traditionary history, he bore the name of _Bochica_. He was the
incarnation of the Great Father, whose sovereignty and paternal care he
emblematized.[130:5]
The inhabitants of _Nicaragua_ called their principal god Thomathoyo;
and said that he had a _son_, who came down to earth, whose name was
Theotbilahe, and that he was their general instructor.[130:6]
We find a corresponding character in the traditionary history of _Peru_.
The Sun--the god of the Peruvians--deploring their miserable condition,
sent down his son, _Manco Capac_, to instruct them in religion,
&c.[130:7]
We have also traces of a similar personage in the traditionary _Votan_
of _Guatemala_; but our accounts concerning him are more vague than in
the cases above mentioned.
We find this traditional character in countries and among tribes where
we would be least apt to suspect its existence. In _Brazil_, besides the
common belief in an age of violence, during which the world was
destroyed by water, there is a tradition of a supernatural personage
called _Zome_, whose history is similar, in some respects, to that of
Quetzalcoatle.[130:8]
The semi-civilized agricultural tribes of _Florida_ had like traditions.
The _Cherokees_, in particular, had a priest and law-giver _essentially
corresponding to Quetzalcoatle and Bochica_. He was their great prophet,
and bore the name of _Wasi_. "He told them what had been from the
beginning of the world, and what would be, and gave the people in all
things directions what to do. He appointed their feasts and fasts, and
all the ceremonies of their religion, and enjoined upon them to obey his
directions from generation to generation."[131:1]
Among the savage tribes the same notions prevailed. The _Edues_ of the
Californians taught that there was a supreme Creator, _Niparaga_, and
that his son, _Quaagagp_, came down upon the earth and instructed the
Indians in religion, &c. Finally, through hatred, the Indians killed
him; but although dead, he is incorruptible and beautiful. To him they
pay adoration, as the _mediatory power_ between earth and the Supreme
Niparaga.[131:2]
The _Iroquois_ also had a beneficent being, uniting in himself the
character of _a god and man_, who was called _Tarengawagan_. He imparted
to them the knowledge of the laws of the Great Spirit, established their
form of government, &c.[131:3]
Among the _Algonquins_, and particularly among the _Ojibways_ and other
remnants of that stock of the North-west, this intermediate great
teacher (denominated, by Mr. Schoolcraft, in his "_Notes of the
Iroquois_," "the great incarnation of the North-west") is fully
recognized. He bears the name of _Michabou_, and is represented as _the
first-born son of a great celestial Manitou_, or _Spirit, by an earthly
mother_, and is esteemed the friend and protector of the human
race.[131:4]
I think we can now say with M. Dupuis, that "the idea of a God, who came
down on earth to save mankind, is neither new nor peculiar to the
Christians," and with Cicero, the great Roman orator and philosopher,
that "brave, famous or powerful men, after death, came to be _gods_, and
they are the very ones whom we are accustomed to worship, pray to and
venerate."
Taking for granted that the synoptic Gospels are historical, there is no
proof that Jesus ever claimed to be either God, or a god; on the other
hand, it is quite the contrary.[131:5] As Viscount Amberly says: "The
best proof of this is that Jesus never, at any period of his life,
desired his followers to worship him, either as God, or as the Son of
God," in the sense in which it is now understood. Had he believed of
himself what his followers subsequently believed of him, that he was one
of the constituent persons in a divine Trinity, he must have enjoined
his Apostles both to address him in prayer themselves, and to desire
their converts to do likewise. It is quite plain that he did nothing of
the kind, and that they never supposed him to have done so.
Belief in Jesus _as the Messiah_ was taught as the first dogma of
Christianity, but adoration of Jesus _as God_ was not taught at all.
But we are not left in this matter to depend on conjectural inferences.
The words put into the mouth of Jesus are plain. Whenever occasion
arose, _he asserted his inferiority to the Father_, though, as no one
had then dreamt of his equality, it is natural that the occasions should
not have been frequent.
He made himself _inferior in knowledge_ when he said that of the day and
hour of the day of judgment no one knew, neither the angels in heaven
nor the Son; no one except the Father.[132:1]
He made himself _inferior in power_ when he said that seats on his right
hand and on his left in the kingdom of heaven were not his to
give.[132:2]
He made himself _inferior in virtue_ when he desired a certain man not
to address him as "Good Master," for there was none good but God.[132:3]
The words of his prayer at Gethsemane, "all things are possible unto
_thee_," imply that all things were _not_ possible to _him_, while its
conclusion "not what _I will_, but what _thou wilt_," indicates
submission to a superior, not the mere execution of a purpose of his
own.[132:4] Indeed, the whole prayer would have been a mockery, useless
for any purpose but the deception of his disciples, if he had himself
been identical with the Being to whom he prayed, and had merely been
giving effect by his death to their common counsels. While the cry of
agony from the cross, "_My God, my God! why hast thou forsaken
me?_"[132:5] would have been quite unmeaning if _the person forsaken_,
and _the person forsaking_, had been _one and the same_.
_Either, then, we must assume that the language of Jesus has been
misreported, or we must admit that he never for a moment pretended to be
co-equal, co-eternal or consubstantial with God._
It also follows of necessity from _both the genealogies_,[133:1] that
their compilers entertained no doubt that _Joseph_ was the father of
Jesus. Otherwise the descent of Joseph would not have been in the least
to the point. All attempts to reconcile this inconsistency with the
doctrine of the Angel-Messiah has been without avail, although the most
learned Christian divines, for many generations past, have endeavored to
do so.
So, too, of the stories of the Presentation in the Temple,[133:2] and of
the child Jesus at Jerusalem,[133:3] _Joseph is called his father_.
Jesus is repeatedly described as _the son of the carpenter_,[133:4] or
the _son of Joseph_, without the least indication that the expression is
not strictly in accordance with the fact.[133:5]
If his parents fail to understand him when he says, at twelve years old,
that he must be about his Father's business;[133:6] if he afterwards
declares that he finds no faith among his nearest relations;[133:7] if
he exalts his faithful disciples above his _unbelieving mother_ and
brothers;[133:8] above all, if Mary and her other sons put down his
prophetic enthusiasm to _insanity_;[133:9]--then the untrustworthy
nature of these stories of his birth is absolutely certain. If even a
_little_ of what they tell us had been true, then _Mary at least_ would
have believed in Jesus, and would not have failed so utterly to
understand him.[133:10]
The Gospel of Mark--which, in this respect, at least, abides most
faithfully by the old apostolic tradition--says not a word about
Bethlehem or _the miraculous birth_. The congregation of Jerusalem to
which Mary and the brothers of Jesus belonged,[133:11] and over which
the eldest of them, James, presided,[133:12] can have known nothing of
it; for the later Jewish-Christian communities, the so-called Ebionites,
who were descended from the congregation at Jerusalem, called Jesus _the
son of Joseph_. Nay, the story that the _Holy Spirit_ was the father of
Jesus, must have risen among the _Greeks_, or elsewhere, and not among
the first believers, who were Jews, for the Hebrew word for _spirit_ is
of _the feminine gender_.[134:1]
The immediate successors of the "congregation at Jerusalem"--to which
Mary, the mother of Jesus, and his brothers belonged--were, as we have
seen, the Ebionites. Eusebius, the first ecclesiastical historian (born
A. D. 264), speaking of the _Ebionites_ (_i. e._ "poor men"), tell us
that they believed Jesus to be "_a simple and common man_," born as
other men, "_of Mary and her husband_."[134:2]
The views held by the Ebionites of Jesus were, it is said, derived from
the Gospel of Matthew, _and what they learned direct from the Apostles_.
Matthew had been a hearer of Jesus, a companion of the Apostles, and had
seen and no doubt conversed with Mary. When he wrote his Gospel
everything was fresh in his mind, and there could be no object, on his
part, in writing the life of Jesus, to state falsehoods or omit
important truths in order to deceive his countrymen. If what is stated
in the _interpolated_ first two chapters, concerning the miraculous
birth of Jesus, were true, Matthew would have known of it; and, knowing
it, why should he omit it in giving an account of the life of
Jesus?[134:3]
The Ebionites, or Nazarenes, as they were previously called were
rejected by the Jews _as apostates_, and by the Egyptian and Roman
Christians _as heretics_, therefore, until they completely disappear,
their history is one of tyrannical persecution. Although some traces of
that obsolete sect may be discovered as late as the fourth century, they
insensibly melted away, either into the Roman Christian Church, or into
the Jewish Synagogue,[134:4] and with them perished the _original_
Gospel of Matthew, _the only Gospel written by an apostle_.
"Who, where masses of men are burning to burst the bonds of time and
sense, to deify and to adore, wants what seems earth-born, prosaic fact?
Woe to the man that dares to interpose it! Woe to the sect of faithful
Ebionites even, and on the very soil of Palestine, that dare to maintain
the earlier, humbler tradition! Swiftly do they become heretics,
revilers, blasphemers, though sanctioned by a James, brother of the
Lord."
Edward Gibbon, speaking of this most unfortunate sect, says:
"A laudable regard for the honor of the first proselytes has
countenanced the belief, the hope, the wish, that the
Ebionites, or at least the Nazarenes, were distinguished only
by their obstinate perseverance in the practice of the Mosaic
rites. Their churches have disappeared, _their books are
obliterated_, their obscure freedom might allow a latitude of
faith, and the softness of their infant creed would be
variously moulded by the zeal of prejudice of three hundred
years. Yet the most charitable criticism must refuse these
sectaries any knowledge of the pure and proper _divinity of
Christ_. Educated in the school of Jewish prophecy and
prejudice, they had never been taught to elevate their hope
above _a human_ and temporal Messiah. If they had courage to
hail their king when he appeared in a plebeian garb, their
grosser apprehensions were incapable of discerning their God,
_who had studiously disguised his celestial character under
the name and person of a mortal_.
"The familiar companions of Jesus of Nazareth conversed with
their friend and countryman, who, in all the actions of
rational and human life, appeared of the same species with
themselves. His progress from infancy to youth and manhood was
marked by a regular increase in stature and wisdom; and after
a painful agony of mind and body, he expired on the
cross."[135:1]
The Jewish Christians then--the congregation of Jerusalem, and their
immediate successors, the Ebionites or Nazarenes--saw in their master
nothing more than _a man_. From this, and the other facts which we have
seen in this chapter, it is evident that the man Jesus of Nazareth was
deified long after his death, just as many other men had been deified
centuries before his time, and even _after_. Until it had been settled
by a council of bishops that Jesus was not only _a God_, but "_God
himself in human form_," who appeared on earth, as did Crishna of old,
to redeem and save mankind, there were many theories concerning his
nature.
Among the early Christians there were a certain class called by the
later Christians _Heretics_. Among these may be mentioned the
"_Carpocratians_," named after one Carpocrates. They maintained that
Jesus was a _mere man_, born of Joseph and Mary, _like other men_, but
that he was good and virtuous. "Some of them have the vanity," says
_Irenæus_, "to think that they may equal, or in some respects exceed,
Jesus himself."[135:2]
These are called by the general name of _Gnostics, and comprehend almost
all the sects of the first two ages_.[135:3] They said that "all the
ancients, and even the Apostles themselves, received and taught the same
things which they held; and that the truth of the Gospel had been
preserved till the time of _Victor_, the thirteenth Bishop of Rome, but
by his successor, _Zephyrinus_, the truth had been corrupted."[135:4]
Eusebius, speaking of _Artemon_ and his followers, who denied the
divinity of Christ, says:
"They affirm that all our ancestors, yea, and the Apostles
themselves, were of the same opinion, and taught the same with
them, and that this their true doctrine (for so they call it)
was preached and embraced unto the time of Victor, the
thirteenth Bishop of Rome after Peter, and corrupted by his
successor Zephyrinus."[136:1]
There were also the "_Cerinthians_," named after one Cerinthus, who
maintained that Jesus was _not_ born of a virgin, which to them
appeared impossible, but that he was the son of Joseph and Mary, _born
altogether as other men are_; but he excelled all men in virtue,
knowledge and wisdom. At the time of his baptism, "_the Christ_" came
down upon him in the shape of a dove, and _left him_ at the time of his
crucifixion.[136:2]
Irenæus, speaking of Cerinthus and his doctrines, says:
"He represents Jesus as the son of Joseph and Mary, according
to the ordinary course of human generation, and _not_ as
having been born of a virgin. He believed nevertheless that he
was more righteous, prudent and wise than most men, and that
_the Christ_ descended upon, and entered into him, at the time
of his baptism."[136:3]
The _Docetes_ were a numerous and learned sect of Asiatic Christians who
invented the _Phantastic_ system, which was afterwards promulgated by
the Marcionites, the Manicheans, and various other sects.
They denied the truth and authenticity of the Gospels, as far as they
related to the conception of Mary, the birth of Jesus, and the thirty
years that preceded the exercise of his ministry.
Bordering upon the Jewish and Gentile world, the _Cerinthians_ labored
to reconcile the _Gnostic_ and the _Ebionite_, by confessing in the
_same Messiah_ the supernatural union of a man and a god; and this
_mystic_ doctrine was adopted, with many fanciful improvements, by many
sects. The hypothesis was this: that Jesus of Nazareth was a mere
mortal, the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary, but he was _the best_ and
wisest of the human race, selected as the worthy instrument to restore
upon earth the worship of the true and supreme Deity. When he was
baptized in the Jordan, _and not till then_, he became _more than man_.
