OF all the miracles said to have been wrought by Jesus, as recorded in
the Gospels, the casting out of devils are among the foremost. The case
of Mary Magdalene is often referred to by Jesus himself; it is related
that no less than seven had taken possession of her person. It is truly
wonderful, that at the time of Christ's preaching, the old Devil of all,
and a host of subordinate ones, appeared to be more active than at any
other time of which we have any account The Old Devil came forward after
an absence of more than four thousand years; for, we have no account
that he, either in person or by proxy, had visited God's chosen people,
admitting that it was he, who, by the agency of a serpent, or by any
other means, deceived Adam and Eve, by which deception, pain, and even
death, followed as a consequence. Satan might well think that he could
afford to rest awhile, till Jehovah should make some new movement to
benefit the human race.
How the Devil came to know that Jesus was about to commence preaching
repentance for the remission of sin, we have no means of finding out;
but, when Jesus had retired into the wilderness, behold the Devil was
close at his heels, and they seemed to be as well acquainted as two old
playmates. The Devil was well fitted for discussion, for he appeared
well versed with the Old Testament. However, if he were the same Devil
who outwitted Jehovah in Paradise, he failed to obtain a victory over
the Son in the wilderness. What became of him after his defeat on the
Temple, and when he came down from the mountain, we have no account No
mention is made of his being concerned in riding the hogs into the sea.
We must, therefore, leave him, and attend to the triumph of Jesus in
ejecting them from their strong holds.
The first in order which we shall review, as being possessed of devils,
will be Mary Magdalene, out of whom, it is recorded, Jesus cast seven
devils. This woman must be considered most grievously afflicted. How
they operated on her--whether it was by inflicting bodily pain, or a
mental disease, we know not; at any rate, she seemed incapable of
getting rid of them. The number being seven, and having dispositions
opposed to each other, they no doubt often quarrelled among themselves,
and disturbed her in her sleeping hours; at all events, her gratitude
and attachment to Jesus is proof positive that she preferred their room
to their company.
Christians, in speaking of Mary Magdalene, convey the idea, that,
previous to the casting out of the devils, she did not bear a good
character. But this is a mistake; for, if the New Testament account of
devils taking possession of persons, be true, and that no human power
can eject them, it then follows, that Mary Magdalene was truly
unfortunate, since no less than seven of these intruders were constantly
about her. We are left to conjecture how the number seven could have
been discovered. If Mary had been compelled to have had seven teeth
extracted, the number could have been fully known to those who stood by;
but how, or in what way, it could have been known that seven devils were
cast out, unless they appeared visible to the by-standers, does not
appear. But we will not dwell too long on such sheer nonsense, as not
one word of truth is in the whole story of casting out devils; for the
best of all possible reasons, because there were none at all to cast
out. It is recorded that the Jews were troubled with devils of different
kinds, such as unclean devils, deaf and dumb devils, and, in one case, a
kind of devil which could not be cast out only by prayer and fasting.
If, at the present day, a person was to apply for medical aid, and hint
to the doctor that his wife was really possessed with (not seven) but
one devil, the doctor would consider such a man a fit subject for a
lunatic asylum.
As it respects demoniacal possession, it is, or rather was of heathen
origin. The Jews, as a nation, believed in its truth, as did also the
surrounding nations; consequently, if a person had a complaint attended
with fits, or any thing rather out of the common way, by which human
beings were afflicted, such a disease was considered a possession of one
or more evil spirits. But now, that the laws of nature are better
understood, and medical science more fully developed, demonology, as
well as witchcraft and sorcery, are given up altogether. No doubt now
remains, but that the whole was the effect of ignorance and fraud; and
consequently the casting out of devils by Jesus and his apostles, had no
reality in it whatever. It is not possible for us to conceive why demons
or devils should have taken possession of human beings, admitting that
they have a real existence. We are ignorant as to the state of mind of
these beings. Whether in those days they took possession of men and
women out of rebellion against God, or, having no real home, were only
wanderers, and felt more comfortable when dwelling in the bodies of
animals or of human beings, we cannot determine. The latter, however,
appears to have been the case; for, an one occasion, when Jesus was
about to expel a legion, the devils _besought him to permit them to
enter into the swine_; but it is recorded, that the hogs started off
down into the sea, and were drowned. What became of the devils, we know
not. If this miracle took place, one thing is clear, namely, that the
devils, with all their cunning, made a bad calculation as to the
security they would have m the swine.
