That this was one of the "_Scriptures_" of the Essenes, becomes very

evident when we find it admitted by the most learned of Christian

theologians that it was in existence "_before either of the canonical

Gospels_," and that it contained the doctrine of the _Trinity_, a

doctrine not established in the Christian church until A. D. 327, but

which was taught by this Buddhist sect in Alexandria, in Egypt, which

has been well called, "Egypt, the land of Trinities."

The learned Dr. Grabe thought it was composed by _some Christians in

Egypt_, and that it was published _before either of the canonical

Gospels_. Dr. Mill also believed that it was composed _before either of

the canonical Gospels_, and, what is more important than all, _that the

authors of it were Essenes_.

_These "Scriptures" of the Essenes were undoubtedly amalgamated with the

"Gospels" of the Christians, the result being the canonical Gospels as

we now have them._ The "Gospel of the Hebrews," and such like, on the

one hand, and the "Gospel of the Egyptians," or Essenes, and such like,

on the other. That the "Gospel of the Hebrews" spoke of Jesus of

Nazareth as the son of Joseph and Mary, _according to the flesh_, and

that it taught _nothing_ about his miracles, his resurrection from the

dead, and other such prodigies, is admitted on all hands. That the

"Scriptures" of the Essenes contained the whole legend of the

Angel-Messiah, which was afterwards added to the history of Jesus,

_making him a_ CHRIST, _or an Anointed Angel_, is a probability almost

to a certainty. Do we now understand how all the traditions and legends,

originally _Indian_, escaping from the great focus through _Egypt_, were

able to reach Judea, Greece and Rome?

To continue with our subject, "why Christianity prospered," we must now

speak of another great support to the cause, _i. e._, _Persecution_.

Ernest de Bunsen, speaking of Buddha, says:

"His religion has never been propagated by the sword. It has

been effected entirely by the influence of peaceable and

persevering devotees."

Can we say as much for what is termed "the religion of Christ?" No! this

religion has had the aid of the sword and firebrand, the rack and the

thumb-screw. "_Persecution_," is to be seen written on the pages of

ecclesiastical history, from the time of Constantine even to the present

day.[444:1] This Christian emperor and saint was the first to check

free-thought.

"We search in vain," (says M. Renan), "in the collection of

Roman laws _before Constantine_, for any enactment aimed at

free thought, or in the history of the emperors, for a

persecution of abstract doctrine. Not a single _savant_ was

disturbed. Men whom the Middle Ages would have burned--such as

Galen, Lucian, Plotinus--lived in peace, protected by the

law."[444:2]

Born and educated a pagan, Constantine embraced the Christian faith from

the following motives. Having committed horrid crimes, in fact, having

committed murders,[444:3] and,

"When he would have had his (Pagan) priests purge him by

sacrifice, of these horrible murders, and could not have his

purpose (for they answered plainly, it lay not in their power

to cleanse him)[444:4] he lighted at last upon an _Egyptian_

who came out of Iberia, and being persuaded by him that the

Christian faith was of force to wipe away every sin, were it

ever so heinous, he embraced willingly at whatever the

Egyptian told him."[444:5]

Mons. Dupuis, speaking of this conversion, says:

"Constantine, soiled with all sorts of crimes, and stained

with the blood of his wife, after repeated perjuries and

assassinations, presented himself before the heathen priests

in order to be absolved of so many outrages he had committed.

He was answered, that amongst the various kinds of expiations,

there was none which could expiate so many crimes, and that no

religion whatever could offer efficient protection against the

justice of the gods; and Constantine was emperor. One of the

courtiers of the palace, who witnessed the trouble and

agitation of his mind, torn by remorse, which nothing could

appease, informed him, that the evil he was suffering was not

without a remedy; that there existed in the religion of the

Christians certain purifications, which expiated every kind of

misdeeds, of whatever nature, and in whatsoever number they

were: that one of the promises of the religion was, that

whoever was converted to it, as impious and as great a villain

as he might be, could hope that his crimes were immediately

forgotten.[445:1] From that moment, Constantine declared

himself the protector of a sect which treats great criminals

with so much lenity.[445:2] He was a great villain, who tried

to lull himself with illusions to smother his remorse."[445:3]

By the delay of baptism, a person who had accepted the _true_ faith

could venture freely to indulge their passions in the enjoyment of this

world, while they still retained in their own hands the means of

salvation; therefore, we find that Constantine, although he accepted the

faith, did not get baptized until he was on his death-bed, as he wished

to continue, as long as possible, the wicked life he was leading. Mr.

Gibbon, speaking of him, says:

"The example and reputation of Constantine seemed to

countenance the delay of baptism. Future tyrants were

encouraged to believe, that the innocent blood which they

might shed in a long reign would instantly be washed away in

the waters of regeneration; and the abuse of religion

dangerously undermined the foundations of moral

virtue."[445:4]

Eusebius, in his "Life of Constantine," tells us that:

"_When he thought that he was near his death_, he confessed

his sins, desiring pardon for them of God, and was baptized.

"Before doing so, he assembled the bishops of Nicomedia

together, and spake thus unto them:

"'Brethren, the salvation which I have earnestly desired of

God these many years, I do now this day expect. It is time

therefore that we should be sealed and signed with the badge

of immortality. And though I proposed to receive it in the

river Jordan, in which our Saviour for our example was

baptized, yet God, knowing what is fittest for me, hath

appointed that I shall receive it in this place, _therefore

let me not be delayed_.'"

"And so, after the service of baptism was read, they baptized

him with all the ceremonies belonging to this mysterious

sacrament. So that Constantine was the first of all the

emperors who was regenerated by the new birth of baptism, and

that was signed with the sign of the cross."[446:1]

When Constantine had heard the good news from the Christian monk from

Egypt, he commenced by conferring many dignities on the Christians, and

those only who were addicted to Christianity, he made governors of his

provinces, &c.[446:2] He then issued edicts against heretics,--_i. e._,

those who, like Arius, did not believe that Christ was "_of one

substance with the Father_," and others--calling them "enemies of truth

and eternal life," "authors and councillors of death," &c.[446:3] He

"_commanded by law_" that none should dare "to meet at conventicles,"

and that "all places where they were wont to keep their meetings should

be _demolished_," or "confiscated to the Catholic church;"[446:4] _and

Constantine was emperor_. "By this means," says Eusebius, "_such as

maintained doctrines and opinions contrary to the church, were

suppressed._"[446:5]

This Constantine, says Eusebius:

"Caused his image to be engraven on his gold coins, in the

form of prayer, with his hands joined together, and looking up

towards Heaven." "And over divers gates of his palace, he was

drawn praying, and lifting up his hands and eyes to

heaven."[446:6]

After his death, "effigies of this blessed man" were engraved on the

Roman coins, "sitting in and driving a chariot, and a hand reached down

from heaven to receive and take him up."[446:7]

The hopes of wealth and honors, the example of an emperor, his

exhortations, his irresistible smiles, diffused conviction among the

venal and obsequious crowds which usually fill the apartments of a

palace, and as the lower ranks of society are governed by example, the

conversion of those who possessed any eminence of birth, of power, or of

riches, _was soon followed by dependent multitudes_. Constantine passed

a law which gave freedom to all the slaves who should embrace

Christianity, and to those who were not slaves, he gave a white garment

and twenty pieces of gold, upon their embracing the Christian faith. The

common people were thus _purchased_ at such an easy rate that, in one

year, _twelve thousand men were baptised at Rome_, besides a

proportionable number of women and children.[447:1]

To suppress the opinions of philosophers, which were contrary to

Christianity, the Christian emperors published edicts. The respective

decrees of the emperors Constantine and Theodosius,[447:2] generally ran

in the words, "that all writings adverse to the claims of the Christian

religion, in the possession of whomsoever they should be found, should

be committed to the fire," as the pious emperors would not that those

things tending to provoke God to wrath, should be allowed to offend the

minds of the piously disposed.

The following is a decree of the Emperor Theodosius of this purport:

"We decree, therefore, that all writings, whatever, which

Porphyry or anyone else hath written against the Christian

religion, in the possession of whomsoever they shall be found

should be committed to the fire; for we would not suffer any

of those things so much as to come to men's ears, which tend

to provoke God to wrath and offend the minds of the

_pious_."[447:3]

A similar decree of the emperor for establishing the doctrine of the

Trinity, concludes with an admonition to all who shall object to it,

that,

"Besides the condemnation of divine justice, they must expect

to suffer the severe penalties, which _our_ authority, guided

by heavenly wisdom, may think proper to inflict upon

them."[447:4]

This orthodox emperor (Theodosius) considered every heretic (as he

called those who did not believe as he and his ecclesiastics

_professed_) a rebel against the supreme powers of heaven and of earth

(he being one of the supreme powers of earth), _and each of the powers_

might exercise their peculiar jurisdiction _over the soul and body of

the guilty_.

The decrees of the Council of Constantinople had ascertained the _true_

standard of the faith, _and the ecclesiastics, who governed the

conscience of Theodosius, suggested the most effectual methods of

persecution_. In the space of fifteen years he promulgated at least

fifteen severe edicts against the heretics, _more especially against

those who rejected the doctrine of the Trinity_.[448:1]

_Arius_ (the presbyter of whom we have spoken in Chapter XXXV., as

declaring that, in the nature of things, _a father must be older than

his son_) was _excommunicated_ for his so-called _heretical_ notions

concerning the Trinity. His followers, who were very numerous, were

called Arians. Their writings, _if they had been permitted to

exist_,[448:2] would undoubtedly contain the lamentable story of the

persecution which affected the church under the reign of the impious

Emperor _Theodosius_.

In Asia Minor the people were persecuted by orders of Constantius, and

these orders were more than obeyed by Macedonius. The civil and military

powers were ordered to obey his commands; the consequence was, he

disgraced the reign of Constantius. "The rites of baptism were conferred

on women and children, who, for that purpose, had been torn from the

arms of their friends and parents; the mouths of the communicants were

held open by a wooden engine, while the consecrated bread was forced

down their throats; the breasts of tender virgins were either burned

with red-hot egg-shells, or inhumanly compressed between sharp and heavy

boards."[448:3] The principal assistants of Macedonius--the tool of

Constantius--in the work of persecution, were the two bishops of

Nicomedia and Cyzicus, who were esteemed for their virtues, and

especially for their charity.[448:4]

Julian, the successor of Constantius, has described some of the

theological calamities which afflicted the empire, and more especially

in the East, in the reign of a prince who was the slave of his own

passions, and of those of his eunuchs: "Many were imprisoned, and

persecuted, and driven into exile. Whole troops of those who are styled

_heretics_ were massacred, particularly at Cyzicus, and at Samosata. In

Paphlagonia, Bithynia, Gallatia, and in many other provinces, towns and

villages were laid waste, and utterly destroyed."[449:1]

Persecutions in the name of Christ Jesus were inflicted on the heathen

in most every part of the then known world. Even among the Norwegians,

the Christian sword was unsheathed. They clung tenaciously to the

worship of their forefathers, and numbers of them died real martyrs for

their faith, after suffering the most cruel torments from their

persecutors. It was by sheer compulsion that the Norwegians embraced

Christianity. The reign of Olaf Tryggvason, a Christian king of Norway,

was in fact entirely devoted to the propagation of the new faith, by

means the most revolting to humanity. His general practice was to enter

a district at the head of a formidable force, summon a _Thing_,[449:2]

and give the people the alternative of fighting with him, or of being

baptized. Most of them, of course, preferred baptism to the risk of a

battle with an adversary so well prepared for combat; and the recusants

were tortured to death with fiend-like ferocity, and their estates

confiscated.[449:3]

These are some of the reasons "why Christianity prospered."

* * * * *

NOTE.--The learned Christian historian Pagi endeavors to smoothe over

the crimes of Constantine. He says: "As for those few murders (which

Eusebius says nothing about), had he thought it worth his while to refer

to them, he would perhaps, with Baronius himself have said, that the

young Licinius (his infant nephew), although the fact might not

generally have been known, had most likely been an accomplice in the

treason of his father. That as to the murder of his son, the Emperor is

rather to be considered as unfortunate than as criminal. And with

respect to his putting his wife to death, he ought to be pronounced

rather a just and righteous judge. As for his numerous friends, whom

Eutropius informs us he put to death one after another, we are bound to

believe that most of them deserved it, and they were found out to have

abused the Emperor's too great credulity, for the gratification of their

own inordinate wickedness, and insatiable avarice; and such no doubt was

that SOPATER the philosopher, who was at last put to death upon the

accusation of Adlabius, and that by the righteous dispensation of God,

for his having attempted to alienate the mind of Constantine from the

true religion." (_Pagi Ann._ 324, quoted in Latin by Dr. Lardner, vol.

iv. p. 371, in his notes for the benefit of the _learned_ reader, but

gives no rendering into English.)

FOOTNOTES:

[419:1] "Numerous bodies of ascetics (Therapeutæ), especially near Lake

Mareotis, devoted themselves to discipline and study, abjuring society

and labor, and often forgetting, it is said, the simplest wants of

nature, in contemplating the hidden wisdom of the _Scriptures_. Eusebius

even claimed them as _Christians_; and some of the forms of monasticism

were evidently modeled after the _Therapeutæ_." (Smith's Bible

Dictionary, art. "_Alexandria_.")

[420:1] Comp. Matt. vi. 33; Luke, xii. 31.

[420:2] Comp. Matt. vi. 19-21.

[420:3] Comp. Matt. xix. 21; Luke, xii. 33.

[420:4] Comp. Acts, ii. 44, 45; iv. 32-34; John, xii. 6; xiii. 29.

[420:5] Comp. Matt. xx. 25-28; Mark, ix. 35-37; x. 42-45.

[420:6] Comp. Matt. xxiii. 8-10.

[420:7] Comp. Matt. v. 5; xi. 29.

[420:8] Comp. Mark, xvi. 17; Matt. x. 8; Luke, ix. 1, 2; x. 9.

[420:9] Comp. Matt. v. 34.

[420:10] Comp. Matt. x. 9, 10.

[421:1] Comp. Luke, xxii. 36.

[421:2] Comp. Matt. xix. 10-12; I. Cor. viii.

[421:3] Comp. Rom. xii. 1.

[421:4] Comp. I. Cor. xiv. 1, 39.

[421:5] The above comparisons have been taken from Ginsburg's "Essenes,"

to which the reader is referred for a more lengthy observation on the

subject.

[421:6] Ginsburg's Essenes, p. 24.

[421:7] "We hear very little of them after A. D. 40; and there can

hardly be any doubt that, owing to the great similarity existing between

their precepts and practices and those of primitive Christians, the

Essenes _as a body_ must have embraced Christianity." (Dr. Ginsburg, p.

27.)

[422:1] This will be alluded to in another chapter.

[422:2] It was believed by some that the order of _Essenes_ was

instituted by Elias, and some writers asserted that there was a regular

succession of hermits upon Mount Carmel from the time of the prophets to

that of Christ, and that the hermits embraced Christianity at an early

period. (See Ginsburgh's Essenes, and Hardy's Eastern Monachism, p.

358.)

[422:3] King's Gnostics and their Remains, p. 1.

[422:4] Ibid. p. 6.

[422:5] King's Gnostics, p. 23.

[422:6] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 2, ch. xvii.

[423:1] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 2, ch. xvii.

[423:2] Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah, p. vii. "The New Testament is the

Essene-Nazarene Glad Tidings! Adon, Adoni, Adonis, style of worship."