At that time, _the Christ_, the first of the _Æons_, the Son of God
himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, _to inhabit his
mind_, and direct his actions during the allotted period of _his
ministry_. When he was delivered into the hands of the Jews, _the
Christ_ forsook him, flew back to the world of spirits, and left the
_solitary Jesus_ to suffer, to complain, and to die. This is why he
said, while hanging on the cross: "My God! My God! why hast thou
forsaken me?"[137:1]
Here, then, we see the _first_ budding out of--what was termed by the
_true_ followers of Jesus--_heretical doctrines_. The time had not yet
come to make Jesus _a god_, to claim that he had been born of a virgin.
As he _must_, however, have been different from other mortals--throughout
the period of his ministry, at least--the Christ _must_ have entered
into him at the time of his baptism, and _as mysteriously_ disappeared
when he was delivered into the hands of the Jews.
In the course of time, the seeds of the faith, which had slowly arisen
in the rocky and ungrateful soil of Judea, were transplanted, in full
maturity, to the happier climes of the _Gentiles_; and the strangers of
_Rome_ and _Alexandria, who had never beheld the manhood_, were more
ready to embrace the _divinity_ of Jesus.
The polytheist and the philosopher, the Greek and the barbarian, were
alike accustomed to receive--as we have seen in this chapter--a long
succession and infinite chain of angels, or deities, or _æons_, or
emanations, issuing from the throne of light. Nor could it seem strange
and incredible _to them_, that the first of the _æons_, the Logos, or
Word of God, of the same substance with the Father, should descend upon
earth, to deliver the human race from vice and error. The histories of
their countries, their odes, and their religions were teeming with such
ideas, as happening in the past, and they were also _looking for and
expecting an Angel-Messiah_.[137:2]
Centuries rolled by, however, before the doctrine of Christ Jesus, the
Angel-Messiah, became a settled question, an established tenet in the
Christian faith. The dignity of Christ Jesus was measured by _private
judgment_, according to the indefinite _rule of Scripture_, or
_tradition_ or _reason_. But when his pure and proper divinity had been
established _on the ruins of Arianism_, the faith of the Catholics
trembled _on the edge of a precipice_ where it was impossible to recede,
dangerous to stand, dreadful to fall; and the _manifold inconveniences
of their creed_ were aggravated by the sublime character of their
theology. They hesitated to pronounce that _God himself_, the second
person of an equal and consubstantial Trinity, was _manifested in the
flesh_,[137:3] that the Being who pervades the universe _had been
confined in the womb of Mary_; that his eternal duration had been
marked by the days, and months, and years of human existence; _that the
Almighty God had been scourged and crucified_; that his impassible
essence _had felt pain and anguish_; that his omniscience was _not
exempt from ignorance_; and that _the source of life and immortality
expired on Mount Calvary_.
These alarming consequences were affirmed with unblushing simplicity by
Apollinaris, Bishop of Laodicea, and one of the luminaries of the
Church. The son of a learned grammarian, he was skilled in all the
sciences of Greece; eloquence, erudition, and philosophy, conspicuous in
the volumes of Apollinaris, were humbly devoted to the service of
religion.
The worthy friend of Athanasius, the worthy antagonist of Julian, he
bravely wrestled with the Arians and polytheists, _and though he
affected the rigor of geometrical demonstration_, his commentaries
revealed the literal and allegorical sense of the Scriptures.
_A mystery_, which had long floated in the looseness of popular belief,
was defined by his perverse diligence in a technical form, _and he first
proclaimed the memorable words, "One incarnate nature of
Christ._"[138:1]
This was about A. D. 362, he being Bishop of Laodicea, in Syria, at that
time.[138:2]
The recent zeal against the errors of Apollinaris reduced the Catholics
to a seeming agreement with the _double-nature_ of Cerinthus. But
instead of a temporary and occasional alliance, they established, and
Christians _still embrace_, the substantial, indissoluble, and
everlasting _union of a perfect God with a perfect man_, of the second
person of the Trinity with a reasonable soul and human flesh. In the
beginning of the _fifth century_, the unity of the two natures was the
prevailing doctrine of the church.[138:3] From that time, until a
comparatively recent period, the cry was: "_May those who divide
Christ[138:4] be divided with the sword; may they be hewn in pieces,
may they be burned alive!_" These were actually the words of a
_Christian_ synod.[139:1] Is it any wonder that after this came the
_dark ages_? How appropriate is the name which has been applied to the
centuries which followed! _Dark_ indeed they were. Now and then,
however, a ray of light was seen, which gave evidence of the coming
_morn_, whose glorious light we now enjoy. But what a grand light is yet
to come from the noon-day sun, which must shed its glorious rays over
the whole earth, ere it sets.
FOOTNOTES:
[111:1] Matthew, i. 18-25.
[111:2] The Luke narrator tells the story in a different manner. His
account is more like that recorded in the KORAN, which says that Gabriel
appeared unto Mary in the shape of a perfect man, that Mary, upon seeing
him, and seeming to understand his intentions, said: "If thou fearest
God, thou wilt not approach me." Gabriel answering said: "Verily, I am
the messenger of the Lord, and am sent to give thee a holy son." (Koran,
ch. xix.)
[112:1] Instead, however, of the benevolent Jesus, the "Prince of
Peace"--as Christian writers make him out to be--the Jews were expecting
a daring and irresistible warrior and conqueror, who, armed with greater
power than Cæsar, was to come upon earth to rend the fetters in which
their hapless nation had so long groaned, to avenge them upon their
haughty oppressors, and to re-establish the kingdom of Judah.
[112:2] Vol. v. p. 294.
[112:3] Moor, in his "_Pantheon_," tells us that a learned Pandit once
observed to him that the English were a new people, and had only the
record of one Avatara, but the Hindoos were an ancient people, and had
accounts of a great many.
[112:4] This name has been spelled in many different ways, such as
Krishna, Khrishna, Krishnu, Chrisna, Cristna, Christna, &c. We have
followed Sir Wm. Jones's way of spelling it, and shall do so throughout.
[113:1] See Asiatic Researches, vol. i. pp. 259-275.
[113:2] Ibid. p. 260. We may say that, "In him dwelt the fulness of the
Godhead bodily." (Colossians, ii. 9.)
[113:3] Allen's India, p. 397.
[113:4] Indian Antiquities, vol. iii. p. 45.
[113:5] Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 270.
[113:6] Like Mary, the mother of Jesus, Devaki is called the "_Virgin
Mother_," although she, as well as Mary, is said to have had other
children.
[114:1] Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 327.
[114:2] Ibid. p. 329.
[114:3] Vishnu Purana, p. 502.
[114:4] Ibid. p. 440.
[114:5] "Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my
gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation
of the _mystery_, which was kept secret since the world began." (Romans,
xvi. 15.) "And without controversy, great is the _mystery_ of godliness:
God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels,
preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into
glory." (1 Timothy, iii. 16.)
[114:6] Vishnu Purana, p. 492, _note_ 3.
[114:7] Geeta, ch. iv.
[115:1] Bhagavat Geeta, Lecture iv. p. 52.
[115:2] Ibid., Lecture iv. p. 79.
[115:3] It is said that there have been several Buddhas (see ch. xxix).
We speak of _Gautama_. Buddha is variously pronounced and expressed
Boudh, Bod, Bot, But, Bud, Budd, Buddou, Bouttu, Bota, Budso, Pot, Pout,
Pota, Poti, and Pouti. The Siamese make the final _t_ or _d_ quiescent,
and sound the word Po; whence the Chinese still further vary it to Pho
or Fo. BUDDHA--which means _awakened_ or _enlightened_ (see Müller: Sci.
of Relig., p. 308)--is the proper way in which to spell the name. We
have adopted this throughout this work, regardless of the manner in
which the writer from which we quote spells it.
[115:4] Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 86.
[115:5] FO-PEN-HING is the life of Gautama Buddha, translated from the
Chinese Sanskrit by Prof. Samuel Beal.
[115:6] Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 25.
[115:7] Hardy: Manual of Buddhism, p. 141.
[115:8] A Christian sect called Collyridians believed that Mary was born
of a virgin, as Christ is related to have been born of her (See _note_
to the "Gospel of the Birth of Mary" [Apocryphal]; also King: The
Gnostics and their Remains, p. 91, and Gibbon's Hist. of Rome, vol. v.
p. 108, _note_). This idea has been recently adopted by the Roman
Catholic Church. They now claim that Mary was born as immaculate as her
son. (See Inman's Ancient Faiths, vol. i. p. 75, and The Lily of Israel,
pp. 6-15; also fig. 17, ch. xxxii.)
"The gradual _deification_ of Mary, though slower in its progress,
follows, in the Romish Church, a course analogous to that which the
Church of the first centuries followed, in elaborating the deity of
Jesus. With almost all the Catholic writers of our day, Mary is the
universal mediatrix; _all power has been given to her in heaven and upon
earth_. Indeed, more than one serious attempt has been already made in
the Ultramontane camp to unite Mary in some way to the _Trinity_; and if
Mariolatry lasts much longer, this will probably be accomplished in the
end." (Albert Réville.)
[116:1] Huc's Travels, vol. i. pp. 326, 327.
[116:2] Ibid. p. 327.
[116:3] Oriental Religions, p. 604.
[116:4] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah.
[116:5] Asiatic Researches, vol. ii. p. 309, and King's Gnostics, p.
167.
[116:6] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 10, 25 and 44.
[117:1] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 36, _note_. Ganesa, the Indian God of
Wisdom, is either represented as an elephant or a man with an elephant's
head. (See Moore's Hindu Pantheon, and vol. i. of Asiatic Researches.)
[117:2] Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah, p. 83.
[117:3] Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 38, 39.
[117:4] Tree and Serpent Worship, p. 131.
[118:1] Tree and Serpent Worship, p. 212.
[118:2] King: The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 168, and Hist.
Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 485. R. Spence Hardy says: "The body of the Queen
was transparent, and the child could be distinctly seen, like a priest
seated upon a throne in the act of saying bana, or like a golden image
enclosed in a vase of crystal; so that it could be known how much he
grew every succeeding day." (Hardy: Manual of Buddhism, p. 144.) The
same thing was said of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Early art represented
the infant distinctly visible in her womb. (See Inman's Ancient Pagan
and Modern Christian Symbolism, and chap. xxix. this work.)
[118:3] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 34.
[118:4] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 185. See also Anacalypsis, vol. i.
pp. 162 and 308.
[119:1] See Asiatic Res., vol. x., and Anac., vol. i. p. 662.
[119:2] Davis: Hist. China, vol. i. p. 161.
[119:3] Thornton: Hist. China, vol. i. pp. 21, 22.
[119:4] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 184.
[120:1] Semedo: Hist. China, p. 89, in Anac., vol. ii. p. 227.
[120:2] Thornton: Hist. China, vol. i. pp. 134-137. See also Chambers's
Encyclo., art. Lao-tsze.
[120:3] Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. pp. 204, 205.
[121:1] "The '_toe-print made by God_' has occasioned much speculation
of the critics. We may simply draw the conclusion that the poet meant to
have his readers believe with him that the conception of his hero was
SUPERNATURAL." (James Legge.)
[121:2] The Shih-King, Decade ii. Ode 1.
[121:3] See Thornton's Hist. China, vol. i. pp. 199, 200, and Buckley's
Cities of the Ancient World, pp. 168-170.
[121:4] "Le Dieu LA des LAMAS est né d'une _Vierge_: plusieurs princes
de l'Asie, entr'autres _l'Empereur Kienlong_, aujourd'hui regnant à la
Chine, et qui est de la race de ces Tartares Mandhuis, qui conquirent
cet empire en 1644, croit, et assure lui-même, être descendu d'une
_Vierge_." (D'Hancarville: Res. Sur l'Orig., p. 186, in Anac., vol. ii.
p. 97.)
[122:1] See Mahaffy: Proleg. to Anct. Hist., p. 416, and Bonwick's
Egyptian Belief, p. 406.
[122:2] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 157.
[122:3] Renouf: Relig. Anct. Egypt, p. 162.
[122:4] See the chapter on "The Worship of the Virgin Mother."
[122:5] "O toi vengeur, Dieu fils d'un Dieu; O toi vengeur, Horus,
manifesté par Osiris, engendré d'Isis déesee." (Champollion, p. 190.)
[122:6] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 406.
[122:7] Ibid. p. 247.
[122:8] Renouf: Religion of Ancient Egypt, p. 161.
[122:9] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. pp. 67 and 147.
[122:10] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 248.
[123:1] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 407.
[123:2] Renouf: Relig. of Anct. Egypt, p. 163.
[123:3] See Herbert Spencer's Principles of Sociology, vol. i. p. 420.
[123:4] Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i. p. 431.
[123:5] Spencer's Principles of Sociology, vol. i. p. 421.
[123:6] Malcolm: Hist. Persia, vol. i. p. 494.
[123:7] Anac. vol. i. p. 117.
[124:1] Roman Antiq., p. 124. Bell's Panth., i. 128. Dupuis, p. 258.
[124:2] Tales of Anct. Greece, p. 55.
[124:3] Greek and Italian Mytho., p. 81. Bell's Panth., i. 117. Roman
Antiq., p. 71, and Murray's Manual Mytho., p. 118.
[124:4] L'Antiquité Expliquée, vol. i. p. 229.
[124:5] Euripides: Bacchae. Quoted by Dunlap: Spirit Hist. of Man, p.
200.
[124:6] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 58. Roman Antiquities, p. 133.
[124:7] See the chapter on "The Crucifixion of Jesus," and Bell's
Pantheon, ii. 195.
[124:8] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 170. Bulfinch: The Age of Fable, p.
161.
[124:9] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 171.
[125:1] Apol. 1, ch. xxii.
[125:2] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 67. Bulfinch: The Age of Fable, p.