At the time Jesus is said to have lived among the Jews, the casting out
of devils was a common occurrence; for Jesus, in reply to the charge
that he cast out devils by Beelzebub, the prince or chief of devils,
says, "_If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast
them out? therefore they shall be the judges,_" So that, after all, it
follows, that what so many could do without the authority of Jesus, was
no miracle at all. It was nothing short of imposition, and failed of
being any proof of his divine mission. The truth is, that casting out
devils was a heathen practice, among many other things, of heathenish
origin; and Jesus, according to the New Testament, fell in with it, as
he did with many doctrines which the Jews brought into the land of
Israel when they returned from their long captivity. The Jews brought
back with them the belief of a future state of rewards and punishments,
the existence of the soul, a heaven for the virtuous and good, and a
hell for the wicked; also good and bad angels, and a future judgment,
over which Jesus said to the Jews he was appointed to be the judge.
Notwithstanding the silence of the Old Testament as to the tenets above
noticed, yet Jesus fell in with them, and he also threatened the Jews
that they were in danger of that very hell and damnation which they
gathered from their heathen conquerors. Ye Christian priests! your
heaven and hell, and also your devil, belong to and originated in a
heathen mythology, the beginning of which is lost in a remote antiquity.
Yes, Christian doctors! your heaven and hell, which, from the hope of
the first, and the fear of the last, you teach as divine truths, and, by
so doing, live in splendor,--these very doctrines have nothing divine
about them, and you ought to know it.
Leaving, then, the miracles of casting out devils, which were no proof
of the divine mission of Jesus, because others, it is said, could,
without his aid, do the same, we must refer to the other miracles said
to have been performed and intended to establish his claim as being the
true Messiah, _the sent of God_. If the miracles that Jesus performed,
had been intended to remove all doubts that the Jewish nation had as to
his being an impostor, such miracles ought to have been sufficiently
convincing for that purpose; for, on such test, his reception or
rejection entirely depended. Now, from the accounts of his appealing to
his countrymen, and reproaching them for their unbelief, he does not, to
all appearance, wish nor try to convince them; for, it is said of his,
miracles, that "he did not many mighty works because of their unbelief."
Their incredulity as to his being the true Christ, is a reason why he
should have followed up miracle after miracle, until unbelief would have
been impossible on the part of the Jews; for, the reader must keep in
mind that the dispute with Jesus and the Jews was not of a moral
character: it was as to his authority in assuming to be greater than
Abram, or all the prophets of the Old Testament.
Again, Jesus says, "_Woe unto you_ [of such a town or village,] _for if
the mighty works which have been done in you, had been done in Sodom and
Gomorrah, they would have repented in sackcloth and ashes_." "Therefore
it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah, in the day of
judgment, than for you." Now here we can see, that the miracles were not
of the sort to convince. Then, why not produce others more strong?