(S. F. Dunlap: Son of the Man, p. iii.)

[423:3] Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 747; vol. ii. p. 34.

[423:4] "In this," says Mr. Lillie, "he was supported by philosophers of

the calibre of Schilling and Schopenhauer, and the great Sanscrit

authority, Lassen. Renan also sees traces of this Buddhist propagandism

in Palestine before the Christian era. Hilgenfeld, Mutter, Bohlen, King,

all admit the Buddhist influence. Colebrooke saw a striking similarity

between the Buddhist philosophy and that of the Pythagoreans. Dean

Milman was convinced that the Therapeuts sprung from the 'contemplative

and indolent fraternities' of India." And, he might have added, the Rev.

Robert Taylor in his "_Diegesis_," and Godfrey Higgins in his

"Anacalypsis," have brought strong arguments to bear in support of this

theory.

[424:1] Buddha and Early Buddhism, p. vi.

[424:2] Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 121.

[424:3] Ibid. p. 240.

[425:1] "The Essenes abounded in Egypt, especially about Alexandria."

(Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 2, ch. xvii.)

[425:2] Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 255.

[426:1] Rhys Davids' Buddhism, p. 179.

[426:2] This is clearly shown by Mr. Higgins in his Anacalypsis. It

should be remembered that Gautama Buddha, the "Angel-Messiah," and

Cyrus, the "Anointed" of the Lord, are placed about six hundred years

before Jesus, the "Anointed." This cycle of six hundred years was called

the "_great year_." Josephus, the Jewish historian, alludes to it when

speaking of the patriarchs that lived to a great age. "God afforded them

a longer time of life," says he, "on account of their virtue, and the

good use they made of it in astronomical and geometrical discoveries,

which would not have afforded the time for foretelling (the periods of

the stars), unless they had lived _six hundred years_; for the _great

year_ is completed in that interval." (Josephus, Antiq., bk. i. c. iii.)

"From this cycle of _six hundred_," says Col. Vallancey, "came the name

of the bird Phoenix, called by the Egyptians Phenu, with the well-known

story of its going to Egypt to burn itself on the altar of the Sun (at

Heliopolis) and rise again from its ashes, at the end of a certain

period."

[426:3] "Philo's writings prove the probability, almost rising to a

certainty, that already in his time the Essenes did expect an

Angel-Messiah as one of a series of divine incarnations. Within about

fifty years after Philo's death, Elkesai the Essene probably applied

this doctrine to Jesus, and it was promulgated in Rome about the same

time, if not earlier, by the Pseudo-Clementines." (Bunsen: The

Angel-Messiah, p. 118.)

"There was, at this time (_i. e._, at the time of the birth of Jesus), a

prevalent expectation that some remarkable personage was about to appear

in Judea. The Jews were anxiously looking for the coming of the

_Messiah_. By computing the time mentioned by Daniel (ch. ix. 23-27),

they knew that the period was approaching when the Messiah should

appear. This personage, _they supposed_, would be a temporal prince, and

they were expecting that he would deliver them from Roman bondage. _It

was natural that this expectation should spread into other countries._"

(Barnes' Notes, vol. i. p. 27.)

[427:1] Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 273.

[427:2] See Lardner's Works, vol. viii. p. 353.

[427:3] Apol. 1, ch. xxvi.

[428:1] See Lardner's Works, vol. viii. p. 593.

[428:2] Socrates: Eccl. Hist., lib. i. ch. xvii.

[429:1] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 3, ch. xxiii.

[429:2] Ibid. lib. 7, ch. xxx.

[429:3] The death of Manes, according to Socrates, was as follows: The

King of Persia, hearing that he was in Mesopotamia, "made him to be

apprehended, flayed him alive, took his skin, filled it full of chaff,

and hanged it at the gates of the city." (Eccl. Hist., lib. 1, ch. xv.)

[430:1] Plato in Apolog. Anac., ii. p. 189.

[431:1] Mark, xiii. 21, 22.

[432:1] Geikie: Life of Christ, vol. i. p. 79.

[433:1] Frothingham's Cradle of the Christ.

[433:2] "The prevailing opinion of the Rabbis and the people alike, in

Christ's day, was, that the Messiah would be simply a great prince, who

should found a kingdom of matchless splendor." "With a few, however, the

conception of the Messiah's kingdom was pure and lofty. . . . Daniel,

and all who wrote after him, painted the 'Expected One' as a _heavenly

being_. He was the 'messenger,' the 'Elect of God,' appointed from

eternity, to appear in due time, and _redeem_ his people." (Geikie's

Life of Christ, vol. i. pp. 80, 81.)

In the book of _Daniel_, by some supposed to have been written during

the captivity, by others as late as Antiochus Epiphanes (B. C. 75), the

restoration of the Jews is described in tremendous language, and the

Messiah is portrayed as a supernatural personage, in close relation with

Jehovah himself. In the book of Enoch, supposed to have been written at

various intervals between 144 and 120 (B. C.) and to have been completed

in its present form in the first half of the second century that

preceded the advent of Jesus, the figure of the Messiah is invested with

superhuman attributes. He is called "The Son of God," "whose name was

spoken before the Sun was made;" "who existed from the beginning in the

presence of God," that is, was pre-existent. At the same time his human

characteristics are insisted on. He is called "Son of Man," even "Son of

Woman," "The Anointed" or "The Christ," "The Righteous One," &c.

(Frothingham: The Cradle of the Christ, p. 20.)

[433:3] This is clearly seen from the statement made by the Matthew

narrator (xvii. 9-13) that the disciples of Christ Jesus supposed John

the Baptist was Elias.

[434:1] Isaiah, xlv. 1.

[434:2] Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah, p. 17.

[434:3] Quoted in Middleton's Letters from Rome, p. 51.

[434:4] Hieron ad Nep. Quoted Volney's Ruins, p. 177, _note_.

[434:5] See his Eccl. Hist., viii. 21.

[435:1] Gibbon's Rome, vol. ii. pp. 79, 80.

[435:2] "On voit dans l'histoire que j'ai rapportée une sorte

d'hypocrisie, qui n'a peut-être été que trop commune dans tous les tems.

C'est que des ecclésiastiques, non-seulement ne disent pas ce qu'ils

pensent, mais disent tout le contraire de ce qu'ils pensent. Philosophes

dans leur cabinet, hors delà, ils content des fables, quoiqu'ils sachent

bien que ce sont des fables. Ils font plus; ils livrent au bourreau des

gens de biens, pour l'avoir dit. Combiens d'athées et de profanes ont

fait brûler de saints personnages, sous prétexte d'hérésie? Tous les

jours des hypocrites, consacrent et font adorer l'hostie, bien qu'ils

soient aussi convaincus que moi, que ce n'est qu'un morceau de pain."

(Tom. 2, p. 568.)

[435:3] On the Use of the Fathers, pp. 36, 37.

[435:4] Quoted in Taylor's Syntagma, p. 170.

[435:5] Mosheim: vol. 1, p. 198.

[435:6] "Postremo illud quoque me vehementer movet, quod videam primis

ecclesiæ temporibus, quam plurimos extitisse, qui facinus palmarium

judicabant, cælestem veritatem, figmentis suis ire adjutum, quo facilius

nova doctrina a gentium sapientibus admitteretur Officiosa hæc mendacia

vocabant bono fine exeogitata." (Quoted in Taylor's Diegesis, p. 44, and

Giles' Hebrew and Christian Records, vol. ii. p. 19.)

[436:1] See the Vision of Hermas, b. 2, c. iii.

[436:2] Mosheim, vol. i. p. 197. Quoted in Taylor's Diegesis, p. 47.

[436:3] Dr. Giles: Hebrew and Christian Records, vol. ii. p. 99.

[436:4] "Continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved

away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was

preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made

a minister." (Colossians, i. 23.)

[436:5] "Being crafty, I caught you with guile." (II. Cor. xii. 16.)

[436:6] "For if the truth of God had more abounded _through my lie_ unto

his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner." (Romans, iii. 7.)

[437:1] "Si me tamen audire velis, mallem te pænas has dicere

indefinitas quam infinitas. Sed veniet dies, cum non minus absurda,

habebitur et odiosa hæc opinio quam transubstantiatio hodie." (De Statu

Mort., p. 304. Quoted in Taylor's Diegesis, p. 43.)

[437:2] Quoted in Taylor's Syntagma, p. 52.

Among the ancients, there were many stories current of countries, the

inhabitants of which were of peculiar size, form or features. Our

Christian saint evidently believed these tales, and thinking thus,

sought to make others believe them. We find the following examples

related by _Herodotus_: "Aristeas, son of Caystrobius, a native of

Proconesus, says in his epic verses that, inspired by Apollo, he came to

the Issedones; that beyond the Issedones dwell the Arimaspians, _a

people that have only one eye_." (Herodotus, book iv. ch. 13.) "When one

has passed through a considerable extent of the rugged country (of the

Seythians), a people are found living at the foot of lofty mountains,

_who are said to be all bald from their birth_, both men and women

alike, and they are flat-nosed, and have large chins." (Ibid. ch. 23.)

"These bald men say, what to me is incredible, that _men with goat's

feet_ inhabit these mountains; and when one has passed beyond them,

other men are found, _who sleep six months at a time_, but this I do not

at all admit." (Ibid. ch. 24.) In the country westward of Libya, "there

are enormous serpents, and lions, elephants, bears, asps, and asses with

horns, and monsters with dog's heads and without heads, _who have eyes

in their breasts_, at least, as the Libyans say, and wild men and wild

women, and many other wild beasts which are not fabulous." (Ibid. ch.

192.)

[438:1] Nicodemus, Apoc., ch. xii.

[438:2] See Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 1, ch. xiv.

[438:3] Socrates: Eccl. Hist., lib. 1, ch. xiii.

[438:4] In year 1444, Caxton published the first book ever printed in

England. In 1474, the then Bishop of London, in a convocation of his

clergy, said: "_If we do not destroy this dangerous invention, it will

one day destroy us._" (See Middleton's Letters from Rome, p. 4.) The

reader should compare this with Pope Leo X.'s avowal that, "_it is well

known how profitable this fable of Christ has been to us_;" and

Archdeacon Paley's declaration that "_he could ill afford to have a

conscience_."

[438:5] _Porphyry_, who flourished about the year 270 A. D., a man of

great abilities, published a large work of fifteen books against the

Christians. "His objections against Christianity," says Dr. Lardner,

"were in esteem with Gentile people for a long while; and the Christians

were not insensible of the importance of his work; as may be concluded

from the several answers made to it by Eusebius, and others in great

repute for learning." (Vol. viii. p. 158.) There are but fragments of

these _fifteen_ books remaining, _Christian magistrates_ having ordered

them to be destroyed. (Ibid.)

[438:6] _Hierocles_ was a Neo-Platonist, who lived at Alexandria about

the middle of the fifth century, and enjoyed a great reputation. He was

the author of a great number of works, a few extracts of which alone

remain.

[438:7] _Celsus_ was an Epicurean philosopher, who lived in the second

century A. D. He wrote a work called "The True Word," against

Christianity, but as it has been destroyed we know nothing about it.

Origen claims to give quotations from it.

[440:1] Draper: Religion and Science, pp. 18-21.

[440:2] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iii. p. 146.

[441:1] Draper: Religion and Science, pp. 55, 56. See also, Socrates'

Eccl. Hist., lib. 7, ch. xv.

[442:1] We have seen this particularly in the cases of Crishna and

Buddha. Mr. Cox, speaking of the former, says: "If it be urged that the

attribution to Crishna of qualities or powers belonging to the other

deities is a mere device by which _his_ devotees sought to supersede the

more ancient gods, _the answer must be that nothing has been done in his

case which has not been done in the case of almost every other member of

the great company of the gods_." (Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 130.)

These words apply to the case we have before us. Jesus was simply

attributed with the qualities or powers which _had been previously

attributed to other deities_. This we hope to be able to fully

demonstrate in our chapter on "_Explanation_."

[443:1] "Dogma of the Deity of Jesus Christ," p. 41.

[444:1] Adherents of the old religion of Russia have been persecuted in

that country within the past year, and even in enlightened England, a

gentleman has been persecuted by government officials because he

believes in neither a personal God or a personal Devil.

[444:2] Renan, Hibbert Lectures, p. 22.

[444:3] The following are the names of his victims:

Maximian, His wife's father, A. D. 310

Bassianus, His sister's husband, A. D. 314

Licinius, His nephew, A. D. 319

Fausta, His wife, A. D. 320

Sopater, His former friend, A. D. 321

Licinius, His sister's husband, A. D. 325

Crispus, His own son, A. D. 326

Dr. Lardner, in speaking of the murders committed by this Christian

saint, is constrained to say that: "The death of Crispus is altogether

without any _good_ excuse, so likewise is the death of the young

Licinianus, who could not have been more than a little above eleven

years of age, and appears not to have been charged with any fault, and

could hardly be suspected of any."

[444:4] The Emperor Nero could not be _baptized_ and be initiated into

Pagan Mysteries--as Constantine was initiated into those of the

Christians--on account of the murder of his mother. And he did not dare

to _compel_--which he certainly could have done--the priests to initiate

him.

[444:5] Zosimus, in Socrates, lib. iii. ch. xl.

[445:1] "The sacrament of baptism was supposed to contain a full and

absolute expiation of sin; and the soul was instantly restored to its

original purity and entitled to the promise of eternal salvation. Among

the proselytes of Christianity, there were many who judged it imprudent

to precipitate a salutary rite, which could not be repeated. By the

delay of their baptism, they could venture freely to indulge their

passions in the enjoyments of this world, while they still retained in

their own hands the means of a sure and speedy absolution." (Gibbon: ii.

pp. 272, 273.)

[445:2] "Constantine, as he was praying about noon-tide, God showed him

a vision in the sky, which was the sign of the cross lively figured in

the air, with this inscription on it: 'In hoc vince;' that is, 'By this

overcome.'" This is the story as related by Eusebius (Life of

Constantine, lib. 1, ch. xxii.), but it must be remembered that Eusebius

acknowledged that he told falsehoods. That night Christ appeared unto

Constantine in his dream, and commanded him to make the figure of the

cross which he had seen, and to wear it in his _banner_ when he went to

battle with his enemies. (See Eusebius' Life of Constantine, lib. 1, ch.

xxiii. See also, Socrates: Eccl. Hist., lib. 1, ch. ii.)

[445:3] Dupuis, p. 405.

[445:4] Gibbon's Rome, vol. ii. p. 373. The Fathers, who censured this

criminal delay, could not deny the certain and victorious efficacy even

of a death-bed baptism. The ingenious rhetoric of Chrysostom (A. D.

347-407) could find only three arguments against these prudent

Christians. 1. "That we should love and pursue virtue for her own sake,

and not merely for the reward. 2. That we may be surprised by death

without an opportunity of baptism. 3. That although we shall be placed

in heaven, we shall only twinkle like little stars, when compared to the

suns of righteousness who have run their appointed course with labor,

with success, and with glory." (Chrysostom in Epist. ad Hebræos. Homil.

xiii. Quoted in Gibbon's "Rome," ii. 272.)

[446:1] Lib. 4, chs. lxi. and lxii., and Socrates: Eccl. Hist., lib. 2,

ch. xxvi.

[446:2] Eusebius: Life of Constantine, lib. 2, ch. xliii.

