ the way to the Father.”

62.   Both represented emblematically “the Sun of Righteous-
ness.”

63.   Each is figuratively represented as being “all in all.”

64.   Both speak of having existed prior to human birth.

65.   A dual existence — an existence in both heaven and earth
at once — is claimed by or for both.

66.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was “ without sin.”

67.   Both assumed the divine prerogative of forgiving sins.

68.   The mission of each was to deliver from sin.
 228

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

69.   Both came to destroy the devil and his works.

70.   The doctrine of the “ atonement ” is practically realized
in each case.

71.   Each made a voluntary offering for the sins of the world.

72.   Both were human as well as divine.

78.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was worshiped as God abso-
lute.

74.   Each was regarded as “the Lord from heaven.”

75.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, had applied to him all the
attributes of God.

76.   Was Christ omniscient, so was Chrishna.

77.   Was one omnipotent, so was the other (so believed).

78.   And both are represented as being omnipresent.

79.   Each was believed to be divinely perfect.

80.   Was one “ Lord of lords,” so was the other.

81.   Each embodied the “power and wisdom of God.”

82.   All power was committed unto each (so claimed).

83.   Chrishna performed many miracles as well as Christ.

84.   One of the first miracles of each was the cure of a leper.

85.   Each healed “ all manner of diseases.”

86.   The work of casting out devils constitutes a part of the
mission of each.

87.   Each practically proved his power to raise the dead.

88.   A miracle appertaining to a tree is related of both.

89.   Both could read the thoughts of the people.

90.   The power to detect and eject evil spirits was claimed
by both.

91.   Both had the keys or control of death.

92.   Each led an extraordinary life.

93.   Each had a character for supernatural greatness.

94.   Both possessed or claimed a oneness with the Father.

95.   A “ oneness with his Lord and Master” is claimed, also,
for the disciples of each.

96.   A strong reciprocal affection between Master and disciple
*n each case.

97.   Each offers to shoulder the burdens of his disciples.

98.   A portion of the life of each was spent in preaching.

99.   Both made converts by their miracles and preaching.
 CHRIST AND CHRISTINA.

229

100.   A numerous retinue of believers springs up in each case.

101.   Both had commissioned apostles to proclaim their reli-
gion.

102.   Each was an innovator upon the antecedent religion.

103.   A beautiful reform in religion was inaugurated by each
Savior.

104.   Each opposed the existing popular priesthood.

105.   Both abolished the law of lineal descent in the ancient
priesthood.

106.   Each was an object of conspiracy by his enemies.

107.   Humility and external poverty distinguished the life of
each.

108.   Each denounced riches and rich men, and loathed and
detested wealth.

109.   Both had a character for meekness.

110.   Chastity or unmarried life was a distinguishing charac-
teristic of each.

111.   Mercy was a noteworthy characteristic of each.

112.   Both were censured for associating with sinners.

113.   Each was a special friend to the poor.

114.   A poor widow woman receives marked attention by
each.

115.   Each encounters a gentile woman at a well.

116.   Both submitted unresistingly to injuries and insults.

117.   General practical philanthropy and impartiality marks
the life of each Savior.

118.   Each took more pleasure in repentant sinners than in
virtuous saints.

119.   Both practically disclosed God’s attempt to reconcile
the world to himself.

120.   The closing incidents in the earth-life of each were
strikingly similar:

121.   A memorable last supper marked the closing career of
both.

122.   Both were put to death by “ wicked hands.”

123.   Chrishna, as well as Christ, was crucified.

124.   Darkness attended the crucifixion of each.

125.   Both were crucified between two thieves.
 230

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

126.   Each is reported to have forgiven his enemies.

127.   The age of each at death corresponds (being between
thirty and thirty-six years).

128.   Each, after giving up the ghost, descends into hell.

129.   The resurrection from the dead is a marked period in
the history of each.

180.   Each ascends to heaven after his resurrection.

131.   Many people are reported to have witnessed the ascen
sion in each case.

132.   Each is reported as having both descended and ascended.

133.   The head of each, while living on earth, was anointed
with oil.

II.   Doctrines.

134.   There is a similarity in the doctrines of their respective
religions.

135.   The same doctrines are propagated by the disciples of
each.

136.   The doctrine of future rewards and punishments is a
part of each system.

137.   Analogous views of heaven are found in each system.

138.   A third heaven is spoken of in each system.

139.   All sin must be punished according to the bible teach-
ings of each.

140.   Each has a hell provided for the wicked.

141.   Both teach a hell of darkness and a hell of light.

142.   An immortal worm finds employment in the hell of each
system (“the worm that dieth not”).

143.   The arch-demon of the under world uses brimstone for
fuel in one case, and oil in the other.

144.   The motive for future punishment is in both cases the
same.

145.   Each has a purgatory or sort of half-way house.

146.   Special divine judgments on nations are taught by each.

147.   A great and final day of judgment is taught by each.

148.   A general resurrection also is taught in each religion.

149.   That there is a “ Judge of the dead ” is a doctrine o/
?ach.
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