19.
[125:3] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 25.
[125:4] Ibid. p. 74, and Bulfinch: p. 248.
[125:5] Tacitus: Annals, iii. lxi.
[125:6] Tales of Anct. Greece, p. 4.
[125:7] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 31.
[125:8] Ibid. p. 81.
[125:9] Ibid. p. 16.
[125:10] Bell's Pantheon, ii. p. 30.
[125:11] Cox: Aryan Mythology, ii. 45.
[125:12] The Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 3.
[126:1] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 78.
[126:2] Quoted by Lardner, vol. iii. p. 157.
[126:3] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 8.
[126:4] Middleton's Letters from Rome, p. 37. In the case of _Jesus_,
one _Saul_ of Tarsus, said to be of a worthy and upright character,
declared most solemnly, that Jesus himself appeared to him while on his
way to Damascus, and again while praying in the temple at Jerusalem.
(Acts xxii.)
[126:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 345. Gibbon's Rome, vol.
i. pp. 84, 85.
[126:6] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 611.
[126:7] Æneid, lib. iv.
[126:8] Tacitus: Annals, bk. i. ch. x.
[126:9] Ibid. bk. ii, ch. lxxxii. and bk. xiii. ch. ii.
[127:1] See Middleton's Letters from Rome, pp. 37, 38.
[127:2] See Religion of the Ancient Greeks, p. 81, and Gibbon's Rome,
vol. i. pp. 84, 85.
[127:3] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 8.
[127:4] Socrates: Eccl. Hist. Lib. 3, ch. xix.
[127:5] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 17.
[127:6] See Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. i. p. 418. Bunsen: Bible
Chronology, p. 5, and The Angel-Messiah, pp. 80 and 298.
[127:7] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 113, and Draper: Religion
and Science, p. 8.
[127:8] Hardy: Manual Budd., p. 141. Higgins: Anac., i. 618.
[128:1] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 8. Compare Luke i. 26-35.
[128:2] Philostratus, p. 5.
[128:3] See the chapter on Miracles.
[128:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 151.
[128:5] See the chapter on Miracles.
[128:6] Bell's Pantheon, i. 27. Roman Ant., 136. Taylor's Diegesis, p.
150.
[128:7] Ibid.
[129:1] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 2, ch. xiii.
[129:2] Ibid. ch. xiii.
[129:3] See Mallet's Northern Antiquities.
[129:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 32, Kingsborough: Mexican
Antiquities, vol. vi. 166 and 175-6.
[129:5] Ibid.
[129:6] See Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 176.
[129:7] Ibid. p. 175.
[130:1] See Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 176.
[130:2] Ibid. p. 166.
[130:3] Brinton: Myths of the New World, pp. 180, 181.
[130:4] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 187.
[130:5] Ibid. p. 188.
[130:6] Ibid.
[130:7] Ibid.
[130:8] Ibid. p. 190.
[131:1] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 191.
[131:2] Ibid.
[131:3] Ibid.
[131:4] Ibid. p. 192.
[131:5] "If we seek, in the first three Gospels, to know what his
biographers thought of Jesus, we find his _true humanity_ plainly
stated, and if we possessed only the Gospel of _Mark_ and the discourses
of the Apostles in the _Acts_, the whole Christology of the New
Testament would be reduced to this: that Jesus of Nazareth was '_a
prophet mighty in deeds and in words_, made by God Christ and Lord.'"
(Albert Réville.)
[132:1] Mark, xiii. 32.
[132:2] Mark, x. 40.
[132:3] Mark, x. 18.
[132:4] Mark, xiv. 36.
[132:5] Mark, xv. 34.
[133:1] Matt. and Luke.
"The passages which appear most confirmatory of Christ's Deity, or
Divine nature, are, in the first place, the narratives of the
Incarnation and of the Miraculous Conception, as given by Matthew and
Luke. Now, the two narratives do not harmonize with each other; they
neutralize and negative the _genealogies_ on which depend so large a
portion of the proof of Jesus being the Messiah--the marvellous
statement they contain is not referred to in any subsequent portion of
the two Gospels, and is tacitly but positively negatived by several
passages--it is never mentioned in the Acts or in the Epistles, and was
evidently unknown to all the Apostles--and, finally, the tone of the
narrative, especially in Luke, is poetical and legendary, and bears a
marked similarity to the stories contained in the Apocryphal Gospels."
(W. R. Greg: The Creed of Christendom, p. 229.)
[133:2] Luke, ii. 27.
[133:3] Luke, ii. 41-48.
[133:4] Matt. xiii. 55.
[133:5] Luke, iv. 22. John, i. 46; vi. 42. Luke, iii. 23.
[133:6] Luke, ii. 50.
[133:7] Matt. xiii. 57. Mark, vi. 4.
[133:8] Matt. xii. 48-50. Mark, iii. 33-35.
[133:9] Mark, iii. 21.
[133:10] Dr. Hooykaas.
[133:11] Acts, i. 14.
[133:12] Acts, xxi. 18. Gal. ii. 19-21.
[134:1] See The Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 57.
[134:2] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 3, ch. xxiv.
[134:3] Mr. George Reber has thoroughly investigated this subject in his
"Christ of Paul," to which the reader is referred.
[134:4] See Gibbon's Rome, vol. i. pp. 515-517.
[135:1] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. pp. 488, 489.
[135:2] See Lardner's Works, vol. viii. pp. 395, 396.
[135:3] Ibid. p. 306.
[135:4] Ibid. p. 571.
[136:1] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 5, ch. xxv.
[136:2] Lardner: vol. viii. p. 404.
[136:3] Irenæus: Against Heresies, bk. i. c. xxiv.
[137:1] See Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. pp. 492-495.
[137:2] Not a _worldly Messiah_, as the Jews looked for, but an
_Angel-Messiah_, such an one as always came at the end of a _cycle_. We
shall treat of this subject anon, when we answer the question _why_
Jesus was believed to be an _Avatar_, by the Gentiles, and not by the
Jews; why, in fact, the doctrine of _Christ incarnate_ in Jesus
succeeded and prospered.
[137:3] "This strong expression might be justified by the language of
St. Paul (_God_ was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen
of angels, &c. I. Timothy, iii. 16), but we are deceived by our modern
Bibles. The word _which_ was altered to _God_ at Constantinople in the
beginning of the sixth century: the true meaning, which is visible in
the Latin and Syriac versions, still exists in the reasoning of the
Greek, as well as of the Latin fathers; and this fraud, with that of the
_three witnesses of St. John_ (I. John, v. 7), is admirably detected by
Sir Isaac Newton." (Gibbon's Rome, iv. 496, _note_.) _Dean Milman_ says:
"The weight of authority is so much against the common reading of both
these points (_i. e._, I. Tim. iii. 16, and I. John, v. 7), that they
are no longer urged by prudent controversialists." (Note in Ibid.)
[138:1] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. pp. 492-497.
[138:2] See Chambers's Encyclopædia, art. "Apollinaris."
[138:3] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. p. 498.
[138:4] That is, separate _him_ from God the Father, by saying that
_he_, Jesus of Nazareth, was _not_ really and truly God Almighty himself
in human form.
[139:1] See Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. p. 516.
CHAPTER XIII.
THE STAR OF BETHLEHEM.
Being born in a miraculous manner, as other great personages had been,
it was necessary that the miracles attending the births of these
virgin-born gods should be added to the history of Christ Jesus,
otherwise the legend would not be complete.
The first which we shall notice is the story of the _star_ which is said
to have heralded his birth, and which was designated "_his_ star." It is
related by the _Matthew_ narrator as follows:[140:1]
"When Jesus was born in Bethlehem, of Judea, in the days of
Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to
Jerusalem, saying: 'Where is he that is born King of the Jews?
for we have seen _his star_ in the east, and are come to
worship him.'"
Herod the king, having heard these things, he privately called the wise
men, and inquired of them what time the star appeared, at the same time
sending them to Bethlehem to search diligently for the young child. The
wise men, accordingly, departed and went on their way towards Bethlehem.
"The star which they saw in the east went before them, till it came _and
stood over_ where the young child was."
The general legendary character of this narrative--its similarity in
style with those contained in the apocryphal gospels--and more
especially its conformity with those _astrological notions_ which,
though prevalent in the time of the Matthew narrator, have been exploded
by the sounder scientific knowledge of our days--all unite to stamp upon
the story the impress of poetic or mythic fiction.
The fact that the writer of this story speaks not of _a star_ but of
_his star_, shows that it was the popular belief of the people among
whom he lived, that each and every person was born under a star, and
that this one which had been seen was _his star_.
All ancient nations were very superstitious in regard to the influence
of the stars upon human affairs, and this ridiculous idea has been
handed down, in some places, even to the present day. Dr. Hooykaas,
speaking on this subject, says:
"In ancient times the Jews, like other peoples, might very
well believe that there was some immediate connection between
the stars and the life of man--an idea which we still preserve
in the forms of speech that so-and-so was born under a lucky
or under an evil star. They might therefore suppose that the
birth of great men, such as Abraham, for instance, was
announced in the heavens. In our century, however, if not
before, all serious belief in astrology has ceased, and it
would be regarded as an act of the grossest superstition for
any one to have his horoscope drawn; for the course, the
appearance and the disappearance of the heavenly bodies have
been long determined with mathematical precision by
science."[141:1]
The Rev. Dr. Geikie says, in his _Life of Christ_:[141:2]
"The Jews had already, long before Christ's day, dabbled
in astrology, and the various forms of magic which became
connected with it. . . . They were much given to cast horoscopes
from the numerical value of a name. Everywhere throughout the
whole Roman Empire, Jewish magicians, dream expounders, and
sorcerers, were found.
"'The life and portion of children,' says the _Talmud_, 'hang
not on righteousness, but on _their_ star.' 'The planet of the
day has no virtue, but the planet of the hour (of nativity)
has much.' 'When the Messiah is to be revealed,' says the book
_Sohar_, 'a star will rise in the east, shining in great
brightness, and _seven_ other stars round it will fight
against it on every side.' 'A star will rise in the east,
which is the star of the Messiah, and will remain in the east
fifteen days.'"
The moment of every man's birth being supposed to determine every
circumstance in his life, it was only necessary to find out in what mode
the _celestial bodies_--supposed to be the primary wheels to the
universal machine--operated at that moment, in order to discover all
that would happen to him afterward.
The regularity of the risings and settings of the fixed stars, though it
announced the changes of the seasons and the orderly variations of
nature, could not be adapted to the capricious mutability of human
actions, fortunes, and adventures: wherefore the astrologers had
recourse to the planets, whose more complicated revolutions offered more
varied and more extended combinations. Their different returns to
certain points of the Zodiac, their relative positions and conjunctions
with each other, were supposed to influence the affairs of men; whence
daring impostors presumed to foretell, not only the destinies of
individuals, but also the rise and fall of empires, and the fate of the
world itself.[141:3]
The inhabitants of _India_ are, and have always been, very superstitious
concerning the stars. The Rev. D. O. Allen, who resided in India for
twenty-five years, and who undoubtedly became thoroughly acquainted with
the superstitions of the inhabitants, says on this subject:
"So strong are the superstitious feelings of many, concerning
the supposed influence of the stars on human affairs, that
some days are _lucky_, and others again are _unlucky_, that no
arguments or promises would induce them to deviate from the
course which these _stars_, signs, &c., indicate, as the way
of safety, prosperity, and happiness. The evils and
inconveniences of these superstitions and prejudices are among
the things that press heavily upon the people of
India."[142:1]
The _Nakshatias_--twenty-seven constellations which in Indian astronomy
separate the moon's path into twenty-seven divisions, as the signs of
the Zodiac do that of the sun into twelve--are regarded as deities who
exert a vast influence on the destiny of men, not only at the moment of
their entrance into the world, but during their whole passage through
it. These formidable constellations are consulted at births, marriages,
and on all occasions of family rejoicing, distress or calamity. No one
undertakes a journey or any important matter except on days which the
aspect of the Nakshatias renders lucky and auspicious. If any
constellation is unfavorable, it must by all means be propitiated by a
ceremony called S'anti.
The _Chinese_ were very superstitious concerning the stars. They
annually published astronomical calculations of the motions of the
planets, for every hour and minute of the year. They considered it
important to be very exact, because the hours, and even the minutes, are
lucky or unlucky, according to the aspect of the stars. Some days were
considered peculiarly fortunate for marrying, or beginning to build a
house; and the gods are better pleased with sacrifice offered at certain
hours than they are with the same ceremony performed at other
times.[142:2]
The ancient _Persians_ were also great astrologers, and held the stars
in great reverence. They believed and taught that the destinies of men
were intimately connected with their motions, and therefore it was
important to know under the influence of what star a human soul made its
advent into this world. Astrologers swarmed throughout the country, and
were consulted upon all important occasions.[142:3]
The ancient _Egyptians_ were exactly the same in this respect. According
to Champollion, the tomb of Ramses V., at Thebes, contains tables of the
constellations, and of their influence on human beings, for every hour
of every month of the year.[142:4]
The Buddhists' sacred books relate that the birth of _Buddha_ was
announced in the heavens by an _asterim_ which was seen rising on the
horizon. It is called the "_Messianic star_."[143:1]
The Fo-pen-hing says:
"The time of Bôdhisatwa's incarnation is, when the
constellation _Kwei_ is in conjunction with the Sun."[143:2]
"Wise men," known as "Holy Rishis," were informed by these celestial
signs that the Messiah was born.[143:3]
In the _Ramayana_ (one of the sacred books of the Hindoos) the horoscope
of Rama's birth is given. He is said to have been born on the 9th Tithi
of the month Caitra. _The planet Jupiter_ figured at his birth; it being
in Cancer at that time.[143:4] Rama was an incarnation of Vishnu. When
_Crishna_ was born "_his stars_" were to be seen in the heavens. They
were pointed out by one Nared, a great prophet and astrologer.[143:5]
Without going through the list, we can say that the birth of every
Indian _Avatar_ was foretold by _celestial signs_.[143:6]
The same myth is to be found in the legends of China. Among others they
relate that a star figured at the birth of _Yu_, the founder of the
first dynasty which reigned in China,[143:7] who--as we saw in the last
chapter--was of heavenly origin, having been born of a virgin. It is
also said that a star figured at the birth of _Laou-tsze_, the Chinese
sage.[143:8]
In the legends of the Jewish patriarchs and prophets, it is stated that
a _brilliant star_ shone at the time of the birth of _Moses_. It was
seen by the _Magi_ of Egypt, who immediately informed the king.[143:9]
When _Abraham_ was born "_his star_" shone in the heavens, if we may
believe the popular legends, and its brilliancy outshone all the other
stars.[143:10] Rabbinic traditions relate the following:
"Abraham was the son of Terah, general of Nimrod's army. He
was born at Ur of the Chaldees 1948 years after the Creation.