[446:3] Ibid. lib. 3, ch. lxii.

[446:4] Ibid. lib. 3, ch. lxiii.

[446:5] Ibid. lib. 3, ch. lxiv.

[446:6] Ibid. lib. 4, ch. xv.

[446:7] Ibid. ch. lxiii.

Plato places the ferocious tyrants in the Tartarus, such as Ardiacus of

Pamphylia, who had slain his own father, a venerable old man, also an

elder brother, and was stained with a great many other crimes.

Constantine, covered with similar crimes, was better treated by the

Christians, who have sent him to heaven, and _sainted_ him besides.

[447:1] Gibbon's Rome, vol. ii. p. 274.

[447:2] "Theodosius, though a professor of the orthodox Christian faith,

was not baptized till 380, and his behavior after that period stamps him

as one of the most cruel and vindictive persecutors who ever wore the

purple. His arbitrary establishment of the Nicene faith over the whole

empire, the deprivation of civil rites of all apostates from

Christianity and of the Eunomians, the sentence of death on the

Manicheans, and Quarto-decimans all prove this." (Chambers's Encyclo.,

art. Theodosius.)

[447:3] Quoted in Taylor's Syntagma, p. 54.

[447:4] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iii. p. 81.

[448:1] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iii. pp. 91, 92.

[448:2] All their writings were ordered to be destroyed.

[448:3] Gibbon's Rome, vol. ii. p. 359.

[448:4] Ibid. note 154.

[449:1] Julian: Epistol. lii. p. 436. Quoted in Gibbon's Rome, vol. ii.

p. 360.

[449:2] "_Thing_"--a general assembly of the freemen, who gave their

assent to a measure by striking their shields with their drawn swords.

[449:3] See Mallet's Northern Antiquities, pp. 180, 351, and 470.

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

THE ANTIQUITY OF PAGAN RELIGIONS.

We shall now compare the great antiquity of the sacred books and

religions of Paganism with those of the Christian, so that there may be

no doubt as to which is the original, and which the copy. Allusions to

this subject have already been made throughout this work, we shall

therefore devote as little space to it here as possible.

In speaking of the sacred literature of India, Prof. Monier Williams

says:

"Sanskrit literature, embracing as it does nearly every branch

of knowledge is entirely deficient in one department. It is

wholly destitute of trustworthy historical records. Hence,

little or nothing is known of the lives of ancient Indian

authors, and the dates of their most celebrated works cannot

be fixed with certainty. A fair conjecture, however, may be

arrived at by comparing the most ancient with the more modern

compositions, and estimating the period of time required to

effect the changes of structure and idiom observable in the

language. In this manner we may be justified in assuming that

the hymns of the Veda were probably composed by a succession

of poets at different dates between 1500 and 1000 years B.

C."[450:1]

Prof. Wm. D. Whitney shows the great antiquity of the Vedic hymns from

the fact that,

"The language of the Vedas is an _older_ dialect, varying very

considerably, both in its grammatical and lexical character,

from the classical Sanscrit."

And M. de Coulanges, in his "Ancient City," says:

"We learn from the hymns of the _Vedas_, which are certainly

very ancient, and from the laws of Manu," "what the Aryans of

the east thought nearly thirty-five centuries ago."[450:2]

That the _Vedas_ are of very high antiquity is unquestionable; but

however remote we may place the period when they were written, we must

necessarily presuppose that the Hindostanic race had already attained

to a comparatively high degree of civilization, otherwise men capable of

framing such doctrines could not have been found. Now this state of

civilization must necessarily have been preceded by several centuries of

barbarism, during which we cannot possibly admit a more refined faith

than the popular belief in elementary deities.

We shall see in our next chapter that these very ancient Vedic hymns

contain the _origin_ of the legend of the Virgin-born God and Saviour,

the great benefactor of mankind, who is finally put to death, and rises

again to life and immortality on the third day.

The _Geetas_ and _Puranas_, although of a comparatively modern date,

are, as we have already seen, nevertheless composed of matter to be

found in the two great epic poems, the _Ramayana_ and the _Mahabharata_,

which were written many centuries before the time assigned as that of

the birth of Christ Jesus.[451:1]

The Pali sacred books, which contain the legend of the virgin-born God

and Saviour--Sommona Cadom--are known to have been in existence 316 B.

C.[451:2]

We have already seen that the religion known as Buddhism, and which

corresponds in such a striking manner with Christianity, has now existed

for upwards of twenty-four hundred years.[451:3]

Prof. Rhys Davids says:

"There is every reason to believe that the _Pitakas_ (the

sacred books which contain the legend of 'The Buddha'), now

extant in Ceylon, are substantially identical with the books

of the Southern Canon, as settled at the Council of Patna

about the year 250 B. C.[451:4] As no works would have been

received into the Canon which were not _then_ believed to be

very old, the _Pitakas_ may be approximately placed in the

_fourth century_ B. C., and parts of them possibly reach back

very nearly, if not quite, to the time of Gautama

himself."[451:5]

The religion of the ancient _Persians_, which corresponds in so very

many respects with that of the Christians, was established by

Zoroaster--who was undoubtedly a Brahman[451:6]--and is contained in

the _Zend-Avesta_, their sacred book or Bible. This book is very

ancient. Prof. Max Müller speaks of "the sacred book of the

Zoroastrians" as being "older in its language than the cuneiform

inscriptions of Cyrus (B. C. 560), Darius (B. C. 520), and Xerxes (B. C.

485) those ancient Kings of Persia, who knew that they were kings by the

grace of _Auramazda_, and who placed his sacred image high on the

mountain-records of Behistun."[452:1] That ancient book, or its

fragments, at least, have survived many dynasties and kingdoms, and is

still believed in by a small remnant of the Persian race, now settled at

Bombay, and known all over the world by the name of Parsees.[452:2]

"The Babylonian and Phenician sacred books date back to a fabulous

antiquity;"[452:3] and so do the sacred books and religion of Egypt.

Prof. Mahaffy, in his "Prolegomena to Ancient History," says:

"There is indeed hardly a great and fruitful idea in the

Jewish or Christian systems which has not its analogy in the

Egyptian faith, and _all these theological conceptions pervade

the oldest religion of Egypt_."[452:4]

The worship of Osiris, the Lord and Saviour, must have been of extremely

ancient date, for he is represented as "Judge of the Dead," in

sculptures contemporary with the building of the Pyramids, centuries

before Abraham is said to have been born. Among the many hieroglyphic

titles which accompany his figure in those sculptures, and in many other

places on the walls of temples and tombs, are, "Lord of Life," "The

Eternal Ruler," "Manifester of Good," "Revealer of Truth," "Full of

Goodness and Truth," etc.

In speaking of the "Myth of Osiris," Mr. Bonwick says:

"This great mystery of the Egyptians demands serious

consideration. Its antiquity--its universal hold upon the

people for over five thousand years--its identification with

the very life of the nation--_and its marvellous likeness to

the creed of modern date_, unite in exciting the greatest

interest."[452:5]

This myth, and that of Isis and Horus, were known before the Pyramid

time.[453:1]

The worship of the Virgin Mother in Egypt--from which country it was

imported into Europe[453:2]--dates back thousands of years B. C. Mr.

Bonwick says:

"In all probability she was worshiped three thousand years

before Moses wrote. 'Isis nursing her child Horus, was

represented,' says Mariette Bey, 'at least six thousand years

ago.' We read the name of Isis on monuments of the fourth

dynasty, and she lost none of her popularity to the close of

the empire."

"The Egyptian Bible is by far the most ancient of all holy

books." "Plato was told that Egypt possessed hymns dating back

ten thousand years before his time."[453:3]

Bunsen says:

"The origin of the ancient prayers and hymns of the 'Book of

the Dead,' is anterior to Menes; it implies that the system of

Osirian worship and mythology was already formed."[453:4]

And, says Mr. Bonwick:

"Besides opinions, we have facts as a basis for arriving at a

conclusion, and justifying the assertion of Dr. Birch, that

the work dated from a period long anterior to the rise of

Ammon worship at Thebes."[453:5]

Now, "this most ancient of all holy books," establishes the fact that a

virgin-born and resurrected Saviour was worshiped in Egypt thousands of

year before the time of Christ Jesus.

P. Le Page Renouf says:

"The _earliest monuments_ which have been discovered present

to us the _very same_ fully-developed civilization and the

_same religion_ as the later monuments. . . . The gods whose

names appear in the _oldest tombs_ were worshiped down to the

Christian times. The same kind of priesthoods which are

mentioned in the tablets of Canopus and Rosetta in the

Ptolemaic period are as ancient as the pyramids, and more

ancient than any pyramid of which we know the date."[453:6]

In regard to the doctrine of the _Trinity_. We have just seen that "the

development of the One God into a Trinity" pervades the oldest religion

of Egypt, and the same may be said of India. Prof. Monier Williams,

speaking on this subject, says:

"It should be observed that the native commentaries on the

Veda often allude to thirty-three gods, which number is also

mentioned in the Rig-Veda. This is a multiple of _three_,

which is a sacred number constantly appearing in the Hindu

religious system. It is probable, indeed, that although the

Tri-murti is not named in the Vedic hymns,[454:1] yet the

Veda is the real source of this Triad of personifications,

afterwards so conspicuous in Hindu mythology. This much, at

least, is clear, that the Vedic poets exhibited a tendency to

group all the forces and energies of nature under three heads,

and the assertion that the number of the gods was

thirty-three, amounted to saying that each of the three

leading personifications was capable of eleven

modifications."[454:2]

The great antiquity of the legends referred to in this work is

demonstrated in the fact that they were found in a great measure on the

continent of America, by the first Europeans who set foot on its soil.

Now, how did they get there? Mr. Lundy, in his "Monumental

Christianity," speaking on this subject, says:

"So great was the resemblance between the two sacraments of

the Christian Church (viz., that of Baptism and the Eucharist)

and those of the ancient Mexicans; so many other points of

similarity, also, in _doctrine_ existed, as to the unity of

God, the Triad, the Creation, the Incarnation and Sacrifice,

the Resurrection, etc., that Herman Witsius, no mean scholar

and thinker, was induced to believe that Christianity had been

preached on this continent by some one of the apostles,

perhaps St. Thomas, from the fact that he is reported to have

carried the Gospel to India and Tartary, whence he came to

America."[454:3]

Some writers, who do not think that St. Thomas could have gotten to

America, believe that St. Patrick, or some other saint, must have, in

some unaccountable manner, reached the shores of the Western continent,

and preached their doctrine there.[454:4] Others have advocated the

devil theory, which is, that the devil, being jealous of the worship of

Christ Jesus, set up a religion of his own, and imitated, nearly as

possible, the religion of Christ. All of these theories being untenable,

we must, in the words of Burnouf, the eminent French Orientalist, "learn

one day that all ancient traditions disfigured by emigration and legend,

_belong to the history of India_."

That America was inhabited by Asiatic emigrants, and that the American

legends are of _Asiatic origin_, we believe to be indisputable. There is

an abundance of proof to this effect.[454:5]

In contrast to the great antiquity of the sacred books and religions of

Paganism, we have the facts that the Gospels were not written by the

persons whose names they bear, that they were written many years after

the time these men are said to have lived, and that they are full of

interpolations and errors. The first that we know of the four gospels

is at the time of Irenæus, who, in the second century, intimates that he

had received four gospels, as authentic scriptures. This pious forger

was probably the author of the _fourth_, as we shall presently see.

Besides these gospels there were many more which were subsequently

deemed apocryphal; the narratives related in them of Christ Jesus and

his apostles were stamped as forgeries.

"The Gospel according to Matthew" is believed by the majority of

biblical scholars of the present day to be the oldest of the four, and

to be made up principally of a pre-existing one, called "The Gospel of

the Hebrews." The principal difference in these two gospels being that

"_The Gospel of the Hebrews_" commenced with giving the genealogy of

Jesus from David, through Joseph "_according to the flesh_." The story

of Jesus being born of a virgin _was not to be found there_, it being an

afterpiece, originating either with the writer of "_The Gospel according

to Matthew_," or some one after him, and was evidently taken from "The

Gospel of the Egyptians." "_The Gospel of the Hebrews_"--from which, we

have said, the _Matthew_ narrator copied--_was an intensely Jewish

gospel_, and was to be found--in one of its forms--among the Ebionites,

who were the narrowest Jewish Christians of the second century. "_The

Gospel according to Matthew_" is, therefore, the most Jewish gospel of

the four; in fact, the most Jewish book in the New Testament, excepting,

perhaps, the _Apocalypse_ and the _Epistle of James_.

Some of the more conspicuous Jewish traits, to be found in this gospel,

are as follows:

Jesus is sent _only_ to the lost sheep of the house of _Israel_. The

twelve are forbidden to go among the _Gentiles_ or the _Samaritans_.

They are to sit on twelve thrones, _judging the twelve tribes of

Israel_. The genealogy of Jesus is traced back to _Abraham_, and there

stops.[455:1] The works of the _law_ are frequently insisted on. There

is a superstitious regard for the _Sabbath_, &c.

There is no evidence of the existence of the Gospel of Matthew,--_in its

present form_--until the year 173, A. D. It is at this time, also, that

it is first ascribed to Matthew, by Apollinaris, Bishop of Hierapolis.

The original oracles of the Gospel of the Hebrews, however,--which were

made use of by the author of our present Gospel of Matthew,--were

written, likely enough, not long before the destruction of Jerusalem,

but the Gospel itself dates from about A. D. 100.[456:1]

"_The Gospel according to Luke_" is believed to come next--in

chronological order--to that of Matthew, and to have been written some

fifteen or twenty years after it. The author was a _foreigner_, as his

writings plainly show that he was far removed from the events which he

records.

In writing his Gospel, the author made use of that of Matthew, the

Gospel of the Hebrews, and Marcion's Gospel. He must have had, also,

still other sources, as there are parables peculiar to it, which are not

found in them. Among these may be mentioned that of the "_Prodigal

Son_," and the "_Good Samaritan_." Other parables peculiar to it are

that of the two debtors; the friend borrowing bread at night; the rich

man's barns; Dives and Lazarus; the lost piece of silver; the unjust

steward; the Pharisee and the Publican.

Several miracles are also peculiar to the Luke narrator's Gospel, the

raising of the widow of Nain's son being the most remarkable. Perhaps

these stories were delivered to him _orally_, and perhaps _he is the

author of them_,--we shall never know. The foundation of the legends,

however, undoubtedly came from the "_certain scriptures_" of the Essenes

in Egypt. The principal _object_ which the writer of this gospel had in

view was to reconcile _Paulinism_ and the _more Jewish_ forms of

Christianity.[456:2]

The next in chronological order, according to the same school of

critics, is "The Gospel according to Mark." This gospel is supposed to

have been written within ten years of the former, and its author, as of

the other two gospels, is unknown. It was probably written at _Rome_, as

the Latinisms of the author's style, and the apparent motive of his

work, strongly suggest that he was a Jewish citizen of the Eternal City.

He made use of the Gospel of Matthew as his principal authority, and

probably referred to that of Luke, as he has things in common with Luke

only.