231

150.   Two witnesses are to report on human actions in tho
final assizes.

151.   We are furnished in each case with the dimension of
heaven or “ the holy city.”

152.   Man is enjoined to strive against temptation to sin by
each.

153.   And repentance for sin is a doctrine taught by the bible
of each.

154.   Each has a prepared city for a paradise.

155.   The bibles of both teach that we have no continuing
city here.

156.   Souls are carried to heaven by angels, as in the instance
of Lazarus, in each case.

157.   A belief in angels or spirits is a tenet of each religion.

158.   The doctrine of fallen or evil angels is found in both
systems.

159.   Obsession by wicked or evil spirits is taught by each.

160.   Both teach that sickness or disease is caused by evil
spirits.

161.   Each has a king-devil or arch-demon with a posse of
subalterns or evil spirits.

162.   Both bibles record the story of a “ hellaballoo ” or war
in heaven.

163.   Both teach that an evil man can neither do nor speak a
good thing.

164.   Both teach that sin is a disadvantage in the present life
as well as in the future.

165.   The doctrine of free will or free agency is taught by
each.

166.   Predestination seems to be inferentially taught by
each.

167.   In each case man is a prize in a lottery, with God and
the devil for ticket-holders.

168.   Both make the devil (or devils) a scape-goat for sin.

169.   Both teach the devil or evil spirits as the primary cause
of all evil.

170.   The destiny of both body and soul is pointed out by
each.
 232

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

171.   The true believers are known as “saints” under both
systems.

172.   Saints with u white robes ” are spoken of by each.

173.   Both specify “ the Word or Logos ” as God.

174.   Wisdom, too, is personified as God by the holy Scrip-
tures of each.

175.   Both teach that God may be known by his works.

176.   The doctrine of one supreme God is taught in each bible.

177.   Light and truth are important words in the religious
nomenclature of each.

178.   Both profess a high veneration for truth.

179.   “ Where the treasure is, there is the heart also,” is taught
by each.

180.   “ Seek and ye shall find” is a condition prescribed by
each.

181.   Religious toleration is a virtue professed by both.

182.   All nations are professedly based on an equality by each.

183.   Both, however, enjoin partiality to “the household of
faith.”

184.   The doors of salvation are thrown open to high and low,
rich and poor, by each.

185.   Each professes to have “the only true and saving faith.”

186.   There is a mystery in the mission of each Savior.

187.   “ Rama ” is a well-known word in the bible of each.

188.   “The understanding of the wise'’ is a phrase in each.

189.   Both speak figuratively of “ the blind leading the blind.”

190.   “A new heaven and a new earth” is spoken of by each.

191.   The doctrine of a Trinity in the Godhead is taught by
each.

192.   Baptism by water is a tenet and ordinance of each.

193.   “ Living water ” is a metaphor found in each.

194.   Baptism by fire seems also to be recognized by each.

195.   Fasting is emphatically enjoined by each.

196.   Sacrifices are of secondary importance in each system,
and are partially or wholly abandoned by each.

197.   The higher law is paramount to ceremonies in each
religion.

198.   The bible of each religion literally condemns idolatry.
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

233

199.   Botli also make concessions to idolatry

200.   Polygamy is not literally encouraged nor openly con-
demned by either.

201.   The power to forgive sins is conferred on the disciples
of each.

202.   The doctrine of blasphemy is recognized by each.

203.   Pantheism, or the reciprocal in-being of God in nature
and nature in God, is taught by both.

III.   Bibles and Holy Scriptures.

204.   Each has a bible which is the idolized fountain of all
religious teaching.

205.   Both have an Old Testament and a New Testament^
virtually.

206.   The New Testament inaugurates a new and reform sys-
tem of religion in each case.

207.   /‘All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” is the
faith of the disciples of each.

208.   Each system claimed to have its inspired men to write
its scriptures.

209.   Both hold a spiritual qualification necessary to under-
stand their bibles.

210.   It is a sin to become “ wise beyond what is written ” in
their respective bibles.

211.   Both recommend knowing the Scriptures in youth.

212.   Alteration of their respective bibles is divinely inter-
dicted.

213.   The bible is an infallible rule of faith and practice in both
cases.

214.   “ All Scripture is profitable for doctrine ” is the faith of
each.

215.   Both explain away the errors of their bibles.

IY. Spirituality of the two Religions.

216.   The religion of Chrishna is pre-eminently spiritual ao
less than Christ’s.
 234

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

217.   Both teach that “to be carnally minded is death.”

218.   External rites are practically dispensed with in each
religion.

219.   The spiritual law written on the heart is recognized by
each.

220.   “ God is within you,” Budhists teach as well as Chris-
tians.

221.   Both recognize an invisible spiritual Savior.

222.   “God dwells in the heart,” say Hindoos as well as
Christians.