On the night of his birth, Terah's friends--among whom were
many of Nimrod's councillors and soothsayers--were feasting in
his house. On leaving, late at night, _they observed an
unusual star in the east_, it seemed to run from one quarter
of the heavens to the other, and to devour four stars which
were there. All amazed in astonishment at this wondrous
sight, 'Truly,' said they, '_this can signify nothing else but
that Terah's new-born son will become great and
powerful_.'"[144:1]
It is also related that Nimrod, in a dream, saw a star rising above the
horizon, which was very brilliant. The soothsayers being consulted in
regard to it, foretold that a child was born who would become a great
prince.[144:2]
A brilliant star, which eclipsed all the other stars, was also to be
seen at the birth of the Cæsars; in fact, as Canon Farrar remarks, "The
Greeks and Romans had _always_ considered that the births and deaths of
great men were symbolized by the appearance and disappearance of
heavenly bodies, and the same belief has continued down to comparatively
modern times."[144:3]
Tacitus, the Roman historian, speaking of the reign of the Emperor Nero,
says:
"A comet having appeared, in this juncture, the phenomenon,
according to the _popular opinion_, announced that governments
were to be changed, and kings dethroned. In the imaginations
of men, Nero was already dethroned, and who should be his
successor was the question."[144:4]
According to Moslem authorities, the birth of _Ali_--Mohammed's great
disciple, and the chief of one of the two principal sects into which
Islam is divided--was foretold by celestial signs. "A light was
distinctly visible, resembling a bright column, extending from
the earth to the firmament."[144:5] Even during the reign of the
Emperor Hadrian, a hundred years after the time assigned for the
death of Jesus, a certain Jew who gave himself out as the "_Messiah_,"
and headed the last great insurrection of his country, assumed the name
of _Bar-Cochba_--that is, "_Son of a Star_."[144:6]
This myth evidently extended to the New World, as we find that the
symbol of _Quetzalcoatle_, the virgin-born Saviour, was the "_Morning
Star_."[144:7]
We see, then, that among the ancients there seems to have been a very
general idea that the birth of a great person would be announced by a
star. The Rev. Dr. Geikie, who maintains to his utmost the truth of the
Gospel narrative, is yet constrained to admit that:
"It was, indeed, universally believed, that extraordinary
events, especially the birth and death of great men, were
heralded by appearances of stars, and still more of comets, or
by conjunctions of the heavenly bodies."[145:1]
The whole tenor of the narrative recorded by the _Matthew_ narrator is
the most complete justification of the science of _astrology_; that the
first intimation of the birth of the Son of God was given to the
worshipers of Ormuzd, who have the power of distinguishing with
certainty _his_ peculiar star; that from these _heathen_ the tidings of
his birth are received by the Jews at Jerusalem, _and therefore that the
theory must be right which connects great events in the life of men with
phenomena in the starry heavens_.
If this _divine sanction of astrology_ is contested on the ground that
this was an _exceptional_ event, in which, simply to bring the Magi to
Jerusalem, God caused the star to appear in accordance with their
superstitious science, the difficulty is only pushed one degree
backwards, for in this case God, it is asserted, wrought an event which
was perfectly certain to strengthen the belief of the Magi, of Herod, of
the Jewish priests, and of the Jews generally, in the truth of
astrology.
If, to avoid the alternative, recourse be had to the notion that the
star appeared _by chance_, or that this _chance_ or _accident_ directed
the Magi aright, is the position really improved? Is _chance_ consistent
with any notion of supernatural interposition?
We may also ask the question, why were the Magi brought to Jerusalem at
all? If they knew that the star which they saw was the star of Christ
Jesus--as the narrative states[145:2]--and were by this knowledge
conducted to Jerusalem, why did it not suffice to guide them _straight
to Bethlehem_, and thus prevent the Slaughter of the Innocents? Why did
the star desert them after its first appearance, not to be seen again
till they issued from Jerusalem? or, if it did not desert them, why did
they ask of Herod and the priests the road which they should take, when,
by the hypothesis, the star was ready to guide them?[145:3]
It is said that in the oracles of Zoroaster there is to be found a
prophecy to the effect that, _in the latter days_, a virgin would
conceive and bear a son, and that, at the time of his birth, a star
would shine at noonday. Christian divines have seen in this a prophecy
of the birth of _Christ_ Jesus, but when critically examined, it does
not stand the test. The drift of the story is this:
Ormuzd, the Lord of Light, who created the universe in _six_ periods of
time, accomplished his work by making the first man and woman, and
infusing into them the breath of life. It was not long before Ahriman,
the evil one, contrived to seduce the first parents of mankind by
persuading them to eat of the forbidden fruit. Sin and death are now in
the world; the principles of _good_ and _evil_ are now in deadly strife.
Ormuzd then reveals to mankind his _law_ through his prophet Zoroaster;
the strife between the two principles continues, however, and will
continue until the end of a destined term. During the last three
thousand years of the period Ahriman is predominant. The world now
hastens to its doom; religion and virtue are nowhere to be found;
mankind are plunged in sin and misery. _Sosiosh_ is born of a virgin,
and redeems them, subdues the Devs, awakens the dead, _and holds the
last judgment_. A comet sets the world in flames; the Genii of Light
combat against the Genii of Darkness, and cast them into Duzakh, where
Ahriman and the Devs and the souls of the wicked are thoroughly cleansed
and purified by fire. Ahriman then submits to Ormuzd; evil is absorbed
into goodness; the unrighteous, thoroughly purified, are united with the
righteous, and _a new earth and a new heaven_ arise, free from all evil,
where peace and innocence will forever dwell.
Who can fail to see that this virgin-born _Sosiosh_ was to come, _not
eighteen hundred years ago_, but, in the "_latter days_," when the world
is to be set on fire by a _comet_, the _judgment_ to take place, and the
"new heaven and new earth" is to be established? Who can fail to see
also, by a perusal of the New Testament, that the idea of a _temporal
Messiah_ (a mighty king and warrior, who should liberate and rule over
his people Israel), and the idea of an _Angel-Messiah_ (who had come to
announce that the "kingdom of heaven was at hand," that the "stars
should fall from heaven," and that all men would shortly be judged
according to their deeds), are both jumbled together in a heap?
FOOTNOTES:
[140:1] Matthew, ch. ii.
[141:1] Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 72.
[141:2] Vol. i. p. 145.
[141:3] See Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, p. 52.
[142:1] Allen's India, p. 456.
[142:2] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 221.
[142:3] Ibid. p. 261.
[142:4] See Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i. p. 456.
[143:1] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 22, 23, 38.
[143:2] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 23, 33, 35.
[143:3] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 36.
[143:4] Williams's Indian Wisdom, p. 347.
[143:5] See Hist. Hindostan, ii. 336.
[143:6] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 561. For that of Crishna,
see Vishnu Purana, book v. ch. iii.
[143:7] See Ibid. p. 618.
[143:8] Thornton: Hist. China, vol. i. p. 137.
[143:9] See Anac., i. p. 560, and Geikie's Life of Christ, i. 559.
[143:10] See Ibid., and The Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 72, and
Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."
[144:1] Baring-Gould: Legends of the Patriarchs, p. 149.
[144:2] Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."
[144:3] Farrar's Life of Christ, p. 52.
[144:4] Tacitus: Annals, bk. xiv. ch. xxii.
[144:5] Amberly's Analysis of Religious Belief, p. 227.
[144:6] Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 73.
[144:7] Brinton: Myths of the New World, pp. 180, 181, and Squire:
Serpent Symbol.
[145:1] Life of Christ, vol. i. p. 144.
[145:2] Matthew ii. 2.
[145:3] See Thomas Scott's English Life of Jesus for a full
investigation of this subject.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE SONG OF THE HEAVENLY HOST.
The story of the Song of the Heavenly Host belongs exclusively to the
_Luke_ narrator, and, in substance, is as follows:
At the time of the birth of Christ Jesus, there were shepherds abiding
in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. And the angel of
the Lord appeared among them, and the glory of the Lord shone round
about them, and the angel said: "I bring you good tidings of great joy,
which shall be to all people; for unto you is born this day in the city
of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."
And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the Heavenly Host,
praising God in song, saying: "Glory to God in the highest; and on earth
peace, good will towards men." After this the angels went _into
heaven_.[147:1]
It is recorded in the _Vishnu Purana_[147:2] that while the virgin
Devaki bore _Crishna_, "the protector of the world," in her womb, she
was eulogized by the gods, and on the day of Crishna's birth, "the
quarters of the horizon were irradiate with joy, as if moonlight was
diffused over the whole earth." "_The spirits and the nymphs of heaven
danced and sang_," and, "at _midnight_,[147:3] when the support of all
was born, _the clouds emitted low pleasing sounds, and poured down rain
of flowers_."[147:4]
Similar demonstrations of celestial delight were not wanting at the
birth of _Buddha_. All beings everywhere were full of joy. Music was to
be heard all over the land, and, as in the case of Crishna, there fell
from the skies a gentle shower of flowers and perfumes. Caressing
breezes blew, and a marvellous light was produced.[147:5]
The Fo-pen-hing relates that:
"The attending spirits, who surrounded the Virgin Maya and the
infant Saviour, singing praises of 'the Blessed One,' said:
'All joy be to you, Queen Maya, rejoice and be glad, for the
child you have borne is holy.' Then the Rishis and Devas who
dwelt on earth exclaimed with great joy: 'This day Buddha is
born for the good of men, to dispel the darkness of their
ignorance.' Then the four heavenly kings took up the strain
and said: 'Now because Bôdhisatwa is born, to give joy and
bring peace to the world, therefore is there this brightness.'
Then the gods of the thirty-three heavens took up the burden
of the strain, and the Yama Devas and the Tûsita Devas, and so
forth, through all the heavens of the Kama, Rupa, and Arupa
worlds, even up to the Akanishta heavens, all the Devas joined
in this song, and said: '_To-day Bôdhisatwa is born on earth,
to give joy and peace to men and Devas, to shed light in the
dark places, and to give sight to the blind._"[148:1]
Even the sober philosopher _Confucius_ did not enter the world, if we
may believe Chinese tradition, without premonitory symptoms of his
greatness.[148:2]
Sir John Francis Davis, speaking of Confucius, says:
"Various prodigies, _as in other instances_, were the
forerunners of the birth of this extraordinary person. On the
eve of his appearance upon earth, _celestial music_ sounded in
the ears of his mother; and when he was born, this inscription
appeared on his breast: 'The maker of a rule for setting the
World.'"[148:3]
In the case of _Osiris_, the Egyptian Saviour, at his birth, a voice was
heard proclaiming that: "The Ruler of all the Earth is born."[148:4]
In Plutarch's "_Isis_" occurs the following:
"At the birth of Osiris, there was heard a voice that the Lord
of all the Earth was coming in being; and some say that a
woman named Pamgle, as she was going to carry water to the
temple of Ammon, in the city of Thebes, heard that voice,
which commanded her to proclaim it with a loud voice, that the
great beneficent god Osiris was born."[148:5]
Wonderful demonstrations of delight also attended the birth of the
heavenly-born _Apollonius_. According to Flavius Philostratus, who wrote
the life of this remarkable man, a flock of swans surrounded his mother,
and clapping their wings, as is their custom, they sang in unison, while
the air was fanned by gentle breezes.
When the god _Apollo_ was born of the virgin Latona in the Island of
Delos, there was joy among the undying gods in Olympus, and the Earth
laughed beneath the smile of Heaven.[148:6]
At the time of the birth of "_Hercules the Saviour_," his father Zeus,
the god of gods, spake from heaven and said:
"This day shall a child be born of the race of Perseus, who
shall be the mightiest of the sons of men."[149:1]
When _Æsculapius_ was a helpless infant, and when he was about to be put
to death, a voice from the god Apollo was heard, saying:
"Slay not the child with the mother; _he is born to do great
things_; but bear him to the wise centaur Cheiron, and bid him
train the boy in all his wisdom and teach him to do brave
deeds, that men may praise his name in the generations that
shall be hereafter."[149:2]
As we stated above, the story of the Song of the Heavenly Host belongs
exclusively to the _Luke_ narrator; none of the other writers of the
synoptic Gospels know anything about it, which, if it really happened,
seems very strange.