The object which the writer had in view, was to have a neutral

go-between, a compromise between Matthew as too Petrine (Jewish), and

Luke as too Pauline (Gentile). The different aspects of Matthew and Luke

were found to be confusing to believers, and provocative of hostile

criticism from without; hence the idea of writing a shorter gospel, that

should combine the most essential elements of both. Luke was itself a

compromise between the opposing Jewish and universal tendencies of

early Christianity, but Mark endeavors by avoidance and omission to

effect what Luke did more by addition and contrast. Luke proposed to

himself to open a door for the admission of Pauline ideas without

offending Gentile Christianity; Mark, on the contrary, in a negative

spirit, to publish a Gospel which should not hurt the feelings of either

party. Hence his avoidance of all those disputed questions which

disturbed the church during the first quarter of the second century. The

genealogy of Jesus is omitted; this being offensive to Gentile

Christians, and even to some of the more liberal Judaizers. The

supernatural birth of Jesus is omitted, this being offensive to the

Ebonitish (extreme Jewish) and some of the Gnostic Christians. For every

Judaizing feature that is sacrificed, a universal one is also

sacrificed. Hard words against the Jews are left out, but with equal

care, hard words about the Gentiles.[457:1]

We now come to the fourth, and last gospel, that "_according to John_,"

which was not written until many years after that "according to

Matthew."

"It is impossible to pass from the Synoptic[457:2] Gospels," says Canon

Westcott, "to the fourth, without feeling that the transition involves

the passage from one world of thought to another. No familiarity with

the general teachings of the Gospels, no wide conception of the

character of the Saviour, is sufficient to destroy the contrast which

exists in form and spirit between the earlier and later narratives."

The discrepancies between the fourth and the Synoptic Gospels are

numerous. If Jesus was the _man_ of Matthew's Gospel, he was not the

_mysterious being_ of the fourth. If his ministry was only _one_ year

long, it was not _three_. If he made but _one_ journey to Jerusalem, he

did not make _many_. If his method of teaching was that of the

Synoptics, it was not that of the fourth Gospel. If he was the _Jew_ of

Matthew, he was not the _Anti-Jew_ of John.[457:3]

Everywhere in John we come upon a more developed stage of Christianity

than in the Synoptics. The scene, the atmosphere, is different. In the

Synoptics Judaism, the Temple, the Law and the Messianic Kingdom are

omnipresent. In John they are remote and vague. In Matthew Jesus is

always yearning for _his own_ nation. In John he has no other sentiment

for it than _hate and scorn_. In Matthew the sanction of the Prophets is

his great credential. In John his dignity can tolerate no previous

approximation.

"Do we ask," says Francis Tiffany, "who wrote this wondrous Gospel?

Mysterious its origin, as that wind of which its author speaks, which

bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof and canst

not tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth. As with the Great Unknown

of the book of Job, the Great Unknown of the later Isaiah, the ages keep

his secret. _The first absolutely indisputable evidence of the existence

of the book dates from the latter half of the second century._"

The first that we know of the _fourth_ Gospel, for certainty, is at the

time of Irenæus (A. D. 179).[458:1] We look in vain for an express

recognition of the _four_ canonical Gospels, or for a _distinct mention_

of any one of them, in the writings of St. Clement (A. D. 96), St.

Ignatius (A. D. 107), St. Justin (A. D. 140), or St. Polycarp (A. D.

108). All we can find is incidents from the life of Jesus, sayings, etc.

That Irenæus is the author of it is very evident. This learned and pious

forger says:

"John, the disciple of the Lord, wrote his Gospel to confute

the doctrine _lately_ taught by Cerinthus, and a great while

before by those called Nicolaitans, a branch of the Gnostics;

and to show that there is one God who made all things by his

WORD: and not, as they say, that there is one the Creator, and

another the Father of our Lord: and one the Son of the

Creator, and another, even the Christ, who descended from

above upon the Son of the Creator, and continued impassible,

and at length returned to his pleroma or fulness."[458:2]

The idea of God having inspired _four_ different men to write a history

of the _same transactions_,--or rather, of many different men having

undertaken to write such a history, of whom God inspired _four only_ to

write correctly, leaving the others to their own unaided resources, and

giving us no test by which to distinguish the inspired from the

uninspired--certainly appears self-confuting, and anything but natural.

The reasons assigned by Irenæus for there being _four_ Gospels are as

follows:

"It is impossible that there could be more or less than

_four_. For there are _four_ climates, and _four_ cardinal

winds; but the Gospel is the pillar and foundation of the

church, and its breath of life. _The church therefore was to

have four pillars, blowing immortality from every quarter, and

giving life to man._"[459:1]

It was by this Irenæus, with the assistance of Clement of Alexandria,

and Tertullian, one of the Latin Fathers, that the four Gospels were

introduced into _general_ use among the Christians.

In these four spurious Gospels, and in some which are considered

_Apocryphal_--because the bishops at the Council of Laodicea (A. D. 365)

rejected them--we have the only history of Jesus of Nazareth. Now, if

all accounts or narratives of Christ Jesus and his Apostles were

forgeries, as it is admitted that all the _Apocryphal_ ones were, what

can the superior character of the received Gospels prove for them, but

that they are merely superiorly executed forgeries? The existence of

Jesus is implied in the New Testament outside of the Gospels, _but

hardly an incident of his life is mentioned, hardly a sentence that he

spoke has been preserved_. Paul, writing from twenty to thirty years

after his death, has but a single reference to anything he ever said or

did.

Beside these four Gospels there were, as we said above, many others,

for, in the words of Mosheim, the ecclesiastical historian:

"Not long after Christ's ascension into heaven, several

histories of his life and doctrines, full of _pious frauds_

and _fabulous wonders_, were composed by persons whose

intentions, perhaps, were not bad, but whose writings

discovered the greatest superstition and ignorance. Nor was

this all; _productions appeared, which were imposed upon the

world by fraudulent men, as the writings of the holy

apostles_."[459:2]

Dr. Conyers Middleton, speaking on this subject, says:

"There never was any period of time in all ecclesiastical

history, in which so many rank heresies were publicly

professed, _nor in which so many spurious books were forged_

and published by the Christians, under the names of Christ,

and the Apostles, and the Apostolic writers, as in those

primitive ages. _Several of these forged books are frequently

cited and applied to the defense of Christianity, by the most

eminent fathers of the same ages, as true and genuine

pieces._"[459:3]

Archbishop Wake also admits that:

"It would be useless to insist on all the spurious pieces

which were attributed to St. Paul alone, in the primitive ages

of Christianity."[460:1]

Some of the "spurious pieces which were attributed to St. Paul," may be

found to-day in our canonical New Testament, and are believed by many to

be the word of God.[460:2]

The learned Bishop Faustus, in speaking of the authenticity of the _New

Testament_, says:

"It is certain that the New Testament was not written by

Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after

them, _by some unknown persons_, who, lest they should not be

credited when they wrote of affairs they were little

acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the

apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their

companions, asserting that what they had written themselves,

was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed

it."[460:3]

Again he says:

"Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the

speeches of our Lord, which, though put forth under his name,

agree not with his faith; especially since--_as already it has

been often proved_--these things were not written by Christ,

nor his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by

I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with

themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions

merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the

apostles of the Lord, or on those who were supposed to follow

the apostles, they mendaciously pretended that they had

written their lies and conceits according to them."[460:4]

What had been said to have been done in _India_, was said by these

"half-Jews" to have been done in _Palestine_; the change of names and

places, with the mixing up of various sketches of the Egyptian, Persian,

Phenician, Greek and Roman mythology, was all that was necessary. They

had an abundance of material, and with it they built. The foundation

upon which they built was undoubtedly the "_Scriptures_," or Diegesis,

of the Essenes in Alexandria in Egypt, which fact led Eusebius, the

ecclesiastical historian--"without whom," says Tillemont, "we should

scarce have had any knowledge of the history of the first ages of

Christianity, or of the authors who wrote in that time"--to say that the

sacred writings used by this sect were none other than "_Our Gospels_."

We offer below a few of the many proofs showing the Gospels to have

been written a long time after the events narrated are said to have

occurred, and by persons unacquainted with the country of which they

wrote.

"He (Jesus) came unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the

coasts of Decapolis," is an assertion made by the Mark narrator (vii.

31), when there were no coasts of Decapolis, nor was the name so much as

known before the reign of the emperor Nero.

Again, "He (Jesus) departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of

Judea, beyond Jordan," is an assertion made by the Matthew narrator

(xix. 1), when the Jordan itself was the eastern boundary of Judea, and

there were no coasts of Judea beyond it.

Again, "But when he (Joseph) heard that Archelaus did reign in Judea, in

the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither,

notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into

the parts of Galilee, and he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth;

that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the prophets, he shall

be called a Nazarene," is another assertion made by the Matthew narrator

(ii. 22, 23), when--1. It was a son of Herod who reigned in Galilee as

well as Judea, so that he could not be more secure in one province than

in the other; and when--2. It was impossible for him to have gone from

Egypt to Nazareth, without traveling through the whole extent of

Archelaus's kingdom, or making a peregrination through the deserts on

the north and east of the Lake Asphaltites, and the country of Moab; and

then, either crossing the Jordan into Samaria or the Lake of Gennesareth

into Galilee, and from thence going to the city of Nazareth, which is no

better geography, than if one should describe a person as _turning

aside_ from Cheapside into the parts of Yorkshire; and when--3. There

were no prophets whatever who had prophesied that Jesus "_should be

called a Nazarene_."

The Matthew narrator (iv. 13) states that "He departed into Galilee, and

leaving Nazareth, came and dwelt in Capernaum," as if he imagined that

the city of Nazareth was not as properly in Galilee as Capernaum was;

which is much such geographical accuracy, as if one should relate the

travels of a hero, who departed into Middlesex, and leaving London, came

and dwelt in Lombard street.[461:1]

There are many other falsehoods in gospel geography beside these,

which, it is needless to mention, plainly show that the writers were not

the persons they are generally supposed to be.

Of gospel statistics there are many falsehoods; among them may be

mentioned the following:

"Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto

John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness," is an assertion made by

the Luke narrator (Luke iii. 2); when all Jews, or persons living among

them, must have known that there never was but _one_ high priest at a

time, as with ourselves there is but one mayor of a city.

Again we read (John vii. 52), "Search (the Scriptures) and look, for out

of Galilee ariseth no prophet," when the most distinguished of the

Jewish prophets--Nahum and Jonah--were both Galileans.

See reference in the Epistles to "_Saints_," a religious order, owing

its origin to the popes. Also, references to the distinct orders of

"_Bishops_," "_Priests_," and "_Deacons_," and calls to a monastic life;

to fasting, etc., when, the titles of "Bishop," "Priest," and "Deacon"

were given to the Essenes--whom Eusebius calls Christians--and, as is

well known, _monasteries_ were the abode of the Essenes or Therapeuts.

See the words for "_legion_," "_aprons_," "_handkerchiefs_,"

"_centurion_," etc., in the original, not being Greek, but Latin,

written in Greek characters, a practice first to be found in the

historian Herodian, in the third century.

In Matt. xvi. 18, and Matt. xviii. 17, the word "_Church_" is used, and

its _papistical_ and infallible authority referred to as then existing,

which is known not to have existed till ages after. And the passage in

Matt. xi. 12:--"From the days of John the Baptist until _now_, the

kingdom of heaven suffereth violence," etc., could not have been written

till a very late period.

Luke ii. 1, shows that the writer (whoever he may have been) lived long

after the events related. His dates, about the fifteenth year of

Tiberius, and the government of Cyrenius (the only indications of time

in the New Testament), are manifestly false. The general ignorance of

the four Evangelists, not merely of the geography and statistics of

Judea, but even of its language,--their egregious blunders, which no

writers who had lived in that age could be conceived of as

making,--prove that they were not only no such persons as those who have

been willing to be deceived have taken them to be, but that they were

not Jews, had never been in Palestine, and neither lived at, or at

anywhere near the times to which their narratives seem to refer. The

ablest divines at the present day, of all denominations, have yielded as

much as this.[463:1]

The Scriptures were in the hands of the clergy only, and they had every

opportunity to insert whatsoever they pleased; thus we find them full of

_interpolations_. Johann Solomo Semler, one of the most influential

theologians of the eighteenth century, speaking of this, says:

"The Christian doctors never brought their sacred books before

the common people; although people in general have been wont

to think otherwise; during the first ages, they were in the

hands of the clergy only."[463:2]

Concerning the _time_ when the canon of the New Testament was settled,

Mosheim says:

"The opinions, or rather the _conjectures_, of the learned

concerning the _time_ when the books of the New Testament were

collected into one volume; as also about the authors of that

collection, are extremely different. This important question

is attended with great and almost insuperable difficulties to

us in these later times."[463:3]

The Rev. B. F. Westcott says:

"It is impossible to point to any period as marking the date

at which our present canon was determined. When it first

appears, it is presented not as a novelty, but as an ancient

tradition."[463:4]

Dr. Lardner says:

"Even so late as the middle of the _sixth century_, the canon

of the New Testament had not been settled by any authority

that was decisive and universally acknowledged, but Christian

people were at liberty to judge for themselves concerning the

genuineness of writings proposed to them as apostolical, and

to determine according to evidence."[464:1]

The learned Michaelis says:

"No manuscript of the New Testament now extant is prior to the

_sixth century_, and what is to be lamented, various readings

which, as appears from the quotations of the Fathers, were in

the text of the Greek Testament, are to be found in none of

the manuscripts which are at present remaining."[464:2]

And Bishop Marsh says:

"It is a certain fact, that several readings in our common

printed text are nothing more than _alterations_ made by

Origen, whose authority was so great in the Christian Church

(A. D. 230) that emendations which he proposed, though, as he

himself acknowledged, they were supported by the evidence of

no manuscript, were very generally received."[464:3]

In his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius gives us a list of what books at

that time (A. D. 315) were considered canonical. They are as follows:

"The four-fold writings of the Evangelists," "The Acts of the

Apostles," "The Epistles of Peter," "after these the _first_

of John, and that of Peter," "_All these are received for

undoubted._" "The Revelation of St. John, _some disavow_."

"The books which are _gainsaid_, though well known unto many,

are these: the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, the

_latter_ of Peter, the _second_ and _third_ of John, _whether

they were John the Evangelist, or some other of the same

name_."[464:4]

Though Irenæus, in the second century, is the first who mentions the

evangelists, and Origen, in the third century, is the first who gives us

a catalogue of the books contained in the New Testament, Mosheim's

admission still stands before us. We have no grounds of assurance that

the mere mention of the _names_ of the evangelists by Irenæus, or the

arbitrary drawing up of a particular catalogue by Origen, were of any

authority. It is still unknown _by whom_, or _where_, or _when_, the

canon of the New Testament was settled. But in this absence of positive

evidence we have abundance of negative proof. We know when it was _not_

settled. We know it was not settled in the time of the Emperor

Justinian, nor in the time of Cassiodorus; that is, not at any time

_before the middle of the sixth century_, "by any authority that was

decisive and universally acknowledged; but Christian people were at

liberty to judge for themselves concerning the genuineness of writings

proposed to them as apostolical."

We cannot do better than close this chapter with the words of Prof. Max

Müller, who, in speaking of Buddhism, says:

"We have in the history of Buddhism an excellent opportunity

for watching the process by which a canon of sacred books is

called into existence. We see here, _as elsewhere_, that

during the life-time of the teacher, no record of events, no

sacred code containing the sayings of the Master, was wanted.