223.   An inward recognition of the divine law is amply seen
in both.

224.   Both confess allegiance to an inward monitor.

225.   The doctrine of inspiration and internal illumination is
found in both.

226.   The indwelling Comforter is believed in by both.

227.   Both also teach that religion is an inward work.

228.   Both speak of being born again —i. e., the second birth.

229.   A spiritual body is also believed in by both.

230.   “ Spiritual things are incomprehensible to the natural
man,” say each.

231.   God’s spiritually sustaining power Budhists also ac-
knowledge.

232.   Both give a spiritual interpretation to their bibles.

233.   Each has a new and more interior law superseding the
old law.

234.   The spiritual cross — self-denial or asceticism — is a
prominent feature of each religion.

235.   The duty of renouncing and abandoning the external
world is solemnly enjoined by each.

236.   Budhists renounce the world more practically than
Christians.

237.   Withdrawal or seclusion from society is recommended
by each.

238.   Bodily suffering as a benefit to the soul is encouraged
by each.

239.   Voluntary suffering for righteousness’ sake is a virtue
with each.
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

235

[Prometheus]

240.   The cross is a religious emblem in each system.

241.   Both glory in “ the religion of the cross” as better than
a religion without suffering.

242.   Hence both teach “ the greater the cross the greater the
crown.”

243.   Earthly pleasures are regarded as evil by both.

244.   Contempt for the body as an enemy to the soul is visi-
ble in both.

245.   Retirement for religious contemplation is a duty with
each.

246.   The forsaking of relations is also enjoined by each.

247.   Spiritual relationship is superior to external relationship
with both.

248.   “ To die is great gain ” we are taught by each.

249.   A subjugation of the passions is a religious duty with
each.

250.   The road to heaven is a narrow one with each.

251.   The same state of religious perfection is aspired to by
the disciples of each.

Y. The Doctrine of Faith or Belief.

252.   Faith is an all-important element and doctrine with
each.

253.   Heresy, or want of faith, is a sin of great magnitude
with both.

254.   Faith in the Savior is a condition to salvation by
both.

255.   Confessing the Savior is also required in both cases.

256.   “Believe or be damned ” is the condition, or profess to
believe the terrible sine qua non to salvation by each.

257.   Skeptics or unbelievers are with both the chief of sin-
ners.

258.   “ Faith can remove mountains,” either with a Budhist
or a Christian.

259.   Both contrast faith with works.

260.   Faith without works is dead — so teach both Budhists
and Christians.
 236

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

VI.   The Doctrine and Practice of Prayer.

261.   Prayer is an important rite in each religion.

262.   Private or secret prayer is recommended by both.

263.   Each has also a formula of prayer.

264.   “ Pray without ceasing is a Budhist as well as a Chris-
tian injunction.

265.   Praying to their respective Saviors in sickness and in
health is a custom with both.

266.   The custom of praying for the dead is recognized in each
system.

VII.   Treatment of Enemies.

267.   It is a Hindoo as well as a Christian injunction to treat
enemies kindly.

268.   Passive submission to injuries and abuse is enjoined by
both.

269.   The holy Scriptures of both require us to pray for en-
emies, and feed them.

270.   And even love to enemies is a part of the spirit of each
religion.

VIII.   The Millennium.

271.   Hindoos, like Christians, prophesy of a great millen-
nial era.

272.   There is a remarkable similarity in their notions with
respect to it.

273.   Both anticipate a second advent or new Savior on the
occasion.

274.   The destruction of the world also is to take place in
both cases.

275.   And an entire renovation and a new order of things are
to be established in each case.

IX.   Miracles.

276.   There is almost a constant display of miraculous powef
in each system.
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.   237

277.   The disciples of both are professedly endowed with this
power.

278.   Miraculous cures of the lame, the 'Wind, and the sick are
reported in both cases.

279.   Miracles of handling poisonous reptiles with impunity
are reported by both.

280.   Swallowing deadly poison is enjoined by Christians and
practiced by Hindoos.

281.   Many cases of the miraculous ejection of devils are re-
ported by both.

282.   The miracle of thought-reading is displayed by both.

283.   The saints in both cases are reported as raising the dead.

X.   Precepts.

284.   “The kingdom of heaven” was to be sought first of all
things in each case.

285.   Love to God is a paramount obligation under each sys-
tem.

286.   And the worship of God is an essential requisition in
each religious polity.

287.   “ Cease to do evil and learn to do well ” is virtually en-
joined by each.