Besides, it showed Jesus to be ignorant of the human mind, his
condemning men for not believing when the evidence was not strong enough
to convince them. It is true, according to the accounts of Christ's
preaching to the Jews, that instead of argument he resorted to abuse of
the coarsest kind, and the same conduct is pursued by Christians towards
unbelievers at the present day. In some instances, Jesus charged the
persons on whom a miracle had been performed, that _they should tell
none of it._
Again, the evidence arising from the working of miracles must always
depend on the information possessed by those before whom such signs and
wonders were wrought. If Jesus intended to rest his Messiahship on the
wonders he intended to perform, in such a case the most learned and best
informed of the Jewish nation were the proper persons to be the judges
for, in our day, in the nineteenth century, we have daily proof that so
universal is ignorance, and so credulous is the mass of society, that
such trash and inconsistent doctrines as those taught by Joseph Smith
and his famous Golden Bible have gained thousands Of believers, and the
greatest part of them are sincere, and would suffer death sooner than
renounce what they believe to be a divine revelation to Smith, and
others of the same stamp. The most learned and intelligent of the Jews
knew this truth, as many of their ignorant people had been led away by
false Christs, and lost their all, and their lives also. No wonder,
then, that they should watch closely every movement made by Jesus, the
then reputed Messiah. There are, in the present age, many things
discovered and known to the most unlearned, that, in former times, much
less remote than the time in which Jesus is said to have lived, Would
have been thought miraculous, and the persons performing them as
possessing power more than human. So that we may safely conclude, that
Infinite Wisdom would not have made use of so uncertain a species of
evidence as miracles, to convince the Jews that the _sent of God was
come_. Other and more certain means would have been resorted to, so that
the Jews could not have mistaken the real Christ, and put him to death
for an impostor.
If we attentively examine the life of Jesus, as written by the four
evangelists, we shall be surprised at many parts of his proceedings. His
uncourteous language to the great men of his nation must strike the
reader very forcibly. He preaches humility and meekness, and soon we
perceive him arrogating divine honors, and calling those, who came
before him, robbers and thieves. He commands his followers to _judge
not_, and the next moment he judges others, and condemns them without
ceremony; and although it is said of him, that "a bruised reed he would
not break, and smoking flax he would not quench," and that "_his voice
could not be heard in the street,_" yet we find him using something very
little short of outrage and violence. In the affair of the Temple, for
instance, it is recorded that Jesus took a cord, and began to attack
those sitting about that sacred place, "_overthrowing the tables of the
money-changers, and the seats of them that sold doves,_" calling them
"_a den of thieves._" Such conduct the Jews could not expect from their
long-wished and earnestly-desired Messiah.
Even at twelve years of age, his conduct seems to have had something
strange about it; namely, his absenting himself from his home. When his
parents found him, and told him that "_they had sought him sorrowing,_"
he said, in reply, "Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's
business?" This answer appears not to have been understood by his
relations; but if Joseph was not his father, his mother could not wonder
at his straying from home; she would have said to Joseph, "As you are
not his father, he has reference to the Holy Ghost." His conduct also
partook of the same strangeness at the marriage-feast. When the wine was
all out, his mother told her son of it; his reply was not very
dutiful--"_Woman_," says he, "_what have I to do with thee?_" At such a
place, on the night of a marriage ceremony, there seems something so
unearthly about him, that he never appeared at ease in any company; such
an absence of mirthful enjoyment was calculated to spread a gloom
throughout the whole party.
But that which appears very strange in Jesus, is his using language that
even his disciples did not understand, such as, "The kingdom of heaven
is at hand;" that he "came down from heaven;" for, says Jesus, "_No man
hath ascended up into heaven, but he who came down from heaven, even the
son of man, who is in heaven._" And again, "_Repent ye, for the kingdom
of heaven is at hand;_" and to the rich man, who asked him what he was
to do to secure the kingdom of heaven, Jesus said, that in addition to
loving and fearing God, and doing his duty to his neighbor, he "_must
sell all he had, and give it to the poor._"
The reader must ever keep in mind the true merits of the case between
Jesus and the Jews. It was not, whether they were more immoral than
their heathen neighbors, nor as to their being more or less learned than
surrounding nations; for, we do not find that Jesus ever made any
inquiries as to their mechanic arts, or the state of agriculture
practised among them. Neither do we find that Jesus interested himself
as to their progress in the science of astronomy. The last of these we
can conceive would have been very useful; and it might be supposed that
he could impart some knowledge in regard to it, since, in his passage
from heaven to earth, he must have crossed: some of the planetary
orbits, and no doubt observed their satellites then undiscovered; but to
communicate such important information was not included in his mission.
His only object was, to convince the Jews that he, and he alone, was the
true and undoubted Messiah promised by the prophets to redeem and
restore the Jews, as a nation, to their former greatness and glory.
Every either subject was useless, and only stood as an hindrance in the
way of the great purpose of his coming.