His presence was enough, and thoughts of the future, and more

particularly, of future greatness, seldom entered the minds of

those who followed him. It was only after Buddha had left the

world to enter into _Nirvâna_, that his disciples attempted to

recall the sayings and doings of their departed friend and

master. At that time, everything that seemed to redound to the

glory of Buddha, however extraordinary and incredible, was

eagerly welcomed, while witnesses who would have ventured to

criticise or reject unsupported statements, or to detract in

any way from the holy character of Buddha, had no chance of

ever being listened to. And when, in spite of all this,

differences of opinion arose, they were not brought to the

test by a careful weighing of evidence, but the names of

'_unbeliever_' and '_heretic_' were quickly invented in India

_as elsewhere_, and bandied backwards and forwards between

contending parties, till at last, when the doctors disagreed,

the help of the secular power had to be invoked, and kings and

emperors assembled councils for the suppression of schism, for

the settlement of an orthodox creed, and for the completion of

a _sacred canon_."[465:1]

That which Prof. Müller describes as taking place in the religion of

Christ Buddha, is exactly what took place in the religion of Christ

Jesus. That the miraculous, and many of the non-miraculous, events

related in the Gospels never happened, is demonstrable from the facts

which we have seen in this work, that nearly all of these events, had

been previously related of the gods and goddesses of heathen nations of

antiquity, more especially of the Hindoo Saviour _Crishna_, and the

Buddhist Saviour _Buddha_, whose religion, with less alterations than

time and translations have made in the Jewish Scriptures, may be traced

in nearly every dogma and every ceremony of the evangelical mythology.

* * * * *

NOTE.--The _Codex Sinaiticus_, referred to on the preceding page,

(_note_ 2,) was found at the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai, by

Tischendorf, in 1859. He _supposes_ that it belongs to the 4th cent.;

but Dr. Davidson (in Kitto's Bib. Ency., Art. MSS.) thinks different. He

says: "_Probably_ it is of the 6th _cent._," while he states that the

_Codex Vaticanus_ "is _believed_ to belong to the 4th cent.," and the

_Codex_ Alexandrinus to the 5th cent. McClintock & Strong's Ency. (Art.

MSS.,) relying probably on Tischendorf's conjecture, places the _Codex

Sinaiticus_ first. "It is _probably_ the oldest of the MSS. of the N.

T., and of the 4th cent.," say they. The _Codex Vaticanus_ is considered

the next oldest, and the _Codex Alexandrinus_ is placed third in order,

and "was _probably_ written in the first half of the 5th cent." The

writer of the art. N. T. in Smith's _Bib. Dic._ says: "The _Codex

Sinaiticus_ is probably the oldest of the MSS. of the N. T., and of the

4th cent.;" and that the _Codex Alexandrinus_ "was _probably_ written in

the first half of the 5th cent." Thus we see that in determining the

dates of the MSS. of the N. T., Christian divines are obliged to resort

to _conjecture_; there being no certainty whatever in the matter. But

with all their "suppositions," "probabilities," "beliefs" and

"conjectures," we have the words of the learned Michaelis still before

us, that: "No MSS. of the N. T. now extant are prior to the _sixth

cent._" This remark, however, does not cover the _Codex Sinaiticus_,

which was discovered since Michaelis wrote his work on the N. T.; but,

as we saw above, Dr. Davidson does not agree with Tischendorf in regard

to its antiquity, and places it in the 6th cent.

FOOTNOTES:

[450:1] Williams' Hinduism, p. 19. See also, Prof. Max Müller's Lectures

on the Origin of Religion, pp. 145-158, and p. 67, where he speaks of

"the Hindus, who, thousands of years ago, had reached in Upanishads the

loftiest heights of philosophy."

[450:2] The Ancient City, p. 13.

[451:1] See Monier Williams' Hinduism, pp. 109, 110, and Indian Wisdom,

p. 493.

[451:2] See Isis Unveiled, vol. ii. p. 576, for the authority of Prof.

Max Müller.

[451:3] "The religion known as Buddhism--from the title of 'The Buddha,'

meaning 'The Wise,' 'The Enlightened'--has now existed for 2400 years,

and may be said to be the prevailing religion of the world." (Chambers's

Encyclo.)

[451:4] This Council was assembled by Asoka in the eighteenth year of

his reign. The name of this king is honored wherever the teachings of

Buddha have spread, and is reverenced from the Volga to Japan, from

Ceylon and Siam to the borders of Mongolia and Siberia. Like his

Christian prototype Constantine, he was converted by a miracle. After

his conversion, which took place in the tenth year of his reign, he

became a very zealous supporter of the new religion. He himself built

many monasteries and dagabas, and provided many _monks_ with the

necessaries of life; and he encouraged those about his court to do the

same. He published edicts throughout his empire, enjoining on all his

subjects morality and justice.

[451:5] Rhys Davids' Buddhism, p. 10.

[451:6] See Chapter VII.

[452:1] Müller: Lectures on the Science of Religion, p. 235.

[452:2] This small tribe of Persians were driven from their native land

by the Mohammedan conquerors under the Khalif Omar, in the seventh

century of our era. Adhering to the ancient religion of Persia, which

resembles that of the _Veda_, and bringing with them the records of

their faith, the _Zend-Avesta_ of their prophet Zoroaster, they settled

down in the neighborhood of Surat, about one thousand one hundred years

ago, and became great merchants and shipbuilders. For two or three

centuries we know little of their history. Their religion prevented them

from making proselytes, and they never multiplied within themselves to

any extent, nor did they amalgamate with the Hindoo population, so that

even now their number only amounts to about seventy thousand.

Nevertheless, from their busy, enterprising habits, in which they

emulate Europeans, they form an important section of the population of

Bombay and Western India.

[452:3] Movers: Quoted in Dunlap's Spirit Hist., p. 261.

[452:4] Prolegomena, p. 417.

[452:5] Bonwick's Egyptian Belief, p. 162.

[453:1] Bonwick's Egyptian Belief, p. 163.

[453:2] Ibid. p. 142, and King's Gnostics, p. 71.

[453:3] Bonwick's Egyptian Belief, pp. 135, 140, and 143.

[453:4] Quoted in Ibid. p. 186.

[453:5] Ibid.

[453:6] Renouf: Religion of Ancient Egypt, p. 81.

[454:1] That is, the Tri-murti Brahma, Vishnu and Siva, for he tells

us that the three gods, Indra, Agni, and Surya, constitute the _Vedic_

chief triad of Gods. (Hinduism, p. 24.) Again he tells us that the idea

of a Tri-murti was _first_ dimly shadowed forth in the Rig-Veda, where a

triad of principal gods--Agni, Indra and Surya--is recognized. (Ibid. p.

88.) The worship of the three members of the Tri-murti, Brahma, Vishnu

and Siva, is to be found in the period of the epic poems, from 500 to

308 B. C. (Ibid. pp. 109, 110, 115.)

[454:2] Williams' Hinduism, p. 25.

[454:3] Monumental Christianity, p. 890.

[454:4] See Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi.

[454:5] See Appendix A.

[455:1] The genealogy which traces him back to _Adam_ (Luke iii.) makes

his religion not only a Jewish, but a _Gentile_ one. According to this

Gospel he is not only a Messiah sent to the Jews, but to all nations,

sons of Adam.

[456:1] See The Bible of To-Day, under "_Matthew_."

[456:2] See Ibid. under "_Luke_."

[457:1] See the Bible of To-Day, under "_Mark_."

[457:2] "_Synoptics_;" the Gospels which contain accounts of the same

events--"parallel passages," as they are called--which can be written

side by side, so as to enable us to make a general view or _synopsis_ of

all the three, and at the same time compare them with each other. Bishop

Marsh says: "The most eminent critics are at present decidedly of

opinion that one of the two suppositions must necessarily be adopted,

either that the three Evangelists copied from each other, or that all

the three drew from a common source, and that the notion of an absolute

independence, in respect to the composition of the three first Gospels,

is no longer tenable."

[457:3] "On opening the New Testament and comparing the impression

produced by the Gospel of Matthew or Mark with that by the Gospel of

John, the observant eye is at once struck with as salient a contrast as

that already indicated on turning from the _Macbeth_ or _Othello_ of

Shakespeare to the _Comus_ of Milton or to Spenser's _Faerie Queene_."

(Francis Tiffany.)

"To learn how far we may trust them (the Gospels) we must in the first

place compare them with each other. The moment we do so we notice that

the _fourth_ stands quite alone, while the _first three form a single

group_, not only following the same general course, but sometimes even

showing a verbal agreement which cannot possibly be accidental." (The

Bible for Learners, vol. ii. p. 27.)

[458:1] "Irenæus is the first person who mentions the four Gospels by

name." (Bunsen: Keys of St. Peter, p. 328.)

"Irenæus, in the second century, is the first of the fathers who, though

he has nowhere given us a professed catalogue of the books of the New

Testament, intimates that he had received four Gospels, as authentic

Scriptures, the authors of which he describes." (Rev. R. Taylor:

Syntagma, p. 109.)

"The authorship of the _fourth_ Gospel has been the subject of much

learned and anxious controversy among theologians. _The earliest, and

only very important external testimony we have is that of_ IRENÆUS (A.

D. 179.)" (W. R. Grey: _The Creed of Christendom_, p. 159.)

[458:2] Against Heresies, bk. ii. ch. xi. sec. 1.

[459:1] Against Heresies, bk. iii. ch. xi. sec. 8.

[459:2] Mosheim: vol. i. p. 109.

[459:3] Middleton's Works, vol. i. p. 59.

[460:1] Genuine Epist. Apost. Fathers, p. 98.

[460:2] See Chadwick's Bible of To-Day, pp. 191, 192.

[460:3] "Nec ab ipso scriptum constat, nec ab ejus apostolis sed longo

post tempore a quibusdam incerti nominis viris, qui ne sibi non

haberetur fides scribentibus quæ nescirent, partim apostolorum, partim

eorum qui apostolos secuti viderentur nomina scriptorum suorum frontibus

indiderunt, asseverantes secundum eos, se scripsisse quæ scripserunt."

(Faust, lib. 2. Quoted by Rev. R. Taylor: Diegesis, p. 114.)

[460:4] "Multa enim a majoribus vestris, eloquiis Domini nostri inserta

verba sunt; quæ nomine signata ipsius, cum ejus fide non congruant,

præsertim, quia, ut jam sæpe probatum a nobis est, nec ab ipso hæc sunt,

nec ab ejus apostolis scripta, sed multo post eorum assumptionem, a

nescio quibus, et ipsis inter se non concordantibus SEMI-JUDÆIS, per

famas opinionesque comperta sunt; qui tamen omnia eadem in apostolorum

Domini conferentes nomina vel eorum qui secuti apostolos viderentur,

errores ac mendacia sua secundum eos se scripsisse mentiti sunt."

(Faust.: lib. 88. Quoted in Ibid. p. 66.)

[461:1] Taylor's Diegesis.

[463:1] Says Prof. Smith upon this point: "All the earliest external

evidence points to the conclusion _that the synoptic gospels are

non-apostolic digests of spoken and written_ apostolic tradition, and

that the arrangement of the earlier material in orderly form took place

only gradually and by many essays."

_Dr. Hooykaas_, speaking of the four "Gospels," and "Acts," says of

them: "Not one of these five books was really written by the person

whose name it bears, and they are all of more recent date than the

heading would lead us to suppose."

"We cannot say that the "Gospels" and book of "Acts" are _unauthentic_,

for not one of them professes to give the name of its author. _They

appeared anonymously._ The titles placed above them in our Bibles owe

their origin to a later ecclesiastical tradition which deserves no

confidence whatever." (Bible for Learners, vol. iii. pp. 24, 25.)

These Gospels "can hardly be said to have had authors at all. _They had

only editors or compilers._ What I mean is, that those who enriched the

old Christian literature with these Gospels did not go to work as

independent writers and compose their own narratives out of the accounts

they had collected, but simply took up the different stories or sets of

stories which they found current in the _oral_ tradition or already

reduced to writing, _adding here_ and _expanding there_, and so sent out

into the world a very artless kind of composition. These works were

then, from time to time, somewhat enriched by _introductory matter or

interpolations_ from the hands of later Christians, and perhaps were

modified a little here and there. Our first two Gospels appear to have

passed through more than one such revision. The third, whose writer says

in his preface, that 'many had undertaken to put together a narrative

(Gospel),' before him, appears to proceed from a single collecting,

arranging, and modifying hand." (Ibid. p. 29.)

[463:2] "Christiani doctores non in vulgus prodebant libros sacros,

licet soleant plerique aliteropinari, erant tantum in manibus

clericorum, priora per sæcula." (Quoted in Taylor's Diegesis, p. 48.)

[463:3] Mosheim: vol. i. pt. 2, ch. ii.

[463:4] General Survey of the Canon, p. 459.

[464:1] Credibility of the Gospels.

[464:2] Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 160. The Sinaitic MS. is believed

by Tischendorf to belong to the fourth century.

[464:3] Ibid. p. 368.

[464:4] Eusebius: Ecclesiastical Hist. lib. 3, ch. xxii.

[465:1] The Science of Religion, pp. 30, 31.

CHAPTER XXXIX.

EXPLANATION.

After what we have seen concerning the numerous virgin-born, crucified

and resurrected Saviours, believed on in the Pagan world for so many

centuries before the time assigned for the birth of the Christian

Saviour, the questions naturally arise: were they real personages? did

they ever exist in the flesh? whence came these stories concerning them?

have they a foundation in truth, or are they simply creations of the

imagination?

The _historical_ theory--according to which _all_ the persons mentioned

in mythology were once real human beings, and the legends and fabulous

traditions relating to them were merely the additions and embellishments

of later times--which was so popular with scholars of the last century,

has been altogether abandoned.

Under the historical point of view the gods are mere deified mortals,

either heroes who have been deified after their death, or

Pontiff-chieftains who have passed themselves off for gods, and who, it

is gratuitously supposed, found people stupid enough to believe in their

pretended divinity. This was the manner in which, formerly, writers

explained the mythology of nations of antiquity; but a method that

pre-supposed an historical Crishna, an historical Osiris, an historical

Mithra, an historical Hercules, an historical Apollo, or an historical

Thor, was found untenable, and therefore, does not, at the present day,

stand in need of a refutation. As a writer of the early part of the

present century said:

"We shall never have an ancient history worthy of the perusal

of men of common sense, till we cease treating poems as

history, and send back such personages as Hercules, Theseus,

Bacchus, etc., to the heavens, whence their history is taken,

and whence they never descended to the earth."

The historical theory was succeeded by the _allegorical_ theory, which

supposes that all the myths of the ancients were _allegorical_ and

_symbolical_, and contain some moral, religious, or philosophical truth

or historical fact under the form of an allegory, which came in process

of time to be understood literally.

In the preceding pages we have spoken of the several virgin-born,

crucified and resurrected Saviours, as real personages. We have

attributed to these individuals words and acts, and have regarded the

words and acts recorded in the several sacred books from which we have

quoted, as said and done by them. But in doing this, we have simply used

the language of others. These gods and heroes were not real personages;

_they are merely personifications of the_ SUN. As Prof. Max Müller

observes in his Lectures on the Science of Religion:

"One of the earliest objects that would strike and stir the

mind of man, and for which a _sign_ or a _name_ would soon be

wanted, is surely the _Sun_.[467:1] It is very hard for us to

realize the feelings with which the first dwellers on the

earth looked upon the Sun, or to understand fully what they

meant by a morning prayer or a morning sacrifice. Perhaps

there are few people who have watched a sunrise more than once

or twice in their life; few people who have ever known the

meaning of a morning prayer, or a morning sacrifice. But think

of man at the very dawn of time. . . . think of the Sun

awakening the eyes of man from sleep, and his mind from

slumber! Was not the sunrise to him the first wonder, the

first beginning of all reflection, all thought, all

philosophy? Was it not to him the first revelation, the first

beginning of all trust, of all religion? . . . .