288.   An inward knowledge of God is taught as essential by
both systems.

289.   A reliance on works is discouraged by both.

290.   Purity of heart is inculcated by Hindoos as well as
Christians.

291.   Speak and think evil of no man is a gospel injunction
of each.

292.   A love of all beings is more prominently the spirit of
Budhism than that of Christianity.

293.   The practice of strict godly virtue is enjoined by both.

294.   Moderation and temperance are recommended by both.

295.   Patience is a virtue in each religion.

296.   The duty of controlling our thoughts is taught by
each.

297.   Charity has a high appreciation by each.
 238

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

298.   Both make the poor special objects of attention.

299.   The practice of hospitality is recommended by each.

300.   Humility is a duty and a virtue under both systems.

301.   Mirthfulness or light conversation is forbidden by each,

302.   Purity of life is a duty with Hindoos as well as Chris-
tians.

303.   Chasteness in conversation is inculcated by both.

304.   “Respect to persons” is a sin in the moral polity of
both.

305.   Alms-giving is religiously enjoined by the holy Scrip-
tures of both.

306.   Both teach that “ it is better to give than to receive.”

307.   Loyalty to rulers is a moral requisition of each system

308.   Honor to father and mother is esteemed a great virtue
by both.

309.   The correct training of children is with each a scrip-
tural duty.

310.   “ Look not upon a woman ” is more than hinted by
each.

311.   The reading of the holy Scriptures is enjoined by both.

312.   Lying or falsehood is with each a sin of great magni-
tude.

313.   Swearing is discountenanced by both religions.

314.   Theft or stealing is specially condemned by both.

315.   Both deprecate and condemn the practice of war.

316.   Both discountenance fighting.

317.   Neither of them professes to believe in slavery.

318.   Drunkenness and the use of wine are more specifically
condemned by the Hindoo religion.

319.   Adultery and fornication are heinous sins in the eyes
of both.

320.   Both condemn covetousness as a great sin.

321.   Budhists more practically condemn anger than Chris-
tians do.

XI.   Miscellaneous Analogies.

322.   Both have their apocryphal as well as their canonical
Scriptures.
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

239

323.   Stories are found in the bible of each which would be
rejected if found elsewhere.

324.   Both make their bible a finality in matters of faith.

325.   Both have had their councils and commentaries to
reveal their bibles over again.

326.   Numerous schisms, divisions, sects, and creeds have
sprung up in each.

327.   Various religious reforms have sprung up under each.

328.   Conversion from one religious sect to another is common
to both.

329.   Both religions have been troubled with numerous skep-
tics or infidels.

330.   Both have often resorted to new interpretations for
their bibles to suit the times.

331.   The unconverted are stigmatized by each.

332.   “Knock and it shall be opened” is the invitation of
each.

333.   Public confession of sins in class-meetings is known to
each.

334.   Death-bed repentance often witnessed under both reli-
gious systems.

335.   A belief in haunted houses incident to the religious
countries of both.

336.   A superior respect for women claimed by each.

337.   An idolatrous veneration for religious ancestors by each.

338.   Both sustain a numerous horde of expensive priests.

339.   A divine call or illumination to preach claimed by
each.

340.   Religious martyrdom the glory of each.

341.   Both have encountered “perils by sea and land” for
their religion.

342.   He who loseth his life (for his religion) shall find it, say
both.

343.   Both in ancient times suffered much persecution.

344.   The disciples of both have suffered death without flinch-
ing from the faith.

345.   Each sent numerous missionaries abroad to pieach and
convert.
 240

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

346.   And, finally, each cherished the hope of converting the
world to their religion.

The author has in his possession historical quotations to prove
the truth of each one of the above parallels. He has all the
historical facts on which they were constructed found in and
drawn from the sacred books of the Hindoo religion and the
works of Christian writers descriptive of their religion. But
they would swell the present volume to unwieldy dimensions,
and far beyond its proper and prescribed limits, to present them
here; they are therefore reserved for the second volume, and
may be published in pamphlet form also.

In proof of the correctness of the foregoing comparative
analogies, we will now summon the testimony of various au-
thors setting forth the historical character of the Hindoo God
Chrishna, and the essential nature of his religion, so far as it
approximates in its doctrines and moral teachings to the Chris-
tian religion. We will first hear from Colonel Wiseman, for ten
years a Christian missionary in India.

“ There is one Indian (Hindoo) legend of considerable im-
portance,” says this writer. . . . “ This is the story of Chrishna,
the Indian Apollo. In native legends he is represented as an
Avatar, or incarnation of the Divinity. At his birth, choirs of
Devitas (angels) sung hymns of praise, while shepherds sur-
rounded his cradle. It was necessary to conceal his birth from
the tyrant ruler, Cansa, to whom it had been foretold that the
infant Savior should destroy him. The child escaped with his
parents beyond the coast of Lamouna. For a time he lived in
obscurity, and then commenced a public life distinguished for
prowess and beneficence. He washed the feet of the Brahmins,
and preached the most excellent doctrines; but at length the
power of his enemies prevailed. . . . Before dying, he foretold
the miseries which would take place in the Cali-yuga, or wicked
age (Dark Age) of the world.”

“ Chrishna (says another writer) taught his followers that
they alone were the true believers of the saving faith; throwing
down the barriers of caste, and elevating the dogmas of their
faith above the sacerdotal class, he admitted every one who
 CHRIST AND CIIRISHNA.