If the reader will turn to the apocryphal Gospel called
"_Protevangelion_" (chapter xiii.), he will there see one of the reasons
why it was thought best to leave this Gospel out of the canon of the New
Testament. It relates the "Miracles at Mary's labor," similar to the
_Luke_ narrator, but in a still more wonderful form. It is probably from
this apocryphal Gospel that the Luke narrator copied.
FOOTNOTES:
[147:1] Luke, ii. 8-15.
[147:2] Translated from the original Sanscrit by H. H. Wilson, M. D., F.
R. S.
[147:3] All the virgin-born Saviours are born at _midnight or early
dawn_.
[147:4] Vishnu Purana, book v. ch. iii. p. 502.
[147:5] See Amberly's Analysis, p. 226. Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 45, 46,
47, and Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 35.
[148:1] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 43, 55, 56, and Bunsen's
Angel-Messiah, p. 35.
[148:2] See Amberly: Analysis of Religious Belief, p. 84.
[148:3] Davis: History of China, vol. ii. p. 48. See also Thornton:
Hist. China, i. 152.
[148:4] See Prichard's Egyptian Mythology, p. 56, and Kenrick's Egypt,
vol. i. p. 408.
[148:5] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 424, and Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i.
p. 408.
[148:6] See Tales of Ancient Greece, p. 4.
[149:1] See Tales of Ancient Greece, p. 55.
[149:2] Ibid. p. 45.
CHAPTER XV.
THE DIVINE CHILD RECOGNIZED AND PRESENTED WITH GIFTS.
The next in order of the wonderful events which are related to have
happened at the birth of Christ Jesus, is the recognition of the divine
child, and the presentation of gifts.
We are informed by the _Matthew_ narrator, that being guided by a star,
the _Magi_[150:1] from the east came to where the young child was.
"And when they were come into the _house_ (not _stable_) they
saw the young child, with Mary his mother, and fell down and
worshiped him. And when they had opened their treasures, they
presented unto him gifts, gold, frankincense, and
myrrh."[150:2]
The _Luke_ narrator--who seems to know nothing about the Magi from the
east--informs us that _shepherds_ came and worshiped the young child.
They were keeping their flocks by night when the angel of the Lord
appeared before them, saying:
"Behold, I bring you good tidings--for unto you is born this
day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."
After the angel had left them, they said one to another:
"Let us go unto Bethlehem and see this thing which is come to
pass, which the Lord hath made known to us. And they came with
haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a
_manger_."[150:3]
The Luke narrator evidently borrowed this story of the _shepherds_ from
the "_Gospel of the Egyptians_" (of which we shall speak in another
chapter), or from other sacred records of the biographies of Crishna or
Buddha.
It is related in the legends of _Crishna_ that the divine child was
cradled among shepherds, to whom were first made known the stupendous
feats which stamped his character with marks of the divinity. He was
recognized as the promised _Saviour_ by Nanda, a shepherd, or cowherd,
and his companions, who prostrated themselves before the heaven-born
child. After the birth of Crishna, the Indian prophet Nared, having
heard of his fame, visited his father and mother at Gokool, examined the
stars, &c., and declared him to be of celestial descent.[151:1]
Not only was Crishna adored by the shepherds and Magi, and received with
_divine honors_, but he was _also presented with gifts_. These gifts
were "sandal wood and perfumes."[151:2] (Why not "frankincense and
myrrh?")
Similar stories are related of the infant _Buddha_. He was visited, at
the time of his birth, by _wise men_, who at once recognized in the
marvellous infant all the characters of the divinity, and he had
scarcely seen the day before he was hailed god of gods.[151:3]
"'Mongst the strangers came
A grey-haired saint, Asita, one whose ears,
Long closed to earthly things, caught heavenly sounds,
And heard at prayer beneath his peepul-tree,
The Devas singing songs at Buddha's birth."
Viscount Amberly, speaking of him, says:[151:4]
"He was visited and adored by a very eminent _Rishi_, or
hermit, known as _Asita_, who predicted his future greatness,
but wept at the thought that he himself was too old to see the
day when the law of salvation would be taught by the infant
whom he had come to contemplate."
"I weep (said Asita), because I am old and stricken in years,
and shall not see all that is about to come to pass. The
Buddha Bhagavat (God Almighty Buddha) comes to the world only
after many kalpas. This bright boy will be Buddha. _For the
salvation of the world_ he will teach the law. He will succor
the old, the sick, the afflicted, the dying. He will release
those who are bound in the meshes of _natural corruption_. He
will quicken the spiritual vision of those whose eyes are
darkened by the thick darkness of ignorance. Hundreds of
thousands of millions of beings will be carried by him to the
'other shore'--will put on immortality. And I shall not see
this perfect Buddha--this is why I weep."[151:5]
He returns rejoicing, however, to his mountain-home, for his eyes had
seen the promised and expected Saviour.[151:6]
Paintings in the _cave_ of Ajunta represent Asita with the infant
Buddha in his arms.[152:1] The marvelous gifts of this child had become
known to this eminent ascetic by _supernatural signs_.[152:2]
Buddha, as well as Crishna and Jesus, was presented with "costly jewels
and precious substances."[152:3] (Why not gold and perfumes?)
_Rama_--the seventh incarnation of Vishnu for human deliverance from
evil--is also hailed by "_aged saints_"--(why not "wise _men_"?)--who
die gladly when their eyes see the long-expected one.[152:4]
_How-tseich_, who was one of those personages styled, in China,
"Tien-Tse," or "Sons of Heaven,"[152:5] and who came into the world in a
miraculous manner, was laid in a narrow lane. When his mother had
fulfilled her time:
"Her first-born son (came forth) like a lamb.
There was no bursting, no rending,
No injury, no hurt--
Showing how wonderful he would be."
When born, the sheep and oxen protected him with loving care.[152:6]
The birth of _Confucius_ (B. C. 551), like that of all the demi-gods and
saints of antiquity, is fabled to have been attended with allegorical
prodigies, amongst which was the appearance of the _Ke-lin_, a
miraculous quadruped, prophetic of happiness and virtue, which announced
that the child would be "a king without a throne or territory." _Five
celestial sages, or "wise men" entered the house at the time of the
child's birth, whilst vocal and instrumental music filed the
air._[152:7]
_Mithras_, the Persian Saviour, and mediator between God and man, was
also visited by "wise men" called Magi, at the time of his birth.[152:8]
He was presented with gifts consisting of gold, frankincense and
myrrh.'[152:9]
According to Plato, at the birth of _Socrates_ (469 B. C.) there came
three Magi from the east to worship him, bringing gifts of gold,
frankincense and myrrh.[152:10]
_Æsculapius_, the virgin-born Saviour, was protected by goatherds (why
not shepherds?), who, upon seeing the child, knew at once that he was
divine. The voice of fame soon published the birth of this miraculous
infant, upon which people flocked from all quarters to behold and
worship this heaven-born child.[153:1]
Many of the Grecian and Roman demi-gods and heroes were either fostered
by or worshiped by shepherds. Amongst these may be mentioned _Bacchus_,
who was educated among shepherds,[153:2] and _Romulus_, who was found on
the banks of the Tiber, and educated by shepherds.[153:3] _Paris_, son
of Priam, was educated among shepherds,[153:4] and _Ægisthus_ was
exposed, like Æsculapius, by his mother, found by shepherds and educated
among them.[153:5]
Viscount Amberly has well said that: "Prognostications of greatness in
infancy are, indeed, among the stock incidents in the mythical or
semi-mythical lives of eminent persons."
We have seen that the _Matthew_ narrator speaks of the infant Jesus, and
Mary, his mother, being in a "_house_"--implying that he had been born
there; and that the _Luke_ narrator speaks of the infant "lying in a
manger"--implying that he was born in a stable. We will now show that
there is still _another_ story related of the _place_ in which he was
born.
FOOTNOTES:
[150:1] "The original word here is '_Magoi_,' from which comes our word
'_Magician_.' . . . The persons _here_ denoted were philosophers,
priests, or _astronomers_. They dwelt chiefly in Persia and Arabia. They
were the learned men of the Eastern nations, devoted to _astronomy_, to
religion, and to medicine. They were held in high esteem by the Persian
court; were admitted as councilors, and followed the camps in war to
give advice." (Barnes's Notes, vol. i. p. 25.)
[150:2] Matthew, ii. 2.
[150:3] Luke, ii. 8-16.
[151:1] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. pp. 129, 130, and Maurice: Hist.
Hindostan, vol. ii. pp. 256, 257 and 317. Also, The Vishnu Purana.
[151:2] Oriental Religions, pp. 500, 501. See also, Ancient Faiths, vol.
ii. p. 353.
[151:3] Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 157.
[151:4] Amberly's Analysis, p. 177. See also, Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p.
36.
[151:5] Lillie: Buddha and Early Buddhism, p. 76.
[151:6] Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 6, and Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 58,
60.
[152:1] Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 36.
[152:2] See Amberly's Analysis p. 231, and Bunsen's Angel Messiah, p.
36.
[152:3] Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 58.
[152:4] Oriental Religions, p. 491.
[152:5] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 200.
[152:6] See Amberly's Analysis of Religious Belief, p. 226.
[152:7] See Thornton's Hist. China, vol. i. p. 152.
[152:8] King: The Gnostics and their Remains, pp. 134 and 149.
[152:9] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 353.
[152:10] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 96.
[153:1] Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150. Roman Antiquities, p. 136, and Bell's
Pantheon, vol. i. p. 27.
[153:2] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 322.
[153:3] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 213.
[153:4] Ibid. vol. i. p. 47.
[153:5] Ibid. p. 20.
CHAPTER XVI.
THE BIRTH-PLACE OF CHRIST JESUS.
The writer of that portion of the Gospel according to _Matthew_ which
treats of the _place_ in which Jesus was born, implies, as we stated in
our last chapter, that he was born in a _house_. His words are these:
"Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea _in the days of
Herod the king_, behold, there came wise men from the east" to
worship him. "And when they were come _into the house_, they
saw the young child with Mary his mother."[154:1]
The writer of the _Luke_ version implies that he was born in _a stable_,
as the following statement will show:
"The days being accomplished that she (Mary) should be
delivered . . . she brought forth her first-born son, and
wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and _laid him in a manger_,
there being no room for him in the _inn_."[154:2]
If these accounts were contained in these Gospels in the time of
Eusebius, the first ecclesiastical historian, who flourished during the
Council of Nice (A. D. 327), it is very strange that, in speaking of the
birth of Jesus, he should have omitted even mentioning them, and should
have given an altogether different version. He tells us that Jesus was
neither born in a _house_, nor in a _stable_, but in a _cave_, and that
at the time of Constantine a magnificent temple was erected on the spot,
so that the Christians might worship in the place where their Saviour's
feet had stood.[154:3]
In the apocryphal Gospel called "_Protevangelion_," attributed to James,
the brother of Jesus, we are informed that Mary and her husband, being
away from their home in Nazareth, and when within three miles of
Bethlehem, to which city they were going, Mary said to Joseph:
"Take me down from the ass, for that which is in me presses to
come forth."
Joseph, replying, said:
"Whither shall I take thee, _for the place is desert_?"
Then said Mary again to Joseph:
"Take me down, for that which is within me mightily presses
me."
Joseph then took her down from off the ass, and he found there a _cave_
and put her into it.
Joseph then left Mary in the cave, and started toward Bethlehem for a
midwife, whom he found and brought back with him. When they neared the
spot a bright cloud overshadowed the cave.
"But on a sudden the cloud became _a great light in the cave_,
so their eyes could not bear it. But the light gradually
decreased, until the infant appeared and sucked the breast of
his mother."[155:1]
Tertullian (A. D. 200), Jerome (A. D. 375) and other Fathers of the
Church, also state that Jesus was born in a _cave_, and that the
_heathen_ celebrated, in their day, the birth and _Mysteries_ of their
Lord and Saviour Adonis in this very cave near Bethlehem.[155:2]
Canon Farrar says:
"That the actual place of Christ's birth was a _cave_, is a
very ancient tradition, and this cave used to be shown as the
scene of the event even so early as the time of Justin Martyr
(A. D. 150)."[155:3]
Mr. King says:
"The place _yet_ shown as the scene of their (the Magi's)
adoration at Bethlehem is a _cave_."[155:4]
The Christian ceremonies in the Church of the Nativity at Bethlehem are
celebrated to this day in a _cave_,[155:5] and are undoubtedly nearly
the same as were celebrated, _in the same place_, in honor of _Adonis_,
in the time of Tertullian and Jerome; and as are yet celebrated in Rome
every Christmas-day, _very early in the morning_.
We see, then, that there are _three_ different accounts concerning the
_place_ in which Jesus was born. The first, and evidently true one, was
that which is recorded by the _Matthew_ narrator, namely, that he was
born in a _house_. The stories about his being born in a _stable_ or in
a _cave_[155:6] were later inventions, caused from the desire to place
him in as _humble_ a position as possible in his infancy, and from the
fact that the virgin-born Saviours who had _preceded_ him had almost
all been born in a position the most humiliating--such as a cave, a
cow-shed, a sheep-fold, &c.--or had been placed there after birth. This
was a part of the _universal mythos_. As illustrations we may mention
the following:
_Crishna_, the Hindoo virgin-born Saviour, was born in a _cave_,[156:1]
fostered by an honest _herdsman_,[156:2] and, it is said, placed in a
_sheep-fold_ shortly after his birth.