"Few nations only have preserved in their ancient poetry some

remnants of the natural awe with which the earlier dwellers on

the earth saw that brilliant being slowly rising from out of

the darkness of the night, raising itself by its own might

higher and higher, till it stood triumphant on the arch of

heaven, and then descended and sank down in its fiery glory

into the dark abyss of the heaving and hissing sea. In the

hymns of the _Veda_, the poet still wonders whether the Sun

will rise again; he asks how he can climb the vault of heaven?

why he does not fall back? why there is no dust on his path?

And when the rays of the morning rouse him from sleep and call

him back to new life, when he sees the Sun, as he says,

stretching out his golden arms to bless the world and rescue

it from the terror of darkness, he exclaims, 'Arise, our life,

our spirit has come back! the darkness is gone, the light

approaches.'"

Many years ago, the learned Sir William Jones said:

"We must not be surprised at finding, on a close examination,

that the characters of all the Pagan deities, male and female,

melt into each other, and at last into one or two; for it

seems as well founded opinion, that the whole crowd of gods

and goddesses of ancient Rome, and modern Varanes, mean only

the powers of nature, and principally those of the SUN,

expressed in a variety of ways, and by a multitude of fanciful

names."[467:2]

Since the first learned president of the Royal Asiatic Society paved

the way for the science of _comparative mythology_, much has been

learned on this subject, so that, as the Rev. George W. Cox remarks,

"recent discussions on the subject seem to justify the conviction that

the foundations of the science of _comparative mythology_ have been

firmly laid, and that its method is unassailable."[468:1]

If we wish to find the gods and goddesses of the ancestors of our race,

we must look to the sun, the moon, the stars, the sky, the earth, the

sea, the dawn, the clouds, the wind, &c., _which they personified and

worshiped_. That these have been the gods and goddesses of all nations

of antiquity, is an established fact.[468:2]

The words which had denoted the sun and moon would denote not merely

living things but living persons. From personification to deification

the steps would be but few; and the process of disintegration would at

once furnish the materials for a vast fabric of mythology. All the

expressions which had attached a living force to natural objects would

remain as the description of personal and anthropomorphous gods. Every

word would become an attribute, and all ideas, once grouped around a

simple object, would branch off into distinct personifications. The sun

had been the lord of light, the driver of the chariot of the day; he had

toiled and labored for the sons of men, and sunk down to rest, after a

hard battle, in the evening. But now the lord of light would be Phoibos

Apollon, while Helios would remain enthroned in his fiery chariot, and

his toils and labors and death-struggles would be transferred to

Hercules. The violet clouds which greet his rising and his setting would

now be represented by herds of cows which feed in earthly pastures.

There would be other expressions which would still remain as floating

phrases, not attached to any definite deities. These would gradually be

converted into incidents in the life of heroes, and be woven at length

into systematic narratives. Finally, these gods or heroes, and the

incidents of their mythical career, would receive each "a local

habitation and a name." _These would remain as genuine history, when the

origin and meaning of the words had been either wholly or in part

forgotten._

For the proofs of these assertions, the Vedic poems furnish indisputable

evidence, that such as this was the origin and growth of Greek and

Teutonic mythology. In these poems, the names of many, perhaps of most,

of the Greek gods, indicate natural objects which, if endued with life,

have not been reduced to human personality. In them Daphne is still

simply the morning twilight ushering in the splendor of the new born

sun; the cattle of Helios there are still the light-colored clouds which

the dawn leads out into the fields of the sky. There the idea of

Hercules has not been separated from the image of the toiling and

struggling sun, and the glory of the life-giving Helios has not been

transferred to the god of Delos and Pytho. In the Vedas the myths of

Endymion, of Kephalos and Prokris, Orpheus and Eurydike, are exhibited

in the form of detached mythical phrases, which furnished for each their

germ. The analysis may be extended indefinitely: but the conclusion can

only be, that in the Vedic language we have the foundation, not only of

the glowing legends of Hellas, but of the dark and sombre mythology of

the Scandinavian and the Teuton. Both alike have grown up chiefly from

names which have been grouped around the sun; but the former has been

grounded on those expressions which describe the recurrence of day and

night, the latter on the great tragedy of nature, in the alternation of

summer and winter.

Of this vast mass of solar myths, some have emerged into independent

legends, others have furnished the groundwork of whole epics, others

have remained simply as floating tales whose intrinsic beauty no poet

has wedded to his verse.[469:1]

"The results obtained from the examination of language in its several

forms leaves no room for doubt that the general system of mythology has

been traced to its fountain head. We can no longer shut our eyes to the

fact that there was a stage in the history of human speech, during which

all the abstract words in constant use among ourselves were utterly

unknown, when men had formed no notions of virtue or prudence, of

thought and intellect, of slavery or freedom, but spoke only of the man

who was strong, who could point the way to others and choose one thing

out of many, of the man who was not bound to any other and able to do as

he pleased.

"That even this stage was not the earliest in the history of language is

now a growing opinion among philologists; but for the _comparison_ of

legends current in different countries it is not necessary to carry the

search further back. Language without words denoting abstract qualities

implies a condition of thought in which men were only awakening to a

sense of the objects which surrounded them, and points to a time when

the world was to them full of strange sights and sounds, some beautiful,

some bewildering, some terrific, when, in short, they knew little of

themselves beyond the vague consciousness of their existence, and

nothing of the phenomena of the world without. _In such a state they

could but attribute to all that they saw or touched or heard, a life

which was like their own in its consciousness, its joys, and its

sufferings._ That power of sympathizing with nature which we are apt to

regard as the peculiar gift of the poet was then shared alike by all.

This sympathy was not the result of any effort, it was inseparably bound

up with the words which rose to their lips. It implied no special purity

of heart or mind; it pointed to no Arcadian paradise where shepherds

knew not how to wrong or oppress or torment each other. We say that the

morning light rests on the mountains; they said that the sun was

greeting his bride, as naturally as our own poet would speak of the

sunlight clasping the earth, or the moonbeams as kissing the sea.

"We have then before us a stage of language corresponding to a stage in

the history of the human mind _in which all sensible objects were

regarded as instinct with a conscious life_. The varying phases of that

life were therefore described as truthfully as they described their own

feelings or sufferings; and hence every phase became a picture. But so

long as the conditions of their life remained unchanged, they knew

perfectly what the picture meant, and ran no risk of confusing one with

another. Thus they had but to describe the things which they saw, felt,

or heard, in order to keep up an inexhaustible store of phrases

faithfully describing the facts of the world from their point of view.

This language was indeed the result of an observation not less keen than

that by which the inductive philosopher extorts the secrets of the

natural world. Nor was its range much narrower. Each object received its

own measure of attention, and no one phenomenon was so treated as to

leave no room for others in their turn. They could not fail to note the

changes of days and years, of growth and decay, of calm and storm; _but

the objects which so changed were to them living things, and the rising

and setting of the sun, the return of winter and summer, became a drama

in which the actors were their enemies or their friends_.

"That this is a strict statement of facts in the history of the human

mind, philology alone would abundantly prove; but not a few of these

phrases have come down to us in their earliest form, and point to the

long-buried stratum of language of which they are the fragments. _These

relics exhibit in their germs the myths which afterwards became the

legends of gods and heroes with human forms, and furnished the

groundwork of the epic poems, whether of the eastern or the western

world._

"The mythical or mythmaking language of mankind had no partialities; and

if the career of the _Sun_ occupies a large extent of the horizon, we

cannot fairly simulate ignorance of the cause. Men so placed would not

fail to put into words the thoughts or emotions roused in them by the

varying phases of that mighty world on which we, not less than they,

feel that our life depends, although we may know something more of its

nature.

"Thus grew up a multitude of expressions which described the sun as the

child of the night, as the destroyer of the darkness, as the lover of

the dawn and the dew--of phrases which would go on to speak of him as

killing the dew with his spears, and of forsaking the dawn as he rose in

the heaven. The feeling that the fruits of the earth were called forth

by his warmth would find utterance in words which spoke of him as the

friend and the benefactor of man; while the constant recurrence of his

work would lead them to describe him as a being constrained to toil for

others, as doomed to travel over many lands, and as finding everywhere

things on which he could bestow his love or which he might destroy by

his power. His journey, again, might be across cloudless skies, or amid

alternations of storm and calm; his light might break fitfully through

the clouds, or be hidden for many a weary hour, to burst forth at last

with dazzling splendor as he sank down in the western sky. He would thus

be described as facing many dangers and many enemies, none of whom,

however, may arrest his course; as sullen, or capricious, or resentful;

as grieving for the loss of the dawn whom he had loved, or as nursing

his great wrath and vowing a pitiless vengeance. Then as the veil was

rent at eventide, they would speak of the chief, who had long remained

still, girding on his armor; or of the wanderer throwing off his

disguise, and seizing his bow or spear to smite his enemies; of the

invincible warrior whose face gleams with the flush of victory when the

fight is over, as he greets the fair-haired Dawn who closes, as she had

begun, the day. To the wealth of images thus lavished on the daily life

and death of the Sun there would be no limit. He was the child of the

morning, or her husband, or her destroyer; he forsook her and he

returned to her, either in calm serenity or only to sink presently in

deeper gloom.

"So with other sights and sounds. The darkness of night brought with it

a feeling of vague horror and dread; the return of daylight cheered them

with a sense of unspeakable gladness; and thus the Sun who scattered

the black shade of night would be the mighty champion doing battle with

the biting snake which lurked in its dreary hiding-place. But as the Sun

accomplishes his journey day by day through the heaven, the character of

the seasons is changed. The buds and blossoms of spring-time expand in

the flowers and fruits of summer, and the leaves fall and wither on the

approach of winter. Thus the daughter of the earth would be spoken of as

dying or as dead, as severed from her mother for five or six weary

months, not to be restored to her again until the time for her return

from the dark land should once more arrive. But as no other power than

that of the Sun can recall vegetation to life, this child of the earth

would be represented as buried in a sleep from which the touch of the

Sun alone could arouse her, when he slays the frost and cold which lie

like snakes around her motionless form.

"_That these phrases would furnish the germs of myths or legends teeming

with human feeling, as soon as the meaning of the phrases were in part

or wholly forgotten, was as inevitable as that in the infancy of our

race men should attribute to all sensible objects the same kind of life

which they were conscious of possessing themselves._"

Let us compare the history of the _Saviour_ which we have already seen,

with that of the _Sun_, as it is found in the _Vedas_.

We can follow in the _Vedic_ hymns, step by step, the development which

changes the _Sun_ from a mere luminary into a "_Creator_,"

"_Preserver_," "_Ruler_," and "_Rewarder of the World_"--in fact, into a

_Divine or Supreme Being_.

The first step leads us from the mere light of the Sun to that light

which in the morning wakes man from sleep, and seems to give new life,

not only to man, but to the whole of nature. He who wakes us in the

morning, who recalls all nature to new life, is soon called "_The Giver

of Daily Life_."

Secondly, by another and bolder step, the Giver of Daily Light and Life

becomes the giver of light and life in general. _He who brings light and

life to-day, is the same who brought light and life on the first of

days._ As light is the beginning of the day, so light was the beginning

of creation, and the Sun, from being a mere light-bringer or life-giver,

becomes a Creator, and, if a Creator, then soon also a Ruler of the

World.

Thirdly, as driving away the dreaded darkness of the night, and likewise

as fertilizing the earth, the Sun is conceived as a "Defender" and kind

"Protector" of all living things.

Fourthly, the Sun sees everything, both that which is good and that

which is evil; and how natural therefore that the evil-doer should be

told that the sun sees what no human eye may have seen, and that the

innocent, when all other help fails him, should appeal to the sun to

attest his guiltlessness!

Let us examine now, says Prof. Müller, from whose work we have quoted

the above, a few passages (from the _Rig-Veda_) illustrating every one

of these perfectly natural transitions.

"In hymn vii. we find the Sun invoked as '_The Protector of

everything that moves or stands, of all that exists_.'"

"Frequent allusion is made to the Sun's power of seeing

everything. The stars flee before the all-seeing Sun, like

thieves (R. V. vii.). He sees the right and the wrong among

men (Ibid.). He who looks upon the world, knows also all the

thoughts in men (Ibid.)."

"As the Sun sees everything and knows everything, he is asked

to forget and forgive what he alone has seen and knows (R. V.

iv.)."

"The Sun is asked to drive away illness and bad dreams (R. V.

x.)."

"Having once, and more than once, been invoked as the

life-bringer, the Sun is also called the breath or life of all

that moves and rests (R. V. i.); and lastly, he becomes _the

maker of all things_, by whom all the worlds have been brought

together (R. V. x.), and . . . Lord of man and of all living

creatures."

"He is the God among gods (R. V. i.); he is the divine leader

of all the gods (R. V. viii.)."

"He alone rules the whole world (R. V. v.). The laws which he

has established are firm (R. V. iv.), and the other gods not

only praise him (R. V. vii.), but have to follow him as their

leader (R. V. v.)."[473:1]

That the history of _Christ_ Jesus, the Christian Saviour,--"the true

_Light_, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world,"[473:2]--is

simply the history of the _Sun_--the real Saviour of mankind--is

demonstrated beyond a doubt from the following indisputable facts:

1. _The birth of Christ Jesus_ is said to have taken place at _early

dawn_[473:3] on the 25th day of December. Now, this is the _Sun's

birthday_. At the commencement of the sun's apparent annual revolution

round the earth, he was said to have been born, and, on the first moment

after midnight of the 24th of December, all the heathen nations of the

earth, as if by common consent, celebrated the accouchement of the

"_Queen of Heaven_," of the "_Celestial Virgin of the Sphere_," and the

birth of the god _Sol_. On that day the sun having fully entered the

winter solstice, the _Sign of the Virgin_ was rising on the eastern

horizon. The woman's symbol of this stellar sign was represented first

by ears of corn, then with a new-born male child in her arms. Such was

the picture of the _Persian_ sphere cited by Aben-Ezra:

"The division of the first decan of the Virgin represents a

beautiful virgin with flowing hair, sitting in a chair, with

two ears of corn in her hand, and suckling an infant called

IESUS by some nations, and _Christ_ in Greek."[474:1]

This denotes the _Sun_, which, at the moment of the winter solstice,

precisely when the Persian magi drew the horoscope of the new year, was

placed on the bosom of the Virgin, rising heliacally in the eastern

horizon. On this account he was figured in their astronomical pictures

under the form of a child suckled by a chaste virgin.[474:2]

Thus we see that Christ Jesus was born on the same day as Buddha,

Mithras, Osiris, Horus, Hercules, Bacchus, Adonis and other

_personifications of the_ SUN.[474:3]

2. _Christ Jesus was born of a Virgin._ In this respect he is also the

_Sun_, for 'tis the sun alone who can be born of an immaculate virgin,

who conceived him without carnal intercourse, and who is still, after

the birth of her child, a virgin.