I have before stated, that miracles must ever be considered doubtful
evidence to prove that the performer is any thing; more than what men in
all ages have pretended to be; and to pretend to do what is far beyond
human agency, presupposes that the persons who are to be the judges,
know where human power ends, and divine power begins. But for this
knowledge, no just and certain rule can be laid down; consequently, it
is folly to conceive that Infinite Wisdom would make use of means so
ill-adapted to the end m view. It would be but an attempt to prove a
doubtful truth, by means equally if not more doubtful.
But, before closing this chapter, we will inquire into the probability
of any miracles having been performed, as mentioned by the New Testament
writers. And here our attention must be turned to the internal evidence
afforded by the New Testament itself. We shall there find internal or
indirect proof, that those miracles never took place, and that the whole
of them were ante-dated; that is, after the persons were dead who are
said to have been the performers. If this can be made out, miracles will
then receive a shock from which they never can recover. To do this, will
be the work of what remains to be done in this chapter.
John the Baptist is the first personage we shall select. The miracle
said to have taken place at the baptism of Jesus, is recorded by John,
as follows:--"_And after Jesus came up out of the water, the heavens
were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a
dove, and lighting upon him; and, lo! a voice from heaven saying, *This
is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased._" (Matthew iii. 16, 17.)
Again, in John's Gospel, i., 36, when John the Baptist saw Jesus, he
said of him, "_Behold the Lamb of God." John also said of Jesus, that
*he knew him not till it was told him, that on whomsoever he (John)
should see the Spirit of God descend, the same is he_--meaning the true
Christ. Now here are repeated miracles to convince not only John the
Baptist, but also all that were present at the baptism of Jesus. Such
evidence ought to have stopped any future inquiries as to the real
Messiahship of Jesus; but there are strong doubts as to the truth that
any such wonders were exhibited at the time they are recorded to have
taken place.
I shall proceed to present those doubts to the reader, as truth is my
object, and I am not afraid to follow after it:--in Matthew ii., 1, 2,
it reads, "_Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ,
he sent two of his disciples, and said unto him, Art thou he that should
come, or do we look for another?_" This question, sent by John to
Christ, shows clearly that John did not hear of the wonders wrought by
Christ until he (John) was in prison for his reproof of Herod. This
account makes it almost certain that the whole story of John's baptizing
Jesus, and also of the voice from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved
Son, in whom 1 am well pleased," is a fabrication altogether, and that
John had never heard of Jesus until his confinement For this conclusion,
we have twofold proof: since if John had baptized Jesus, and the wonders
were performed as recorded, John could not have required any further
evidence us to his being no pretender, but the true Messiah, the hope
and expectation of Israel. On the part of Jesus, his reply would have
been, "Why, John, what do you mean by sending a question as to whom I
am? You heard the voice from heaven when I was baptized; you also saw
the dove descend on my head; and now you send two of your disciples to
inquire of me, by saying, 'Art thou he that should come, or do we look
for another?'"
If we consider John's question to Jesus, and also Jesus's reply, it will
be plain that John had not even seen nor heard much of Jesus, till after
he was in prison. What, then, aha** we say of those wonders at the
baptism of Jesus? The answer is at hand, which is, that there is no
truth in the story. The probability is, that it was recorded from
hearsay evidence, by some person unknown, and ante-dated so as to
correspond to the time of John the Baptist; but that such evidence was
given to John, of the identity of Jesus, as to prevent any future
inquiry, there can be no doubt, admitting it ever took place; but John's
sending his disciples to Jesus to ascertain the truth of his being the
true Messiah, fully destroys the truth of any voice being heard by John,
or the Holy Spirit descending like a dove on the head of Jesus.