241

felt an inward desire to the ministry to the preaching of their
religion. A system thus associating itself with the habits, feel-
ings, and personal advantages of its disciples could not fail
to make rapid progress.” (Upham’s History. Doctrines of
Budhism.)

“Budhism inculcates benevolence, tenderness, forgiveness of
injuries, and love of enemies; and forbids sensuality, love of
pleasure, and attachment to worldly objects.” (Judson.)

“ At the moment of his (Chrishna’s) conception a God left
heaven to enter the womb of his mother (a virgin). Imme-
diately after his birth he was recognized as a divine personage,
and it was predicted that he would surpass all previous divine
incarnations in holiness. Every one adored him, saluting him
as ‘ the God of Gods.’ When twenty years of age he went
into a desert, and lived there in the austerest retirement, pov-
erty, simplicity, and virtue, spending his whole time in religious
cohtemplation. He was tempted in various ways, but his self-
denial resisted all the seductive approaches of sin. He declared,
‘ Religion is my essence.’ He experienced a lively opposition
from the priests attached to the ancient creeds (as Christ sub-
sequently did). But he triumphed over all his enemies after
holding a discussion with them (as Christ did with the doctors
in the Temple). He revised the existing code of morals and
the social law. He reduced the main principles of morality
to four, viz.: mercy, aversion to cruelty, unbounded sympathy
for all animated beings, and the strictest adherence to the
moral law. He also gave a decalogue of commandments, viz.:
1. Not to kill. 2. Not to steal. 3. To be chaste. 4. Not to
testify falsely. 5. Not to lie. 6. Not to swear. 7. To avoid
all impure words. 8. To be disinterested. 9. Not to take re-
venge. 10. And not to be superstitious. This code of morals
was firmly established in the hearts of his followers.” (Abridged
from Hardy’s Manual of Budhism.)

“ It was prophesied in olden times that a person would arise
and redeem Hindostan from 4the yoke of bondage.’ ‘At mid-
night, when the birth of Chrishna was taking place, the clouds
emitted low music, and poured down a rain of flowers. The
celestial child was greeted with hymns by attending spirits.

16
 242

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

The room was illuminated by his light, and the countenances
of his father and mother emitted rays of glory, and they bowed
in worship.’ ‘ The people believed he was a God.’ They eager-
ly caught the words which fell from his lips, which taught his
divine mission, and they called him the ‘Holy One,’ and finally
the ‘ Living God.’ lie performed miraculous cures. At his
birth a marvelous light illumed the earth. His followers bap-
tized, and performed miraculous cures. And he, when a child,
attracted attention by his miracles. While attending the herds
with his foster-father a great serpent poisoned the river, which
caused the death of cows and shepherd-boys when they drank
of it, whom Chrishna restored to life by a look of divine power.
His life was devoted to mercy and charity. He left paradise
from pure compassion, to die for suffering sinners. He sought
to lead men to better paths and lives of virtue and rectitude.
He suffered to atone for the sins of the world; and the sinner,
through faith in him, can be saved. Christ and Chrishna both
taught the equality of man. Prayers addressed to Chrishna
were after this fashion : ‘ O thou Supreme One! thy essence is
inscrutable. Thou art all in all. The understanding of man
cannot reach thy Almighty Power. I, who know nothing, fly
to thee for protection. Show mercy unto me, and enable me
to see and know thee.’ Chrishna replies, ‘Have faith in me.
No one who worships me can perish. Address thyself to me
as the only asylum. I will deliver thee from sin. I am ani-
mated with equal benevolence toward all beings. I know
neither hatred nor partiality. Those who adore me devoutly
are in me and I in them’”—“Christ within you the hope of
glory.” (Abridged from Mr. Tuttle.)

“ If we consider that Budhism proclaimed the equality of all
men and women in the sight of God, that it denounced the
impious pretensions of the most mischievous priesthood the
world ever saw, and that it inculcated a pure system of practi-
cal morality, we must admit that the innovation was as advan-
tageous as it was extensively spread and adopted.” (Hue’s
Journey through China, chap, v.)

“ To Chrishna the Hindoos were indebted for a code of pure
and practical morality, which inculcated charity and chastity,
 CHRIST AND CHRISHNA.

243

performance of good works, abstinence from evil, and general
kindness to all living things.” (Cunningham.)

“ Budhism never confounds right and wrong, and never ex-
cuses any sin.” (Catharine Beecher.)

“ He (Chrishna) honored humanity by his virtues.” (St. Hi-
laire.)

“ It is probable that every incident in his (Chrishna’s) life is
founded in fact, which, if separated from surrounding fable,
would afford a history that would scarce have an equal in the
importance of the lessons it would teach.” (Hardy’s Manual
of Budhism.)