This Virgin, of whom the Sun, the true "Saviour of Mankind," is born, is

either the bright and beautiful _Dawn_,[474:4] or the dark

_Earth_,[474:5] or _Night_.[474:6] Hence we have, as we have already

seen, the _Virgin_, or _Virgo_, as one of the signs of the

zodiac.[474:7]

This Celestial Virgin was feigned to be a mother. She is represented in

the Indian Zodiac of Sir William Jones, with ears of corn in one hand,

and the lotus in the other. In Kircher's Zodiac of Hermes, she has corn

in both hands. In other planispheres of the Egyptian priests she carries

ears of corn in one hand, and the infant Saviour _Horus_ in the other.

In Roman Catholic countries, she is generally represented with the

child in one hand, and the lotus or lily in the other. In Vol. II. of

Montfaucon's work, she is represented as a female nursing a child, with

ears of corn in her hand, and the legend IAO. She is seated on clouds, a

star is at her head. The reading of the Greek letters, from right to

left, show this to be very ancient.

In the Vedic hymns Aditi, _the Dawn_, is called the "_Mother of the

Gods_." "She is the mother with powerful, terrible, with _royal sons_."

She is said to have given birth to the _Sun_.[475:1] "As the _Sun_ and

all the _solar deities_ rise from the _east_," says Prof. Max Müller,

"we can well understand how Aditi (the Dawn) came to be called the

'Mother of the Bright Gods.'"[475:2]

The poets of the Veda indulged freely in theogonic speculations without

being frightened by any contradictions. They knew of Indra as the

greatest of gods, they knew of Agni as the god of gods, they knew of

Varuna as the ruler of all; but they were by no means startled at the

idea that their Indra had a mother, or that Varuna was nursed in the lap

of Aditi. All this was true to nature; for their god was the _Sun_, and

the mother who bore and nursed him was the _Dawn_.[475:3]

We find in the _Vishnu Purana_, that Devaki (the virgin mother of the

Hindoo Saviour Crishna, whose history, as we have seen, corresponds in

most every particular with that of Christ Jesus) _is called

Aditi_,[475:4] which, in the _Rig-Veda_, is the name for the _Dawn_.

Thus we see the legend is complete. Devaki is Aditi, Aditi is the Dawn,

and the Dawn is the Virgin Mother. "The Saviour of Mankind" who is born

of her is the Sun, the Sun is Crishna, and Crishna is Christ.

In the _Mahabharata_, Crishna is also represented as the "Son of

_Aditi_."[475:5] As the hour of his birth grew near, the mother became

more beautiful, and her form more brilliant.[475:6]

_Indra_, the sun, who was worshiped in some parts of India as a

_Crucified God_, is also represented in the Vedic hymns as the _Son of

the Dawn_. He is said to have been born of Dahana, who is Daphne, a

personification of the Dawn.[475:7]

The _humanity_ of this SOLAR GOD-MAN, this demiurge, is strongly

insisted on in the _Rig-Veda_. He is the son of God, but also the son

of Aditi. He is Purusha, the man, the male. Agni is frequently called

the "Son of man." It is expressly explained that the titles Agni, Indra,

Mitra, &c., all refer to _one Sun god_ under "many names." And when we

find the name of a mortal, _Yama_, who once lived upon earth, included

among these names, the humanity of the demiurge becomes still more

accentuated, and we get at the root idea.

_Horus_, the Egyptian Saviour, was the son of the virgin _Isis_. Now,

this Isis, in Egyptian mythology, is the same as the virgin Devaki in

Hindoo mythology. She is the _Dawn_.[476:1] _Isis_, as we have already

seen, is represented suckling the infant Horus, and, in the words of

Prof. Renouf, we may say, "in whose lap can the _Sun_ be nursed more

fitly than in that of the _Dawn_?"[476:2]

Among the goddesses of Egypt, the highest was Neith, who reigned

inseparably with Amun in the upper sphere. She was called "Mother of the

gods," "Mother of the sun." She was the feminine origin of all things,

as Amun was the male origin. She held the same rank at Sais as Amun did

at Thebes. Her temples there are said to have exceeded in colossal

grandeur anything ever seen before. On one of these was the celebrated

inscription thus deciphered by Champollion:

"I am all that has been, all that is, all that will be. No

mortal has ever raised the veil that conceals me. _My

offspring is the Sun._"

She was mother of the _Sun_-god _Ra_, and, says Prof. Renouf, "is

commonly supposed to represent _Heaven_; but some expressions which are

hardly applicable to heaven, render it more probable that she is one of

the many names of the _Dawn_."[476:3]

If we turn from Indian and Egyptian, to Grecian mythology, we shall also

find that their _Sun-gods_ and _solar heroes_ are born of the same

virgin mother. Theseus was said to have been born of Aithra, "_the pure

air_," and OEdipus of Iokaste, "_the violet light of morning_."

Perseus was born of the virgin Danae, and was called the "_Son of the

bright morning_."[476:4] In Iô, the mother of the "sacred bull,"[476:5]

the mother also of Hercules, we see the _violet-tinted morning_ from

which the sun is born; all these gods and heroes being, like _Christ_

Jesus, _personifications of the Sun_.[476:6]

"The Saviour of Mankind" was also represented as being born of the

"_dusky mother_," which accounts for many Pagan, and so-called

Christian, goddesses being represented _black_.[477:1] This is the _dark

night_, who for many weary hours travails with the birth of her child.

The Sun, which scatters the darkness, is also the child of the darkness,

and so the phrase naturally went _that he was born of her_. Of the two

legends related in the poems afterwards combined in the "Hymn to

Apollo," the former relates the birth of Apollo, the _Sun_, from Leto,

the _Darkness_, which is called his mother.[477:2] In this case, Leto

would be _personified_ as a "black virgin," either with or without the

child in her arms.

The _dark earth_ was also represented as being the mother of the god

Sun, who apparently came out of, or was born of her, in the East,[477:3]

as Minos (the sun) was represented to have been born of Ida (the

earth).[477:4]

In Hindoo mythology, the _Earth_, under the name of _Prithivi_, receives

a certain share of honors as one of the primitive goddesses of the Veda,

being thought of as the "_kind mother_." Moreover, various _deities_

were regarded as the progeny resulting from the fancied union of the

Earth with Dyaus (_Heaven_).[477:5]

Our Aryan forefathers looked up to the _heavens_ and they gave it the

name of _Dyaus_, from a root-word which means "_to shine_." And when,

out of the forces and forms of nature, they afterwards fashioned other

gods, this name of Dyaus became _Dyaus pitar_, the _Heaven-father_, or

Lord of All; and in far later times, when the western Aryans had found

their home in Europe, the _Dyaus pitar_ of the central Asian land became

the _Zeupater_ of the Greeks, and the _Jupiter_ of the Romans, and the

first part of his name gave _us_ the word _Deity_.

According to Egyptian mythology, Isis was also the Earth.[477:6] Again,

from the union of Seb and Nut sprung the mild Osiris. Seb is the

_Earth_, Nut is _Heaven_, and Osiris is the _Sun_.[477:7]

Tacitus, the Roman historian, speaking of the Germans in A. D. 98, says:

"There is nothing in these several tribes that merit

attention, except that they all agree in worshiping the

goddess _Earth_, or as they call her, _Herth_, whom they

consider as the common mother of all."[477:8]

These virgin mothers, and virgin goddesses of antiquity, were also, at

times, personifications of the _Moon_, or of Nature.[478:1]

Who is "God the _Father_," who overshadows the maiden? The overshadowing

of the maiden by "God the Father," whether he be called Zeus, Jupiter or

Jehovah, is simply the _Heaven_, the _Sky_, the "_All-father_,"[478:2]

looking down upon with love, and overshadowing the maiden, the broad

flushing light of _Dawn_, or the _Earth_. From this union the _Sun_ is

born without any carnal intercourse. The _mother_ is yet a _virgin_.

This is illustrated in Hindoo mythology by the union of Pritrivi,

"_Mother Earth_," with Dyaus, "Heaven." Various deities were regarded as

their progeny.[478:3] In the Vedic hymns the _Sun_--the Lord and

Saviour, the Redeemer and Preserver of Mankind--is frequently called the

"_Son of the Sky_."[478:4]

According to Egyptian mythology, Seb (the _Earth_) is overshadowed by

Nut (_Heaven_), the result of this union being the beneficent Lord and

Saviour, Osiris.[478:5] The same thing is to be found in ancient Grecian

mythology. Zeus or Jupiter is the _Sky_,[478:6] and Danae, Leto,

Iokaste, Io and others, are the _Dawn_, or _the violet light of

morning_.[478:7]

"The _Sky_ appeared to men (says Plutarch), to perform the

functions of a _Father_, as the _Earth_ those of a _Mother_.

The sky was the father, for it cast seed into the bosom of the

earth, which in receiving them became fruitful, and brought

forth, and was the mother."[479:1]

This union has been sung in the following verses by Virgil:

"Tum pater omnipotens fecundis imbribis æther

Conjugis in grenium lætæ descendit."

(Geor. ii.)

The _Phenician_ theology is founded on the same principles. _Heaven_ and

_Earth_ (called Ouranos and Ghè) are at the head of a genealogy of æons,

whose adventures are conceived in the mythological style of these

physical allegorists.[479:2]

In the Samothracian mysteries, which seem to have been the most

anciently established ceremonies of the kind in Europe, the _Heaven_ and

the _Earth_ were worshiped as a male and female _divinity_, and as the

_parents of all things_.[479:3]

The Supreme God (the _Al-fader_), of the ancient _Scandinavians_ was

_Odin_, a personification of the _Heavens_. The principal goddess among

them was _Frigga_, a personification of the _Earth_. It was the opinion

among these people that this Supreme Being or Celestial God had united

with the Earth (Frigga) to produce "Baldur the Good" (the Sun), who

corresponds to the Apollo of the Greeks and Romans, and the Osiris of

the Egyptians.[479:4]

_Xiuletl_, in the Mexican language, signifies _Blue_, and hence was a

name which the Mexican gave to _Heaven_, from which _Xiuleticutli_ is

derived, an epithet signifying "_the God of Heaven_," which they

bestowed upon _Tezcatlipoca_, who was the "Lord of All," the "Supreme

God." He it was who overshadowed the Virgin of Tula, Chimelman, who

begat the Saviour Quetzalcoatle (the Sun).

3. _His birth was foretold by a star._ This is the bright _morning

star_--

"Fairest of stars, last in the train of Night,

If better, thou belongst not to the Dawn,

Sure pledge of day, that crown'st the smiling morn

With thy bright circlet"--

which heralds the birth of the god _Sol_, the beneficent Saviour.

A glance at a geography of the heavens will show the "chaste, pure,

immaculate Virgin, suckling an infant," preceded by a _Star_, which

rises immediately preceding the Virgin and her child. This can truly be

called "_his Star_," which informed the "Wise Men," the

"Magi"--_Astrologers and Sun-worshipers_--and "the shepherds who watched

their flocks by night" that the Saviour of Mankind was about to be born.

4. _The Heavenly Host sang praises._ All nature smiles at the birth of

the Heavenly Being. "To him all angels cry aloud, the heavens, and all

the powers therein." "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace,

good will towards men." "The quarters of the horizon are irradiate with

joy, as if moonlight was diffused over the whole earth." "The spirits

and nymphs of heaven dance and sing." "Caressing breezes blow, and a

marvelous light is produced." For the Lord and Saviour is born, "to give

joy and peace to men and Devas, _to shed light in the dark places_, and

to give sight to the blind."[480:1]

5. _He was visited by the Magi._ This is very natural, for the Magi were

_Sun-worshipers_, and at early dawn on the 25th of December, the

astrologers of the Arabs, Chaldeans, and other Oriental nations, greeted

the infant Saviour with gold, frankincense and myrrh. They started to

salute their God long before the rising of the Sun, and having ascended

a high mountain, they waited anxiously for his birth, facing the East,

and there hailed his first rays with incense and prayer.[480:2] The

shepherds also, who remained in the open air watching their flocks by

night, were in the habit of prostrating themselves, and paying homage to

their god, the Sun. And, like the poet of the Veda, they said:

"Will the powers of darkness be conquered by the _god of light_?"

And when the Sun rose, they wondered how, just born, he was so mighty.

They greeted him:

"Hail, Orient Conqueror of Gloomy Night."

And the human eye felt that it could not bear the brilliant majesty of

him whom they called, "The Life, the Breath, the Brilliant Lord and

Father." And they said:

"Let us worship again the _Child of Heaven_, the Son of

Strength, Arusha, the Bright Light of the Sacrifice." "He

rises as a mighty flame, he stretches out his wide arms, he is

even like the wind." "His light is powerful, and his (virgin)

mother, the Dawn, gives him the best share, the first worship

among men."[480:3]

6. _He was born in a Cave._ In this respect also, the history of

_Christ_ Jesus corresponds with that of other Sun-gods and Saviours,

for they are nearly all represented as being born in a cave or dungeon.

This is the dark abode from which the wandering _Sun_ starts in the

morning.[481:1] As the Dawn springs fully armed from the forehead of the

cloven Sky, so the eye first discerns the blue of heaven, as the first

faint arch of light is seen in the East. This arch is the cave in which

the infant is nourished until he reaches his full strength--in other

words, until the day is fully come.

As the hour of his birth drew near, the mother became more beautiful,

her form more brilliant, while the dungeon was filled with a heavenly

light as when Zeus came to Danae in a golden shower.[481:2]

At length the child is born, and a halo of serene light encircles his

cradle, just as the Sun appears at early dawn in the East, in all its

splendor. His presence reveals itself there, in the dark cave, by his

first rays, which brightens the countenances of his mother and others

who are present at his birth.[481:3]

6. _He was ordered to be put to death._ All the Sun-gods are fated to

bring ruin upon their parents or the _reigning monarch_.[481:4] For this

reason, they attempt to prevent his birth, and failing in this, seek to

destroy him when born. Who is the dark and wicked Kansa, or his

counterpart Herod? He is _Night_, who reigns supreme, but who must lose

his power when the young prince of glory, the Invincible, is born.

The _Sun_ scatters the _Darkness_; and so the phrase went that the child

was to be the destroyer of the reigning monarch, or his parent, _Night_;

and oracles, and magi, it was said, warned the latter of the doom which

would overtake him. The newly-born babe is therefore ordered to be put

to death by the sword, or exposed on the bare hillside, as the Sun seems

to rest on the Earth (Ida) at its rising.[481:5]

In oriental mythology, the destroying principle is generally

represented as a serpent or dragon.[482:1] Now, the position of the

sphere on Christmas-day, the birthday of the Sun, shows the Serpent all

but touching, and certainly aiming at the woman--that is, the figure of

the constellation _Virgo_--who suckles the child Iessus in her arms.

Thus we have it illustrated in the story of the snake who was sent to

kill Hercules, when an infant in his cradle;[482:2] also in the story of

Typhon, who sought the life of the infant Saviour Horus. Again, it is

illustrated in the story of the virgin mother Astrea, with her babe

beset by Orion, and of Latona, the mother of Apollo, when pursued by the

monster.[482:3] And last, that of the virgin mother Mary, with her babe

beset by Herod. But like Hercules, Horus, Apollo, Theseus, Romulus,

Cyrus and other _solar heroes_, _Christ_ Jesus has yet a long course

before him. Like them, he grows up both wise and strong, and the "old

Serpent" is discomfited by him, just as the sphynx and the dragon are

put to night by others.