_How-Tseih_, the Chinese "Son of Heaven," when an infant, was left
unprotected by his mother, but the _sheep_ and _oxen_ protected him with
loving care.[156:3]
_Abraham_, the Father of Patriarchs, is said to have been _born in a
cave_.[156:4]
_Bacchus_, who was the son of God by the virgin Semele, is said to have
been _born in a cave_, or placed in one shortly after his birth.[156:5]
Philostratus, the Greek sophist and rhetorician, says, "the inhabitants
of India had a tradition that Bacchus was born at _Nisa_, and was
brought up in a _cave_ on Mount Meros."
_Æsculapius_, who was the son of God by the virgin Coronis, was left
exposed, when an infant, on a mountain, where he was found and cared for
by a _goatherd_.[156:6]
_Romulus_, who was the son of God by the virgin Rhea-Sylvia, was left
exposed, when an infant, on the banks of the river Tiber, where he was
found and cared for by a _shepherd_.[156:7]
_Adonis_, the "Lord" and "Saviour," was placed in a _cave_ shortly after
his birth.[156:8]
_Apollo_ (Phoibos), son of the Almighty Zeus, was born in a cave at
early dawn.[156:9]
_Mithras_, the Persian Saviour, was born in a _cave or grotto_,[156:10]
at early dawn.
_Hermes_, the son of God by the mortal _Maia_, was born early in the
morning, in _a cave or grotto_ of the Kyllemian hill.[156:11]
_Attys_, the god of the Phrygians,[156:12] was born in a _cave_ or
grotto.[156:13]
The _object_ is the same in all of these stories, however they may
differ in detail, which is to place the heaven-born infant in the most
humiliating position in infancy.
We have seen it is recorded that, at the time of the birth of Jesus
"there was a _great light_ in the cave, so that the eyes of Joseph and
the midwife could not bear it." This feature is also represented in
early Christian art. "Early Christian painters have represented the
infant Jesus as welcoming three Kings of the East, _and shining as
brilliantly as if covered with phosphuretted oil_."[157:1] In all
pictures of the Nativity, the light is made to arise from the body of
the infant, and the father and mother are often depicted with glories
round their heads. This too was a part of the old mythos, as we shall
now see.
The moment _Crishna_ was born, his mother became beautiful, and her form
brilliant. The whole cave was splendidly illuminated, being filled with
a _heavenly light_, and the countenances of his father and his mother
emitted rays of glory.[157:2]
So likewise, it is recorded that, at the time of the birth of Buddha,
"the Saviour of the World," which, according to one account, took place
in an _inn_, "_a divine light diffused around his person_," so that "the
Blessed One" was "heralded into the world by a supernatural
light."[157:3]
When _Bacchus_ was born, a _bright light_ shone round him,[157:4] so
that, "_there was a brilliant light in the cave_."
When _Apollo_ was born, _a halo of serene light encircled his cradle_,
the nymphs of heaven attended, and bathed him in pure water, and girded
a broad golden band around his form.[157:5]
When the Saviour _Æsculapius_ was born, his countenance shone like the
sun, and he was surrounded by a fiery ray.[157:6]
In the life of _Zoroaster_ the common mythos is apparent. He was born in
innocence of an immaculate conception of a Ray of the Divine Reason. As
soon as he was born, _the glory arising from his body enlightened the
whole room_, and he laughed at his mother.[157:7]
It is stated in the legends of the Hebrew Patriarchs that, at the birth
of _Moses_, a bright light appeared and shone around.[157:8]
There is still another feature which we must notice in these narratives,
that is, the contradictory statements concerning the _time_ when Jesus
was born. As we shall treat of this subject more fully in the chapter on
"The Birthday of Christ Jesus," we shall allude to it here simply as far
as necessary.
The _Matthew_ narrator informs us that Jesus was born _in the days of
Herod the King_, and the _Luke_ narrator says he was born _when
Cyrenius_ was _Governor of Syria_, or later. This is a very awkward and
unfortunate statement, as Cyrenius was not Governor of Syria until some
_ten years after the time of Herod_.[158:1]
The cause of this dilemma is owing to the fact that the Luke narrator,
after having interwoven into _his_ story, of the birth of Jesus, the
_old myth_ of the tax or tribute, which is said to have taken place at
the time of the birth of some _previous_ virgin-born Saviours, looked
among the records to see if a taxing had ever taken place in Judea, so
that he might refer to it in support of his statement. He found the
account of the taxing, referred to above, and without stopping to
consider _when_ this taxing took place, or whether or not it would
conflict with the statement that Jesus was born _in the days of Herod_,
he added to his narrative the words: "And this taxing was _first made_
when Cyrenius was governor of Syria."[158:2]
We will now show the ancient myth of the taxing. According to the
_Vishnu Purana_, when the infant Saviour _Crishna_ was born, his foster
father, _Nanda_, had come to the city _to pay his tax or yearly tribute
to the king_. It distinctly speaks of Nanda, and other cowherds,
"_bringing tribute or tax to Kansa_" the reigning monarch.[158:3]
It also describes a scene which took place after the taxes had been
paid.
Vasudeva, an acquaintance of Nanda's, "went to the wagon of Nanda, and
found Nanda there, rejoicing that a son (Crishna) had been born to him.
"Vasudeva spoke to him kindly, and congratulated him _on having a son in
his old age_.[158:4]
"'Thy yearly tribute,' he added, 'has been paid to the king . . . why do
you delay, now that your affairs are settled? Up, Nanda, quickly, and
set off to your own pastures.' . . . Accordingly Nanda and the other
cowherds returned to their village."[158:5]
Now, in regard to _Buddha_, the same myth is found.
Among the thirty-two signs which were to be fulfilled by the mother of
the expected Messiah (Buddha), the fifth sign was recorded to be, "_that
she would be on a journey at the time of her child's birth_."
Therefore, "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the
prophets," the virgin Maya, in the tenth month after her heavenly
conception, was on a journey to her father, when lo, the birth of the
Messiah took place under a tree. One account says that "she had alighted
at an _inn_ when Buddha was born."[159:1]
The mother of _Lao-tsze_, the Virgin-born Chinese sage, was away from
home when her child was born. She stopped to rest _under a tree_, and
there, like the virgin Maya, gave birth to her son.[159:2]
_Pythagoras_ (B. C. 570), whose real father was the Holy Ghost,[159:3]
was also born at a time when his mother was away from home on a journey.
She was travelling with her husband, who was _about his mercantile
concerns_, from Samos to Sidon.[159:4]
_Apollo_ was born when his mother was away from home. The Ionian legend
tells the simple tale that Leto, the mother of the unborn Apollo, could
find no place to receive her in her hour of travail until she came to
Delos. The child was born like Buddha and Lao-tsze--_under a
tree_.[159:5] The mother knew that he was destined to be a being of
mighty power, ruling among the undying gods and mortal men.[159:6]
Thus we see that the stories, one after another, relating to the birth
and infancy of Jesus, are simply old myths, and are therefore not
historical.
FOOTNOTES:
[154:1] Matthew, ii.
[154:2] Luke, ii.
[154:3] Eusebius's Life of Constantine, lib. 3, chs. xl., xli. and xlii.
[155:1] Protevangelion. Apoc. chs. xii., xiii., and xiv., and Lily of
Israel, p. 95.
[155:2] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. pp. 98, 99.
[155:3] Farrar's Life of Christ, p. 38, and _note_. See also, Hist.
Hindostan, ii. 311.
[155:4] King: The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 134.
[155:5] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 95.
[155:6] Some writers have tried to connect these by saying that it was a
_cave-stable_, but why should a stable be in a _desert place_, as the
narrative states?
[156:1] Aryan Myths, vol. ii. p. 107.
[156:2] See Asiatic Researches, vol. i. p. 259.
[156:3] See Amberly's Analysis, p. 226.
[156:4] See Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."
[156:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 321. Bell's Pantheon, vol.
i. p. 118, and Dupuis, p. 284.
[156:6] See Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150, and Bell's Pantheon under
"Æsculapius."
[156:7] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 218.
[156:8] See Ibid. vol. i. p. 12.
[156:9] Aryan Mythology, vol. i. pp. 72, 158.
[156:10] See Dunlap's Mysteries of Adoni, p. 124, and Aryan Mythology,
vol. ii. p. 134.
[156:11] Ibid.
[156:12] See Dupuis: Origin of Religious Beliefs, p. 255.
[156:13] See Dunlap's Mysteries of Adoni, p. 124.
[157:1] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 460.
[157:2] Cox: Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 133. Higgins: Anacalypsis,
vol. i. p. 130. See also, Vishnu Purana, p. 502, where it says:
"No person could bear to gaze upon Devaki from the light that invested
her."
[157:3] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 43, 46, or Bunsen's Angel-Messiah,
pp. 34, 35.
[157:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 322, and Dupuis: Origin of
Relig. Belief, p. 119.
[157:5] Tales of Anct. Greece, p. xviii.
[157:6] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 27. Roman Antiquities, p. 136.
[157:7] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 460. Anacalypsis, vol. i. p.
649.
[157:8] See Hardy: Manual of Buddhism, p. 145.
[158:1] See the chapter on "Christmas."
[158:2] It may be that this verse was added by another hand some time
after the narrative was written. We have seen it stated somewhere that,
in the manuscript, this verse is in brackets.
[158:3] See Vishnu Purana, book v. chap. iii.
[158:4] Here is an exact counterpart to the story of Joseph--the
foster-father, so-called--of Jesus. He too, had a son in his old age.
[158:5] Vishnu Purana, book v. chap. v.
[159:1] Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah, p. 34. See also, Beal: Hist. Buddha,
p. 32, and Lillie: Buddha and Early Buddhism, p. 73.
[159:2] Thornton: Hist. China, i. 138.
[159:3] As we saw in Chapter XII.
[159:4] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 150.
[159:5] See Rhys David's Buddhism, p. 25.
[159:6] See Cox: Aryan Myths, vol. ii. p. 31.
CHAPTER XVII.
THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST JESUS.
The biographers of Jesus, although they have placed him in a position
the most humiliating in his infancy, and although they have given him
poor and humble parents, have notwithstanding made him to be of _royal
descent_. The reasons for doing this were twofold. First, because,
according to the Old Testament, the expected Messiah was to be of the
seed of Abraham,[160:1] and second, because the Angel-Messiahs who had
previously been on earth to redeem and save mankind had been of _royal
descent_, therefore Christ Jesus must be so.
The following story, taken from Colebrooke's "_Miscellaneous
Essays_,"[160:2] clearly shows that this idea was general:
"The last of the Jinas, Vardhamâna, was _at first_ conceived
by Devananda, a Brahmana. The conception was announced to
her by a dream. Sekra, being apprised of his incarnation,
prostrated himself and worshiped the future saint (who was in
the womb of Devananda); but reflecting that _no great saint
was ever born in an indigent or mendicant family_, as that of
a Brahmana, Sekra commanded his chief attendant to remove the
child from the womb of Devananda to that of Trisala, wife of
Siddhartha, _a prince of the race of Jeswaca_, of the Kasyapa
family."
In their attempts to accomplish their object, the biographers of Jesus
have made such poor work of it, that all the ingenuity Christianity has
yet produced, has not been able to repair their blunders.
The genealogies are contained in the first and third Gospels, and
although they do not agree, yet, if either is right, then Jesus was
_not_ the son of God, engendered by the "Holy Ghost," but the legitimate
son of Joseph and Mary. In any other sense they amount to nothing. That
Jesus can be of royal descent, and yet be the Son of God, in the sense
in which these words are used, is a conclusion which can be acceptable
to those only who believe in _alleged_ historical narratives on no other
ground than that they wish them to be true, and dare not call them into
question.
The _Matthew_ narrator states that _all_ the generations from Abraham to
David are _fourteen_, from David until the carrying away into Babylon
are _fourteen_, and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Jesus are
_fourteen_ generations.[161:1] Surely nothing can have a more
_mythological_ appearance than this. But, when we confine our attention
to the genealogy itself, we find that the generations in the third
stage, including Jesus himself, amount to only _thirteen_. All attempts
to get over this difficulty have been without success; the genealogies
are, and have always been, hard nuts for theologians to crack. Some of
the early Christian fathers saw this, and they very wisely put an
_allegorical_ interpretation to them.
Dr. South says, in Kitto's Biblical Encyclopædia:
"Christ's being the true Messiah depends upon his being the
son of David and king of the Jews. _So that unless this be
evinced the whole foundation of Christianity must totter and
fall._"
Another writer in the same work says:
"In these two documents (Matthew and Luke), which profess to
give us the genealogy of Christ, there is no notice whatever
of the connection of his only earthly parent with the stock of
David. On the contrary, both the genealogies profess to give
us the descent of Joseph, to connect our Lord with whom by
natural generation, would be to falsify the whole story of his
miraculous birth, and overthrow the Christian faith."
Again, when the idea that one of the genealogies is Mary's is spoken of:
"One thing is certain, that our belief in Mary's descent from
David is grounded on inference and tradition and not on any
direct statement of the sacred writings. And there has been a
ceaseless endeavor, both among ancients and moderns, to
gratify the natural cravings for knowledge on this subject."
Thomas Scott, speaking of the genealogies, says:
"It is a favorite saying with those who seek to defend the
history of the Pentateuch against the scrutiny of modern
criticism, that the objections urged against it were known
long ago. The objections to the _genealogy_ were known long
ago, indeed; and perhaps nothing shows more conclusively than
this knowledge, the disgraceful dishonesty and willful
deception of the most illustrious of Christian
doctors."[161:2]
Referring to the two genealogies, Albert Barnes says:
"No two passages of Scripture have caused more difficulty than
these, and various attempts have been made to explain them.