“ He (Chrishna) undertakes and counsels a constant struggle
against the body. In his eyes the body is the enemy of man’s
soul (as Paul thought when he spoke of ‘our vile bodies’)-
He aims to subdue the body and the burning passions which
consume it. . . . He requires humility, disregard of worldly
wealth, patience and resignation in adversity, love to enemies,
religious tolerance, horror at falsehood, avoidance of frivolous
conversation, consideration and esteem for women, sanctity of
the marriage relation, non-resistance to evil, confession of sins,
and conversion.” (St. Hilaire.)

“Budhism has been called the Christianity of the East.”
(Abel Remuset.)

[Prometheus]

“ The doctrine and practical piety of their bible (the Bagha-
vat Gita) bear a strong resemblance to those of the Holy Scrip-
tures. It has scarcely a precept or principle that is not found
in the (Christian) bible. And were the people to live up to its
principles of peace and love, oppression and injury would be
known no more within their borders. ... It has no mythology
of obscene and ferocious deities, no sanguinary or impure ob-
servances, no self-inflicting tortures, no tyrannizing priesthood,
no confounding of right and wrong by making certain iniquities
laudable in worship. In its moral code, its description of the
purity and peace of the first ages, and the shortening of man’s
life by sin, it seems to follow genuine traditions. In almost
every respect it seems to be the best religion ever invented by
man.” (Rev. H. Mai corn’s Travels in Asia.)

“ If the morality of Budhism be examined, its exhortations
 244

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

to guard the will, to curb the thoughts, to exercise kindness
toward others, to abstain from wrong to all, it propounds a very
high standard of practice.” (Upham’s Doctrines and History
of Budhism.)

“ It seeks the highest triumphants of humanity in the exer-
cise of devotion, self-contemplation, and self-denial .” (Theog-
ony of the Hindoos, by Bjornsjerma.)

“And the doctrines of Budhism are not alone in the beauty
of their sentiments and the excellence of much of their moral-
ity. 4 It is not permitted to you to return evil for evil ’ is one
of the sentiments of Socrates.” (Rev. H. S. Hardy’s Eastern
Monachism.)

“ Budhism insists on the necessity of taking the intellectual
faculties for guides in philosophical researches.” (Tiberghien.)

“ It sought to wean mankind from the pleasures and vanities
of life by pointing to the transitoriness of all human enjoyment.”
(Smith’s Mongolia.)

“ The principal characteristics of Budhism are the doctrines
of mildness and the universal brotherhood of man.” (Ibid.)

“ Life is a state of probation and misery, according to Budh-
ism.” (Upham, chap, vi.)

“ The Brahmins found fault with him (Chrishna) for receiv-
ing as disciples the outcasts of Hindoo society (as the Jews did
Christ for fellowsbiping publicans and sinners). But he (Chrish-
na) replied, 4My law is a law of mercy to all.’” (Hue’s
Voyages through China.)

“ Budhism attracted and furnished consolation for the poor
and unfortunate.” (Ibid.)

“ Budhism is a rationalistic and reform system as compared
with Brahminism. Landresse expresses his high admiration of
the heroism with which the Budhist missionaries before Christ
crossed streams and seas which had arrested armies, and trav-
ersed deserts and mountains upon which no caravans dared to
venture, and braved dangers and surmounted obstacles which
had defied the omnipotence of the emperors.” (A note on
Landresse’s Foe Foul Ft.)

44 If we addressed a Mogul or Thibetan this question, Who
 CHRIST AND CI1RISHNA.

245

is Chrishna? the reply was, instantly, ‘The Savior of men.’”
(Hue’s Journey through China.)

“ Chrishna, the incarnate Deity of the Sanscrit romance, con-
tinues to this hour the darling God of the women of India. . . .
Chrishna was the person of Vishnu (God) himself in the hu-
man form.” (Asiat. Researches, 260.)

“ Respectable natives told me that some of the missionaries
had told them that they were even now almost Christians”
(owing to the two religions being so nearly alike). (Ibid.)

“All that converting the Hindoos to Christianity does for
them is to change the object of their worship from Chrishna to
Christ.” (Robert Cheyne.)

“ Brahminism or Budhism in some of its forms is said to con-
stitute the religion of considerably more than half the human
race. It teaches the existence of one supreme, eternal, and un-
created God, called Brahma, who created the world through
Chrishna, the second member of the Trinity.” Paul says, God
created the world through Jesus Christ, the second member of
the Christian Trinity. (Eph. iii. 9.) How striking the resem-
blance !   “ The doctrine of the incarnation, the descent of the

Deity upon earth, and his manifestation in a human form for the
redemption of mankind, seems to have existed in the shape of
prophecy or fact in all ages of the world. Hindooism teaches
nine of these incarnations. Furthermore, it teaches the doc-
trine of the Trinity, the fall and redemption of man, and a
state of future rewards and punishments in a future life. . . .
This religion in chief of Asia is traceable to remote ages. The
doctrine of the Trinity is represented in the Elephantine cav-
ern, and taught in the Mahabarat, which goes back for its ori-
gin nearly two thousand years before Christ.” (New York
Sunday Despatch, 1855.)