7. _He was tempted by the devil._ The temptation by, and victory over

the evil one, whether Mara or Satan, is the victory of the _Sun_ over

the clouds of storm and darkness.[482:4] Growing up in obscurity, the

day comes when he makes himself known, tries himself in his first

battles with his gloomy foes, and _shines_ without a rival. He is rife

for his destined mission, but is met by the demon of storm, who runs to

dispute with him in the duel of the storm. In this struggle against

darkness the beneficent hero remains the conqueror, the gloomy army of

Mara, or Satan, broken and rent, is scattered; the Apearas, daughters of

the demon, the last light vapors which float in the heaven, try in vain

to clasp and retain the vanquisher; he disengages himself from their

embraces, repulses them; they writhe, lose their form, and vanish.

Free from every obstacle, and from every adversary, he sets in motion

across space his disk with a thousand rays, having avenged the attempts

of his eternal foe. He appears then in all his glory, and in his

sovereign splendor; the god has attained the summit of his course, it is

the moment of triumph.

8. _He was put to death on the cross._ The Sun has now reached his

extreme Southern limit, his career is ended, and he is at last overcome

by his enemies. The powers of _darkness_, and of _winter_, which had

sought in vain to wound him, have at length won the victory. The bright

Sun of summer is finally slain, _crucified in the heavens_, and pierced

by the arrow, spear or thorn of winter.[483:1] Before he dies, however,

he sees all his disciples--his retinue of light, and the _twelve_ hours

of the day, or the twelve months of the year--disappear in the

sanguinary mêlée of the clouds of the evening.

Throughout the tale, the _Sun-god_ was but fulfilling his doom. These

things must be. The suffering of a violent death was a necessary part of

the mythos; and, when his hour had come, he must meet his doom, as

surely as the Sun, once risen, must go across the sky, and then sink

down into his bed beneath the earth or sea. It was an iron fate from

which there was no escaping.

Crishna, the crucified Saviour of the Hindoos, is a personification of

the Sun crucified in the heavens. One of the names of the Sun in the

Vedic hymns is _Vishnu_,[483:2] and Crishna is Vishnu in human

form.[483:3]

In the hymns of the _Rig-Veda_ the _Sun_ is spoken of as "_stretching

out his arms_," in the heavens, "to bless the world, _and to rescue it

from the terror of darkness_."

Indra, the crucified Saviour worshiped in Nepal and Tibet,[484:1] is

identical with Crishna, the Sun.[484:2]

The principal Phenician deity, El, which, says Parkhurst, in his Hebrew

Lexicon, "was the very name the heathens gave to their god SOL, their

Lord or Ruler of the Hosts of Heaven," was called "_The Preserver_ (or

_Saviour_) of _the World_," for the benefit of which _he offered a

mystical sacrifice_.[484:3]

The crucified _Iao_ ("Divine Love" personified) is the crucified Adonis,

the Sun. The Lord and Saviour Adonis was called _Iao_.[484:4]

_Osiris_, the Egyptian Saviour, was crucified in the heavens. To the

Egyptian the cross was the symbol of immortality, an emblem of the

_Sun_, and the god himself was crucified to the tree, which denoted his

fructifying power.[484:5]

_Horus_ was also crucified in the heavens. He was represented, like

Crishna and Christ Jesus, with _outstretched arms in the vault of

heaven_.[484:6]

The story of the crucifixion of _Prometheus_ was allegorical, for

Prometheus was only a title of the SUN, expressing _providence_ or

_foresight_, wherefore his being _crucified_ in the extremities of the

earth, signified originally no more than the restriction of the power of

the SUN during the winter months.[484:7]

Who was _Ixion_, bound on the wheel? He was none other than the god

_Sol_, crucified in the heavens.[484:8] Whatever be the origin of the

name, _Ixion_ is the "_Sun of noonday_," crucified in the heavens, whose

four-spoked wheel, in the words of Pindar, is seen whirling in the

highest heaven.[484:9]

The _wheel_ upon which Ixion and criminals were said to have been

extended _was a cross_, although the name of the thing was dissembled

among Christians; it was a St. Andrew's cross, of which two spokes

confined the arms, and two the legs. (See Fig. No. 35.)

The allegorical tales of the triumphs and misfortunes of the _Sun_-gods

of the ancient Greeks and Romans, signify the alternate exertion of the

generative and destructive attributes.

[Illustration: Fig. No. 35]

_Hercules_ is torn limb from limb; and in this catastrophe we see the

_blood-red sunset_ which closes the career of Hercules.[485:1] The

Sun-god cannot rise to the life of the blessed gods until he has been

slain. The morning cannot come until the Eôs who closed the previous day

has faded away and died in the black abyss of night.

_Achilleus_ and _Meleagros_ represent alike the _short-lived Sun_, whose

course is one of toil for others, ending in an early death, after a

series of wonderful victories alternating with periods of darkness and

gloom.[485:2]

In the tales of the Trojan war, it is related of Achilleus that he

expires at the Skaian, or _western gates of the evening_. He is slain by

Paris, who here appears as the Pani, or dark power, who blots out the

light of the Sun from the heaven.[485:3]

We have also the story of _Adonis_, born of a virgin, and known in the

countries where he was worshiped as "The Saviour of Mankind," killed by

the wild _boar_, afterwards "rose from the dead, and ascended into

heaven." This Adonis, Adonai--in Hebrew "My Lord"--is simply the _Sun_.

He is crucified in the heavens, put to death by the wild boar, _i. e._,

_Winter_. "Babylon called Typhon or Winter _the boar_; they said he

killed Adonis or the fertile _Sun_."[485:4]

The _Crucified Dove_ worshiped by the ancients, was none other than the

crucified Sun. Adonis was called the _Dove_. At the ceremonies in honor

of his resurrection from the dead, the devotees said, "Hail to the Dove!

the Restorer of Light."[485:5] Fig. No. 35 is the "Crucified Dove" as

described by Pindar, the great lyric poet of Greece, born about 522 B.

C.

"We read in Pindar, (says the author of a learned work

entitled "Nimrod,") of the venerable bird Iynx bound to the

wheel, and of the pretended punishment of Ixion. But this

rotation was really no punishment, being, as Pindar saith,

_voluntary_, and prepared _by himself_ and _for himself_; or

if it was, it was appointed in derision of his false

pretensions, whereby he gave himself out as _the crucified

spirit of the world_." "The four spokes represent St. Andrew's

cross, adapted to the four limbs extended, and furnish perhaps

the oldest _profane_ allusion to the crucifixion. The same

cross of St. Andrew was the _Taw_, which Ezekiel commands them

to mark upon the foreheads of the faithful, as appears from

all Israelitish coins whereon that letter is engraved. The

same idea was familiar to Lucian, who calls T _the letter of

crucifixion_. Certainly, the veneration for the cross is very

ancient. Iynx, the bird of Mautic inspiration, bound to the

four-legged wheel, gives the notion of _Divine Love

crucified_. The wheel denotes the world, of which she is the

spirit, and the cross _the sacrifice made for that

world_."[486:1]

This "_Divine Love_," of whom Nimrod speaks, was "_The First-begotten

Son_" of the Platonists. The crucifixion of "_Divine Love_" is often

found among the Greeks. Iönah or Juno, according to the _Iliad_, was

bound with fetters, and _suspended in space_, between heaven and earth.

Ixion, Prometheus, Apollo of Miletus, (anciently the greatest and most

flourishing city of Ionia, in Asia Minor), were all crucified.[486:2]

Semi-Ramis was both a queen of unrivaled celebrity, and also a goddess,

worshiped under the form of a Dove. Her name signifies the _Supreme

Dove_. She is said to have been slain by the last survivor of her sons,

while others say, she flew away as a bird--a Dove. In both Grecian and

Hindoo histories this mystical queen Semiramis is said to have fought a

battle on the banks of the Indus, with a king called Staurobates, in

which she was defeated, and from which she flew away in the form of a

Dove. Of this Nimrod says:

"The name Staurobates, the king by whom Semiramis was finally

overpowered, _alluded to the cross on which she perished_,"

and that, "_the crucifixion was made into a glorious mystery

by her infatuated adorers_."[486:3]

Here again we have the crucified Dove, the _Sun_, for it is well known

that the ancients personified the Sun _female_ as well as male.

We have also the fable of the Crucified Rose, illustrated in the jewel

of the _Rosicrucians_. The jewel of the Rosicrucians is formed of a

transparent red stone, with a red _cross_ on one side, and a red _rose_

on the other--thus it is a _crucified rose_. "The Rossi, or

Rosy-crucians' idea concerning this emblematic red cross," says Hargrave

Jennings, in his _History of the Rosicrucians_, "probably came from the

fable of _Adonis_--_who was the Sun whom we have so often seen

crucified_--being changed into a red rose by Venus."[487:1]

The emblem of the _Templars_ is a red rose on a cross. "When it can be

done, it is surrounded with a glory, and placed on a calvary (Fig. No.

36). This is the Naurutz, Natsir, or Rose of Isuren, of Tamul, or

Sharon, or the Water Rose, the Lily Padma, Pena, Lotus, _crucified in

the heavens for the salvation of man_."[487:2]

[Illustration: Fig. No. 36.]

Christ Jesus was called the ROSE--the Rose of Sharon--of Isuren. He was

the renewed incarnation of _Divine Wisdom_. He was the son of Maia or

Maria. He was the Rose of Sharon and the Lily of the Valley, which

bloweth in the month of his mother Maia. Thus, when the angel Gabriel

gives the salutation to the Virgin, he presents her with the lotus or

lily; as may be seen in hundreds of old pictures in Italy. We see

therefore that Adonis, "the Lord," "the Virgin-born," "the Crucified,"

"the Resurrected Dove," "the Restorer of Light," is one and the same

with the "Rose of Sharon," the crucified Christ Jesus.

Plato (429 B. C.) in his _Pimæus_, philosophizing about the Son of God,

says:

"The _next power_ to the Supreme God was decussated or figured

_in the shape of a cross on the universe_."

This brings to recollection the doctrine of certain so-called Christian

_heretics_, who maintained that Christ Jesus was crucified in the

heavens.

The _Chrèstos_ was the Logos, the _Sun_ was the manifestation of the

Logos or Wisdom to men; or, as it was held by some, it was his peculiar

habitation. The Sun being crucified at the time of the winter solstice

was represented by the young man slaying the _Bull_ (_an emblem of the

Sun_) in the Mithraic ceremonies, and the slain _lamb_ at the foot of

the cross in the Christian ceremonies. The Chrest was the Logos, or

Divine Wisdom, or a portion of divine wisdom incarnate; in this sense

he is really the Sun or the solar power incarnate, and to him everything

applicable to the Sun will apply.

[Illustration: Fig. No. 37]

Fig. No. 37, taken from Mr. Lundy's "Monumental Christianity," is

evidently a representation of the Christian Saviour _crucified in the

heavens_. Mr. Lundy calls it "Crucifixion in Space," and believes that

it was intended for the Hindoo Saviour Crishna, who is also represented

crucified in space (See Fig. No. 8, Ch. XX.). This (Fig. 37) is exactly

in the form of a Romish crucifix, _but not fixed to a piece of wood_,

though the legs and feet are put together in the usual way. There is a

glory over it, _coming from above_, not shining _from the figure_, as is

generally seen in a Roman crucifix. It has a pointed _Parthian coronet_

instead of a crown of thorns. All the avatars, or incarnations of

Vishnu, are painted with Ethiopian or Parthian coronets. For these

reasons the Christian author will not own that it is a representation of

the "True Son of Justice," for he _was not_ crucified in space; but

whether it was intended to represent Crishna, Wittoba, or Jesus,[488:1]

it tells a secret: it shows that some one was represented _crucified in

the heavens_, and undoubtedly has something to do with "The next power

to the Supreme God," who, according to Plato, "was decussated or figured

_in the shape of a cross on the universe_."

Who was the crucified god whom the ancient Romans worshiped, and whom

they, according to Justin Martyr, represented as _a man on a cross_? Can

we doubt, after what we have seen, that he was this same _crucified

Sol_, whose birthday they annually celebrated on the 25th of December?

In the poetical tales of the ancient _Scandinavians_, the same legend is

found. Frey, _the Deity of the Sun_, was fabled to have been killed, at

the time of the winter solstice, by the same boar who put the god Adonis

to death, therefore a boar was annually offered to him at the great

feast of Yule.[489:1] "Baldur the Good," son of the supreme god Odin,

and the virgin-goddess Frigga, was also put to death by the sharp thorn

of winter.

The ancient _Mexican_ crucified Saviour, Quetzalcoatle, another

personification of the Sun, was sometimes represented as crucified in

space, _in the heavens_, in a circle of nineteen figures, the number of

the metonic cycle. A _serpent_ (the emblem of evil, darkness, and

winter) is depriving him of the organs of generation.[489:2]

We have seen in Chapter XXXIII. that Christ Jesus, and many of the

heathen saviours, healers, and preserving gods, were represented in the

form of a Serpent. This is owing to the fact that, _in one of its

attributes_, the Serpent was an emblem of the _Sun_. It may, at first,

appear strange that the Serpent should be an emblem of evil, and yet

also an emblem of the beneficent divinity; but, as Prof. Renouf remarks,

in his _Hibbert Lectures_, "The moment we understand the nature of a

myth, all impossibilities, contradictions, and immoralities disappear."

The serpent is an emblem of evil when represented with his _deadly

sting_; he is the emblem of eternity when represented _casting off his

skin_;[489:3] and an emblem of the Sun when represented _with his tail

in his mouth_, thus forming a circle.[489:4] Thus there came to be, not

only good, but also bad, serpents, both of which are referred to in the

narrative of the Hebrew exodus, but still more clearly in the struggle

between the good and the bad serpents of Persian mythology, which

symbolized Ormuzd, or Mithra, and the evil spirit Ahriman.[489:5]

As the Dove and the Rose, emblems of the Sun, were represented on the

cross, so was the Serpent.[489:6] The famous "Brazen Serpent," said to

have been "set up" by Moses in the wilderness, is called in the Targum

(the general term for the Aramaic versions of the Old Testament) the

SAVIOUR. It was probably a serpentine crucifix, as it is called a

_cross_ by Justin Martyr. The crucified serpent (Fig. No. 38) denoted

the _quiescent Phallos_, or the Sun after it had lost its power. It is

the Sun in winter, crucified on the tree, which denoted its fructifying

power.[490:1] As Mr. Wake remarks, "There can be no doubt that both the

Pillar (Phallus) and the Serpent were associated with many of the

_Sun-gods_ of antiquity."[490:2]

This is seen in Fig. No. 39, taken from an ancient medal, which

represents the serpent with rays of glory surrounding his head.

[Illustration: Fig. No. 38]

[Illustration: Fig. No. 39]

The Ophites, who venerated the serpent as an emblem of Christ Jesus, are

said to have maintained that the serpent of Genesis--who brought

_wisdom_ into the world--was Christ Jesus. The brazen serpent was called

the WORD by the Chaldee paraphrast. The Word, or Logos, was _Divine

Wisdom_, which was crucified; thus we have the cross, or Linga, or

Phallus, with the serpent upon it. Besides considering the serpent as

the emblem of Christ Jesus, or of the Logos, the Ophites are said to

have revered it as the cause of all the arts of civilized life. In

Chapter XII. we saw that several illustrious females were believed to

have been selected and impregnated by the Holy Ghost. In some cases, a

serpent was supposed to be the form which it assumed. This was the

incarnation of the Logos.