. . . Most interpreters have supposed that Matthew gives the
genealogy of Joseph, and Luke that of Mary. _But though this
solution is plausible and may be true, yet it wants
evidence._"
Barnes furthermore admits the fallibility of the Bible in his remarks
upon the genealogies; 1st, by comparing them to _our_ fallible family
records; and 2d, by the remark that "the only inquiry which can now be
fairly made _is whether they copied these tables correctly_."
Alford, Ellicott, Hervey, Meyer, Mill, Patritius and Wordsworth hold
that both genealogies are Joseph's; and Aubertin, Ebrard, Greswell,
Kurtz, Lange, Lightfoot and others, hold that one is Joseph's, and the
other Mary's.
When the genealogy contained in _Matthew_ is compared with the Old
Testament _they are found to disagree_; there are omissions which any
writer with the least claim to historical sense would never have made.
When the genealogy of the _third_ Gospel is turned to, the difficulties
greatly increase, instead of diminish. It not only contradicts the
statements made by the _Matthew_ narrator, but it does not agree with
the Old Testament.
What, _according to the three first evangelists_, did Jesus think of
himself? In the first place he made no allusion to any miraculous
circumstances connected with his birth. He looked upon himself as
belonging to _Nazareth_, not as the child of Bethlehem;[162:1] _he
reproved the scribes for teaching that the Messiah must necessarily be a
descendant of David,[162:2] and did not himself make any express claim
to such descent_.[162:3]
As we cannot go into an extended inquiry concerning the genealogies, and
as there is no real necessity for so doing, as many others have already
done so in a masterly manner,[162:4] we will continue our investigations
in another direction, and show that Jesus was not the only Messiah who
was claimed to be of royal descent.
To commence with _Crishna_, the Hindoo Saviour, he was of _royal
descent_, although born in a state the most abject and humiliating.[163:1]
Thomas Maurice says of him:
"Crishna, in the _male_ line, was of royal descent, being of
the Yadava line, the oldest and noblest of India; and nephew,
by his _mother's_ side, to the reigning sovereign; but, though
royally descended, he was actually born in a state the most
abject and humiliating; and, though not in a stable, yet in a
dungeon."[163:2]
_Buddha_ was of _royal descent_, having descended from the house of
Sakya, the most illustrious of the caste of Brahmans, which reigned in
India over the powerful empire of Mogadha, in the Southern Bahr.[163:3]
R. Spence Hardy says, in his "Manual of Buddhism:"
"The ancestry of Gotama Buddha is traced from his father,
Sodhódana, through various individuals and races, all of royal
dignity, to Maha Sammata, the first monarch of the world.
Several of the names, and some of the events, are met with in
the Puranas of the Brahmins, but it is not possible to
reconcile one order of statement with the other; and it would
appear that the Buddhist historians have introduced races, and
invented names, that they may invest their venerated sage with
all the honors of heraldry, in addition to the attributes of
divinity."
How remarkably these words compare with what we have just seen
concerning the genealogies of Jesus!
_Rama_, another Indian _avatar_--the seventh incarnation of Vishnu--was
also of _royal descent_.[163:4]
_Fo-hi_; or _Fuh-he_, the virgin-born "Son of Heaven," was of _royal
descent_. He belonged to the oldest family of monarchs who ruled in
China.[163:5]
_Confucius_ was of _royal descent_. His pedigree is traced back in a
summary manner to the monarch _Hoang-ty_, who is said to have lived and
ruled more than two thousand years before the time of Christ
Jesus.[163:6]
_Horus_, the Egyptian virgin-born Saviour, was of _royal descent_,
having descended from a line of kings.[163:7] He had the title of "Royal
Good Shepherd."[163:8]
_Hercules_, the Saviour, was of _royal descent_.[163:9]
_Bacchus_, although the Son of God, was of _royal descent_.[164:1]
_Perseus_, son of the virgin Danae, was of _royal descent_.[164:2]
_Æsculapius_, the great performer of miracles, although a son of God,
was notwithstanding of _royal descent_.[164:3]
Many more such cases might be mentioned, as may be seen by referring to
the histories of the virgin-born gods and demi-gods spoken of in Chapter
XII.
FOOTNOTES:
[160:1] That is, a passage in the Old Testament was construed to mean
this, although another and more plausible meaning might be inferred. It
is when Abraham is blessed by the Lord, who is made to say: "_In thy
seed_ shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because thou hast
obeyed my voice." (Genesis, xxii. 18.)
[160:2] Vol. ii. p. 214.
[161:1] Matthew, i. 17.
[161:2] Scott's English Life of Jesus.
[162:1] Matthew, xiii. 54; Luke, iv. 24.
[162:2] Mark, ii. 35.
[162:3] "There is no doubt that the authors of the genealogies regarded
him (Jesus), as did his countrymen and contemporaries generally, as the
eldest son of Joseph, Mary's husband, and that they had no idea of
anything miraculous connected with his birth. All the attempts of the
old commentators to reconcile the inconsistencies of the evangelical
narratives are of no avail." (Albert Réville: Hist. Dogma, Deity, Jesus,
p. 15.)
[162:4] The reader is referred to Thomas Scott's English Life of Jesus,
Strauss's Life of Jesus, The Genealogies of Our Lord, by Lord Arthur
Hervey, Kitto's Biblical Encyclopædia, and Barnes' Notes.
[163:1] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 130. Asiatic Researches,
vol. i. p. 259, and Allen's India, p. 379.
[163:2] Hist. Hindostan, ii. p. 310.
[163:3] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 157. Bunsen: The
Angel-Messiah. Davis: Hist. of China, vol. ii. p. 80, and Huc's Travels,
vol. i. p. 327.
[163:4] Allen's India, p. 379.
[163:5] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 200, and Chambers's Encyclo.,
art. "Fuh-he."
[163:6] Davis: History of China, vol. ii. p. 48, and Thornton: Hist.
China, vol. i. p. 151.
[163:7] See almost any work on Egyptian history or the religions of
Egypt.
[163:8] See Lundy: Monumental Christianity, p. 403.
[163:9] See Taylor's Diegesis, p. 152. Roman Antiquities, p. 124, and
Bell's Pantheon, i. 382.
[164:1] See Greek and Italian Mythology, p. 81. Bell's Pantheon, vol. i.
p. 117. Murray: Manual of Mythology, p. 118, and Roman Antiquities, p.
71.
[164:2] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 170, and Bulfinch: The Age of
Fable, p. 161.
[164:3] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 27. Roman Antiquities, p. 136,
and Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150.
CHAPTER XVIII.
THE SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS.
Interwoven with the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus, the star,
the visit of the Magi, &c., we have a myth which belongs to a common
form, and which, in this instance, is merely adapted to the special
circumstances of the age and place. This has been termed "the myth of
the dangerous child." Its general outline is this: A child is born
concerning whose future greatness some prophetic indications have been
given. But the life of the child is fraught with danger to some powerful
individual, generally a monarch. In alarm at his threatened fate, this
person endeavors to take the child's life, but it is preserved by divine
care.
Escaping the measures directed against it, and generally remaining long
unknown, it at length fulfills the prophecies concerning its career,
while the fate which he has vainly sought to shun falls upon him who had
desired to slay it. There is a departure from the ordinary type, in the
case of Jesus, inasmuch as Herod does not actually die or suffer any
calamity through his agency. But this failure is due to the fact that
Jesus did not fulfill the conditions of the Messiahship, according to
the Jewish conception which Matthew has here in mind. Had he--as was
expected of the Messiah--become the actual sovereign of the Jews, he
must have dethroned the reigning dynasty, whether represented by Herod
or his successors. But as his subsequent career belied the expectations,
the evangelist was obliged to postpone to a future time his accession to
that throne of temporal dominion which the incredulity of his countrymen
had withheld from him during his earthly life.
The story of the slaughter of the infants which is said to have taken
place in Judea about the time of the birth of Jesus, is to be found in
the second chapter of _Matthew_, and is as follows:
"When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of
Herod the king, there came wise men from the East to
Jerusalem, saying: 'Where is he that is born _king of the
Jews_? for we have seen _his star_ in the East and have come
to worship him.' When Herod the king had heard these things,
he was troubled and all Jerusalem with him. Then Herod, when
he had privately called the wise men, enquired of them
diligently what time the star appeared. And he sent them to
Bethlehem, and said: 'Go and search diligently for the young
child; and when ye have found him, bring me word.'"
The wise men went to Bethlehem and found the young child, but instead of
returning to Herod as he had told them, they departed into their own
country another way, having been warned of God _in a dream_, that they
should not return to Herod.
"Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men,
was exceeding wroth, _and sent forth, and slew all the
children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts
thereof, from two years old and under_."
We have in this story, told by the _Matthew_ narrator--which the writers
of the other gospels seem to know nothing about,--almost a counterpart,
if not an exact one, to that related of _Crishna_ of India, which shows
how closely the mythological history of Jesus has been copied from that
of the Hindoo Saviour.
Joguth Chunder Gangooly, a "Hindoo convert to Christ," tells us, in his
"Life and Religion of the Hindoos," that:
"A _heavenly voice_ whispered to the foster father of Crishna
and told him to fly with the child across the river Jumna,
which was immediately done.[166:1] This was owing to the fact
that the reigning monarch, King Kansa, sought the life of the
infant Saviour, and to accomplish his purpose, he sent
messengers '_to kill all the infants in the neighboring
places_.'"[166:2]
Mr. Higgins says:
"Soon after Crishna's birth he was carried away by night and
concealed in a region remote from his natal place, for fear of
a tyrant whose destroyer it was foretold he would become; and
who had, for that reason, ordered all the male children born
at that period to be slain."[166:3]
Sir William Jones says of Crishna:
"He passed a life, according to the Indians, of a most
extraordinary and incomprehensible nature. His birth was
concealed through fear of the reigning tyrant Kansa, who, at
the time of his birth, _ordered all new-born males to be
slain, yet this wonderful babe was preserved_."[166:4]
In the Epic poem Mahabarata, composed more than two thousand years ago,
we have the whole story of this incarnate deity, born of a virgin, and
miraculously escaping in his infancy from the reigning tyrant of his
country, related in its original form.
Representations of this flight with the babe at midnight are sculptured
on the walls of ancient Hindoo temples.[167:1]
This story is also the subject of an immense sculpture in the
cave-temple at Elephanta, where the children are represented as being
slain. The date of this sculpture is lost in the most remote antiquity.
It represents a person holding a drawn sword, surrounded by slaughtered
_infant boys_. Figures of men and women are also represented who are
supposed to be supplicating for their children.[167:2]
Thomas Maurice, speaking of this sculpture, says:
"The event of Crishna's birth, and the attempt to destroy him,
took place by night, and therefore the shadowy mantle of
darkness, _upon which mutilated figures of infants are
engraved_, darkness (at once congenial with his crime and the
season of its perpetration), involves the tyrant's bust; the
string of _death heads_ marks the multitude of infants slain
by his savage mandate; and every object in the sculpture
illustrates the events of that Avatar."[167:3]
Another feature which connects these stories is the following:
Sir Wm. Jones tells us that when Crishna was taken out of reach of the
tyrant Kansa who sought to slay him, he was fostered at _Mathura_ by
Nanda, the herdsman;[167:4] and Canon Farrar, speaking of the sojourn of
the Holy Family in Egypt, says:
"St. Matthew neither tells us where the Holy Family abode in
Egypt, nor how long their exile continued; but ancient legends
say that they remained two years absent from Palestine, and
lived at Mataréëh, a few miles north-east of Cairo."[167:5]
Chemnitius, out of Stipulensis, who had it from Peter Martyr, Bishop of
Alexandria, in the third century, says, that the place in Egypt where
Jesus was banished, is now called Matarea, about ten miles beyond Cairo,
that the inhabitants constantly burn a lamp in remembrance of it, and
that there is a garden of trees yielding a balsam, which was planted by
Jesus when a boy.[167:6]
Here is evidently one and the same legend.
_Salivahana_, the virgin-born Saviour, anciently worshiped near Cape
Comorin, the southerly part of the Peninsula of India, had the same
history. It was attempted to destroy him in infancy by a tyrant who was
afterward killed by him. Most of the other circumstances, with slight
variations, are the same as those told of Crishna and Jesus.[167:7]
_Buddha's_ life was also in danger when an infant. In the southern
country of Magadha, there lived a king by the name of Bimbasara, who,
being fearful of some enemy arising that might overturn his kingdom,
frequently assembled his principal ministers together to hold discussion
with them on the subject. On one of these occasions they told him that
away to the north there was a respectable tribe of people called the
Sâkyas, and that belonging to this race there was a youth newly-born,
the first-begotten of his mother, &c. This youth, who was Buddha, they
said was liable to overturn him, they therefore advised him to "at once
raise an army and destroy the child."[168:1]
In the chronicles of the East Mongols, the same tale is to be found
repeated in the following story:
"A certain king of a people called Patsala, had a son whose
peculiar appearance led the Brahmins at court to prophesy that
he would bring evil upon his father, and to advise his
destruction. Various modes of execution having failed, _the
boy was laid in a copper chest and thrown into the Ganges_.
Rescued by an old peasant who brought him up as his son, he,
in due time, learned the story of his escape, and returned to
seize upon the kingdom destined for him from his
birth."[168:2]
_Hau-ki_, the Chinese hero of supernatural origin, was exposed in
infancy, as the "Shih-king" says:
"He was placed in a narrow lane, but the sheep and oxen
protected him with loving care. He was placed in a wide
forest, where he was met with by the wood-cutters. He was
placed on the cold ice, and a bird screened and supported him
with its wings," &c.[168:3]
Mr. Legge draws a comparison with this to the Roman legend of Romulus.