“ In the year 3600, Chrishna descended to the earth for the
purpose of defeating the evil machinations of Chivan (the
devil), as Christ ‘ came to destroy the devil and his works.’ (See
John iii. 8.) After a fierce combat with the devil, or serpent,
he defeated him by bruising his head — he receiving, during
the contest, a wound in the heel. It [the serpent] shall bruise
 246

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.’ — Gen. iii. 15.) He
died at last between two thieves. . . . He led a pure and holy
life, and was a meek, tender, and benevolent being, and enjoined
charity, hospitality, and mercy, and forbade lying, prevarica*
lion, hypocrisy, and overreaching in dealing, and pilfering, and
theft, and violence toward any being.” (Lecture before the
Free Press Association in 1827.)

“ The birthplace of the Hindoo hero (Chrishna) is called
Mathura, which is easily changed, and by correct translation be-
comes Maturea, the place where Christ is said to have stopped,
between Nazareth and Egypt. . . . To show his humility he
washed the feet of the Brahmins (as Christ is said to have
washed the feet of the Jews — see John xiii. 14). One day a
woman came to him and anointed his hair with oil, in return
for which he healed her maladies. One of his first miracles was
that of healing a leper, like Christ (see Mark i. 4). Finally,
he was crucified, then descended to Hades. (It is said of
Christ, ‘his soul was not left in hell.’ — Acts ii. 31.) He
(Chrishna) rose from the dead and ascended to Voicontha”
(heaven). (Higgins’ Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 239.)

Now, we ask, is it any wonder, in view of the foregoing his-
torical exposition, that Eusebius should exclaim, “The religion
of Jesus Christ is neither new nor strange ” ? (Eccl. Hist. ch. iv.)
Truly did St. Augustine say, “This, in our day,is the Christian
religion, not as having been unknown in former times, but as
having recently received that name.”

Here, then, we pause to ask our good Christian reader, "Where
is your original Christianity now? or what constitutes the
revealed religion of Jesus Christ? or where is the evidence
that any new religion was revealed by him or preached by him,
seeing we have all his religion, as shown by the foregoing his-
torical citations, included in an old heathen system more than
a thousand years old when Jesus Christ was born? We find
it all here in this old oriental system of Budhism — every essen•
tial part, particle, and principle of it. We find Christianity all
here — its Alpha and Omega, its beginning and end. We find
it here in all its details, — its root, essence, and entity, — all its
“ revealed doctrines,” religious ideas, beautiful truths, senseless
 CHRIST AND CHRISTINA.

241

dogmas and oriental phantoms. Not a doctrine, principle, oi
precept of the Christian system, but that is here proclaimed ta
the world ages before “ the angels announced the birth of a
divine babe in Bethlehem.” Will you, then, persist in claiming
that “truth, life, and immortality came by Jesus Christ,” and
that “ Christ came to preach a new gospel to the world, and to
set forth a new religion never before heard amongst men ” (to
use the language of Archbishop Tillotson), when the historical
facts cited in this work demonstrate a hundred times over that
such a position is palpably erroneous ? Will you still persist,
with all those undeniable facts staring you in the face (proving
and re-proving, with overwhelming demonstration, that the
statement is untrue), in declaring that “the religion of Jesus
Christ is the only true and soul-saving religion, and all other
systems are mere straw, stubble, tradition, and superstition ” (as
asserted by a popular Christian writer), when no mathematician
ever demonstrated a scientific problem more clearly than we
have proved in these pages that all the principal systems of the
past, by no means excepting Christianity, are essentially alike
in every important particular — all their cardinal doctrines
being the same, differing only in unimportant details ?

Seeing, then, that all systems of religion have been found to
be essentially alike in spirit and in practice, the all-important
question arises here, What is the true cause assignable for this
striking resemblance ? How is it to be accounted for? Perhaps
some of our good Christian readers, unacquainted with history,
may cherish the thought that all th»e oriental systems brought
to notice are but imitations of Christianity; that they were re-
constructed out of materials obtained from that source; that
Christianity is the parent, and they the offspring. But, alas
for their long-cherished idol, those who entertain such forlorn
hopes are “sowing to the wind, and are doomed to disappoint-
ment.” With the exception of Mahomedanism alone, Christian-
ity is the youngest system in the whole catalogue. The his-
torical facts to prove this statement are voluminous. But as
it needs no proof to those who have read religious history, but
little space will be occupied with citations for this purpose.
With respect to the antiquity of the principal oriental system,
 248