_Horus_, according to the Egyptian story, was born in the winter, and
brought up secretly in the Isle of Buto, for fear of Typhon, who sought
his life. Typhon at first schemed to prevent his birth and then sought
to destroy him when born.[168:4]
Within historical times, _Cyrus_, king of Persia (6th cent. B. C.), is
the hero of a similar tale. His grandfather, Astyages, had dreamed
certain dreams which were interpreted by the Magi to mean that the
offspring of his daughter Mandane would expel him from his kingdom.
Alarmed at the prophecy, he handed the child to his kinsman Harpagos to
be slain; but this man having entrusted it to a shepherd to be exposed,
the latter contrived to save it by exhibiting to the emissaries of
Harpagos the body of a still-born child of which his own wife had just
been delivered. Grown to man's estate Cyrus of course justified the
prediction of the Magi by his successful revolt against Astyages and
assumption of the monarchy.
Herodotus, the Grecian Historian (B. C. 484), relates that Astyages, in
a vision, appeared to see a vine grow up from Mandane's womb, which
covered all Asia. Having seen this and communicated it to the
interpreters of dreams, he put her under guard, resolving to destroy
whatever should be born of her; for the Magian interpreters had
signified to him from his vision that the child born of Mandane would
reign in his stead. Astyages therefore, guarding against this, as soon
as Cyrus was born sought to have him destroyed. The story of his
exposure on the mountain, and his subsequent good fortune, is then
related.[169:1]
_Abraham_ was also a "dangerous child." At the time of his birth,
Nimrod, king of Babylon, was informed by his soothsayers that "a child
should be born in Babylonia, who would shortly become a great prince,
and that he had reason to fear him." The result of this was that Nimrod
then issued orders that "all women with child should be guarded with
great care, _and all children born of them should be put to
death_."[169:2]
The mother of Abraham was at that time with child, but, of course, _he_
escaped from being put to death, although many children were
slaughtered.
_Zoroaster_, the chief of the religion of the Magi, was a "dangerous
child." Prodigies had announced his birth; he was exposed to dangers
from the time of his infancy, and was obliged to fly into Persia, like
Jesus into Egypt. Like him, he was pursued by a king, his enemy, who
wanted to get rid of him.[169:3]
His mother had alarming dreams of evil spirits seeking to destroy the
child to whom she was about to give birth. But a good spirit came to
comfort her and said: "Fear nothing! Ormuzd will protect this infant. He
has sent him as a prophet to the people. The world is waiting for
him."[169:4]
_Perseus_, son of the Virgin Danae, was also a "dangerous child."
Acrisius, king of Argos, being told by the oracle that a son born of his
virgin daughter would destroy him, immured his daughter Danae in a
tower, _where no man could approach her_, and by this means hoped to
keep his daughter from becoming _enceinte_. The god Jupiter, however,
visited her there, as it is related of the Angel Gabriel visiting the
Virgin Mary,[170:1] the result of which was that she bore a
son--_Perseus_. Acrisius, on hearing of his daughter's disgrace, caused
both her and the infant to be shut up in a chest and cast into the sea.
They were discovered by one Dictys, and liberated from what must have
been anything but a pleasant position.[170:2]
_Æsculapius_, when an infant, was exposed on the Mount of Myrtles, and
left there to die, but escaped the death which was intended for him,
having been found and cared for by _shepherds_.[170:3]
_Hercules_, son of the virgin Leto, was left to die on a plain, but was
found and rescued by a maiden.[170:4]
_OEdipous_ was a "dangerous child." Laios, King of Thebes, having been
told by the Delphic Oracle that OEdipous would be his destroyer, no
sooner is OEdipous born than the decree goes forth that the child must
be slain: but the servant to whom he is intrusted contents himself with
exposing the babe on the slopes of Mount Kithairon, where a _shepherd_
finds him, and carries him, like Cyrus or Romulus, to his wife, who
cherishes the child with a mother's care.[170:5]
The Theban myth of OEdipous is repeated substantially in the Arcadian
tradition of _Telephos_. He is exposed, when a babe, on Mount Parthenon,
and is suckled by a doe, which represents the wolf in the myth of
Romulus, and the dog of the Persian story of Cyrus. Like Moses, he is
brought up in the palace of a king.[170:6]
As we read the story of Telephos, we can scarcely fail to think of the
story of the Trojan _Paris_, for, like Telephos, Paris is exposed as a
babe on the mountain-side.[170:7] Before he is born, there are portents
of the ruin which he is to bring upon his house and people. Priam, the
ruling monarch, therefore decrees that the child shall be left to die on
the hill-side. But the babe lies on the slopes of _Ida_ and is nourished
by a she-bear. He is fostered, like Crishna and others, by _shepherds_,
among whom he grows up.[170:8]
_Iamos_ was left to die among the bushes and violets. Aipytos, the
chieftain of Phaisana, had learned at Delphi that a child had been born
who should become the greatest of all the seers and prophets of the
earth, and he asked all his people where the babe was: but none had
heard or seen him, for he lay away amid the thick bushes, with his soft
body bathed in the golden and pure rays of the violets. So when he was
found, they called him Iamos, the "violet child;" and as he grew in
years and strength, he went down into the Alpheian stream, and prayed to
his father that he would glorify his son. Then the voice of Zeus was
heard, bidding him come to the heights of Olympus, where he should
receive the gift of prophecy.[171:1]
_Chandragupta_ was also a "dangerous child." He is exposed to great
dangers in his infancy at the hands of a tributary chief who has
defeated and slain his suzerain. His mother, "relinquishing him to the
protection of the Devas, places him in a vase, and deposits him at the
door of a _cattle pen_." A _herdsman_ takes the child and rears it as
his own.[171:2]
_Jason_ is another hero of the same kind. Pelias, the chief of Iolkos,
had been told that one of the children of Aiolos would be his destroyer,
and decreed, therefore, that all should be slain. Jason only is
preserved, and brought up by Cheiron.[171:3]
_Bacchus_, son of the virgin Semele, was destined to bring ruin upon
Cadmus, King of Thebes, who therefore orders the infant to be put into a
chest and thrown into a river. He is found, and taken from the water by
loving hands, and lives to fulfill his mission.[171:4]
Herodotus relates a similar story, which is as follows:
"The constitution of the _Corinthians_ was formerly of this
kind; it was an _oligarchy_, (a government in the hands of a
selected few), and those who were called _Bacchiadæ_ governed
the city. About this time one Eetion, who had been married to
a maiden called Labda, and having no children by her, went to
Delphi to inquire of the oracle about having offspring. Upon
entering the temple he was immediately saluted as follows;
'Eetion, no one honors thee, though worthy of much honor.
Labda is pregnant and will bring forth a round stone; it will
fall on monarchs, and vindicate Corinth.' This oracle,
pronounced to Eetion, was by chance reported to the
_Bacchiadæ_, who well knew that it prophesied the birth of a
son to Eetion who would overthrow them, and reign in their
stead; and though they comprehended, they kept it secret,
purposing to destroy the offspring that should be born to
Eetion. As soon as the woman brought forth, they sent ten
persons to the district where Eetion lived, to put the child
to death; but, the child, _by a divine providence_, was saved.
His mother hid him in a chest, and as they could not find the
child they resolved to depart, and tell those who sent them
that they had done all that they had commanded. After this,
Eetion's son grew up, and having escaped this danger, the name
of Cypselus was given him, from the chest. When Cypselus
reached man's estate, and consulted the oracle, an ambiguous
answer was given him at Delphi; relying on which he attacked
and got possession of Corinth."[171:5]
_Romulus_ and _Remus_, the founders of Rome, were exposed on the banks
of the Tiber, when infants, and left there to die, but escaped the death
intended for them.
The story of the "dangerous child" was well known in ancient Rome, and
several of their emperors, so it is said, were threatened with death at
their birth, or when mere infants. Julius Marathus, in his life of the
Emperor Augustus Cæsar, says that before his birth there was a prophecy
in Rome that a king over the Roman people would soon be born. To obviate
this danger to the republic, the Senate ordered that all the male
children born in that year should be abandoned or exposed.[172:1]
The flight of the virgin-mother with her babe is also illustrated in the
story of Astrea when beset by Orion, and of Latona, the mother of
Apollo, when pursued by the monster.[172:2] It is simply the same old
story, over and over again. Someone has predicted that a child born at a
certain time shall be great, he is therefore a "dangerous child," and
the reigning monarch, or some other interested party, attempts to have
the child destroyed, but he invariably escapes and grows to manhood, and
generally accomplishes the purpose for which he was intended. This
almost universal mythos was added to the fictitious history of Jesus by
its fictitious authors, who have made him escape in his infancy from the
reigning tyrant with the usual good fortune.
When a marvellous occurrence is said to have happened _everywhere_, we
may feel sure that it never happened anywhere. Popular fancies propagate
themselves indefinitely, but historical events, especially the striking
and dramatic ones, are rarely repeated. That this is a fictitious story
is seen from the narratives of the birth of Jesus, which are recorded by
the first and third Gospel writers, without any other evidence. In the
one--that related by the _Matthew_ narrator--we have a birth at
Bethlehem--implying the ordinary residence of the parents there--and a
_hurried flight_--almost immediately after the birth--from that place
into Egypt,[172:3] the slaughter of the infants, and a journey, after
many months, from Egypt to Nazareth in Galilee. In the other story--that
told by the _Luke_ narrator--the parents, who have lived in Nazareth,
came to Bethlehem only for business of the State, and the casual birth
in the cave or stable is followed by a quiet sojourn, during which the
child is circumcised, and by a leisurely journey to Jerusalem; whence,
everything having gone off peaceably and happily, they return naturally
to their own former place of abode, full, _it is said over and over
again_, of wonder at the things that had happened, and deeply impressed
with the conviction that their child had a special work to do, and was
specially gifted for it. _There is no fear of Herod, who seems never to
trouble himself about the child, or even to have any knowledge of him.
There is no trouble or misery at Bethlehem, and certainly no mourning
for children slain._ Far from flying hurriedly away by night, his
parents _celebrate openly_, and at the usual time, the circumcision of
the child; and when he is presented in the temple, there is not only no
sign that enemies seek his life, _but the devout saints give public
thanks for the manifestation of the Saviour_.
Dr. Hooykaas, speaking of the slaughter of the innocents, says:
"Antiquity in general delighted in representing great men,
such as Romulus, Cyrus, and many more, as having been
threatened in their childhood by fearful dangers. This served
to bring into clear relief both the lofty significance of
their future lives, and the special protection of the deity
who watched over them.
"The brow of many a theologian has been bent over this
(Matthew) narrative! For, as long as people believed in the
miraculous inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, of course they
accepted every page as literally true, and thought that there
_could_ not be any contradiction between the different
accounts or representations of Scripture. The worst of all
such pre-conceived ideas is, that they compel those who hold
them to do violence to their own sense of truth. For when
these so-called religious prejudices come into play, people
are afraid to call things by their right names, and, without
knowing it themselves, become guilty of all kinds of evasive
and arbitrary practices; for what would be thought quite
unjustifiable in any other case is here considered a duty,
inasmuch as it is supposed to tend toward the maintenance of
faith and the glory of God!"[173:1]
As we stated above, this story is to be found in the fictitious gospel
according to Matthew only; contemporary history has nowhere recorded
this audacious crime. It is mentioned neither by Jewish nor Roman
historians. Tacitus, who has stamped forever the crimes of despots with
the brand of reprobation, it would seem then, did not think such
infamies worthy of his condemnation. Josephus also, who gives us a
minute account of the atrocities perpetrated by Herod up to even the
very last moment of his life, does not say a single word about this
unheard-of crime, which must have been so notorious. Surely he must have
known of it, and must have mentioned it, had it ever been committed. "We
can readily imagine the Pagans," says Mr. Reber, "who composed the
learned and intelligent men of their day, at work in exposing the story
of Herod's cruelty, by showing that, considering the extent of
territory embraced in the order, and the population within it, the
assumed destruction of life stamped the story false and ridiculous. A
governor of a Roman province who dared make such an order would be so
speedily overtaken by the vengeance of the Roman people, that his head
would fall from his body before the blood of his victims had time to
dry. Archelaus, his son, was deposed for offenses not to be spoken of
when compared with this massacre of the infants."
No wonder that there is no trace at all in the Roman catacombs, nor in
Christian art, of this fictitious story, until about the beginning of
the fifth century.[174:1] Never would Herod dared to have taken upon
himself the odium and responsibility of such a sacrifice. _Such a crime
could never have happened at the epoch of its professed perpetration._
To such lengths were the early Fathers led, by the servile adaptation of
the ancient traditions of the East, they required a _second edition_ of
the tyrant Kansa, and their holy wrath fell upon Herod. The Apostles of
Jesus counted too much upon human credulity, they trusted too much that
the future might not unravel their maneuvers, the sanctity of their
object made them too reckless. They destroyed all the evidence against
themselves which they could lay their hands upon, but they did not
destroy it all.
FOOTNOTES:
[166:1] _A heavenly voice_ whispered to the foster-father of Jesus, and
told him to fly with the child into Egypt, which was immediately done.
(See Matthew, ii. 13.)
[166:2] Life and Relig. of the Hindoos, p. 134.
[166:3] Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 129. See also, Cox: Aryan Mythology,
vol. ii. p. 134, and Maurice: Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 331.
[166:4] Asiatic Researches, vol. i. pp. 273 and 259.
[167:1] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 61.
[167:2] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. 130, 13-, and Maurice: Indian
Antiquities, vol. i. pp. 112, 113, and vol. iii. pp. 45, 95.
[167:3] Indian Antiquities, vol. i. pp. 112, 113.