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

we nee<l only quote the testimony of Sir William Jones, a de
vout Christian writer, who spent years in India, and whose
testimony will be accepted by any person acquainted with his
history. lie makes the emphatic declaration, “ That the name
of Chrishna, and the general outline of his history, were long
anterior to the birth of our Savior, and probably to the time of
Homer (900 B. C.), we know very certainly.” (Asiat. Res. vol. i.
p. 254.) No guess-work about it. “ We know very certainly.”
And being a scholar, a traveler, and a sojourner among the
Hindoos, and well versed in their history, no person ever had a
better opportunity to know than he. We will hear this re-
nowned author further. “In the Sanscrit dictionary, compiled
more than two thousand years ago, we have the whole history
of the incarnate deity (Chrishna), born of a virgin, and miracu-
lously escaping in his infancy from the reigning tyrant of his
country (Cansa). He passed a life of the most extraordinary
and incomprehensible devotion. His birth was concealed from
the tyrant Cansa, to whom it had been predicted that one born
at that time, and in that family, would destroy him; ” i. e.,
destroy his power. (Asiat. Res. vol. i. p. 278.) This writer
also states that the first Christian missionaries who entered
India were astonished to find there a religion so near like their
own, and could only account for it by supposing that the devil,
foreseeing the advent of Christ, originated a system of religion
in advance of his, and “just like it.” Stated in other words,
he got out the second edition of the gospel plan of salvation
before the first edition was published or had an existence.
Rather a smart trick this, thus to outwit God Almighty.

With respect to the vast antiquity of the Hindoo oriental
religion, which indicates it as being not only the source from
which the materials of the Christian religion were drawn, but
as being the parent of all the leading systems, with their three
thousand subordinate branches which existed at a much earlier
period than Christianity, we need only point to the deep chis-
eled sculptures and imperishable monuments enstamped on
their time-honored temples, tombs, altars, vases, columns,
pagodas, ruined towers, &c., wThich, with cotemporary inscrip-
tions, warrant us in antedating the religion of the Himma-
 CHRIST AND CIJRISIINA.

249

lelis far beyond the authentic records of any other religion
that has floated down to us on the stream of time. The numer-
ous images of their crucified Gods, Chrishna and Sakia, em-
blazoned on their old rock temples in various parts of the
country, some of which are contructed of clay porphyry, now
the very hardest species of rock, with their attendant inscrip-
tions in a language so very ancient as to be lost to the memory
of man, vie with the Sanscrit in age, the oldest deciphered
language in the world.

All these and a hundred corroboratory historical facts fix on
India as being the birthplace of the mother of all religions
now existing, or that ever had an existence, while the great
workshop in which they were subsequently remodeled was in
Alexandria in Egypt, whose theological schools furnished the
model for nearly every system now found noticed on the page
of history — Christianity of course included. So much for
the unrivaled antiquity of the Hindoo religion. Now, the more
important query arises, What relationship does ancient heathen
or Hindoo Budhism bear to Christianity ? What is the evi-
dence that the latter is an outgrowth of the former? As an
answer to this question, the reader will please note the follow-
ing facts of history : —

1.   Alexandria, the home of the world’s great conqueror, was
at one period of time the great focal center for religious specu-
lation and propagandism, the great emporium for religious dog-
mas throughout the East, and a place of resort for the disciples
of nearly every system of religious faith then existing.

2.   In this capital city, comprising about five hundred thou-
sand inhabitants, were established a voluminous library, and
vast theological schools, in which men of every religious order,
and of every phase of faith, met and exchanged religious ideas,
and borrowed new doctrines, with which they remodeled their
former systems of faith, amounting in some cases to an entire
change of their long-established creeds.

3.   In these theological schools the Jewish sect, which after-
ward became the founders of Christianity, were extensively
represented; for, let it be noted, its first disciples and found-
ers had all been Jews, probably of the Essene sect. “For a
 250

THE WORLD'S SAVIORS.

long time the Christians were but a Jewish sect,” says M.
Reuss’ “History of Christian Theology.” Alexander liadf
previous to this time (tlut is, about 330 B. C.), subjected the
whole of Western Asia to his dominions, including, of course,
“ The Holy Land ” — Judea.

4.   By this act a large portion of the Jewish nation were
transferred from their own country to Alexandria. And this
number was afterward vastly increased by Alexander’s suc-
cessor, Ptolemy Sotor, who carried off and settled in that
credal city one hundred thousand more Jews.

5.   As the result, in part, of these repeated calamities, “ the
Lord’s chosen people” were literally broken up. They lost
their law, lost their leader and lawgiver, lost their language,
lost the control of their country, the “ Promised Land? which
(they verily believed) the Lord had deeded to them in fee
simple, and ratified in the high court of heaven, and had de-
clared they should hold and possess forever. And finally they
partially lost their nationality, being literally dissolved and
broken up; and were finally almost lost to history — the ten
tribes disappearing entirely.

6.   The Jews had ever manifested a proneness for copying after
the religious customs of their heathen neighbors, and engraft-
ing their doctrines into their own creeds, as their bible history
furnishes ample proof.

7.   In Alexandria a very superior opportunity was afforded
for doing this, excelling in this respect any previous period of
their history.