The ignorance of all the disciples of Jesus, as it regards who he really
was, is remarkable, if it be admitted that he performed what is said of
him. We will notice the Apostle Peter, as he may be fairly considered
the representative of the twelve. It is written, that when Jesus and
Peter were together, behold! old Moses and Elias (Elijah) came so near
to the earth that they held conversation with Jesus, and that Peter,
somehow or other, knew them; but he, so far from being alarmed at seeing
those two old prophets, was unwilling that they should return, and even
proposed to Jesus to prepare for their stay. Surely, that was an age of
miracles and wonders! We have an account of the old Devil's crawling out
from some hole or cave, and following Jesus into the wilderness; and,
again, we have two old prophets returned, hovering in the air, and
conversing with Jesus; one of whom is said to have died a thousand years
previous to the time of his holding this supposed conversation with
Jesus from the clouds; and the other, at nearly the same time, was taken
up into heaven in a chariot of fire! Those two strange personages must
have had business of great importance with Jesus. Are we to consider
this strange visit to have taken place, when the truth of it rests on
the same authority as all the other miracles and wonders which are
recorded concerning the mission of Jesus? If Moses and Elijah did not in
truth and reality talk to Jesus from the clouds, in the hearing of
Peter, in their real persons, or by their apparitions, it then follows,
that there is no truth in any of the miracles or wonders said to have
been performed, to prove that Jesus was _sent from God_; for all the
miracles and wonders which (it is said) took place, stand or fall
together.
If, for instance, the Devil did not find Jesus in the wilderness, and go
with him into the city, and tempt him to throw himself from the
Temple--if this is not strictly true, why, then, it is false as to Moses
and Elijah's talking with him from the clouds. This incredible story, if
related in any book but what is called the Word of God, would not be
credited by one in ten thousand; but being found in the life of the
Redeemer, the man who rejects it and proclaims it unworthy of credit, is
considered an enemy of God, and will have the sentence of "_Go, ye
cursed_," &c. As so much importance is attached to what is called the
Word of God, we will discuss a little further the business which brought
Moses and Elijah so near to this earth. As to where Moses or Elijah
reside, we have no knowledge, and what is the nature of their
employment, we know not; but if they still live, they must have some
location, and also, we suppose, must be employed about something--but
these things we must leave to those who are better acquainted with other
worlds, while our attention will be directed to the business of the
heavenly visitors.
If Moses had any interest in the mission of Jesus to the Jews, he could
have been serviceable to him, as he had been their former leader, and
therefore could give him useful hints concerning them. We may suppose he
would introduce the subject of Jesus's mission in the following
manner:--"I am Moses, the former leader of the seed of Abram, and
hearing that Jehovah had sent his son Jesus to convert them to the true
worship of God, and the practice of justice and truth, I come to offer
my services, as I am well acquainted with that disobedient race; and, in
truth, I had a terrible time of it with them: only think of forty years
in the wilderness, always murmuring, and worshipping strange gods, for
which, at times, they were cruelly punished; Jehovah destroyed thousands
of them for resisting my authority; but they were incurable. He would
have, at one time, so great was his wrath, destroyed them all; but I
told him what the Egyptians and the heathen in general would say, and he
altered his mind, and killed off the worst of them: for, getting a
little out of temper with them at one time, in consequence of their
murmurings, Jehovah became angry with me, and I was prevented from
enjoying full possession of the promised land. It always surprised me
how it came about that Jehovah should select them from the rest of the
human race, for in my lifetime nothing was ever made of them; they even
disgraced the God who had made them his choice. I left them in thy hands
of Joshua, as the most proper person to rule over them; but how he got
along with them, I have not heard." "Your offer, Moses, is duly
appreciated; but the Jews, as a nation, are now a different people from
what they were when you had to manage them. My course will be different
altogether from what you pursued. Farewell! Moses and Elijah." We may
suppose that Jesus would say to Peter, "As for your purposing to erect
three tabernacles in this place, one for myself, one for Moses, and
another for Elijah, it is proof that you are entirely ignorant of my
future dealings with my own nation; for, in a few months, such things
will transpire, that even you, Peter, all zealous as you are, will swear
off and deny any knowledge of me."
Now, reader, nothing can be more extravagant than to suppose that such
conversation took place between Jesus, Moses, and Elijah. But if those
two old prophets did really descend, and converse with Jesus, then what
I have supposed is no more extravagant than that two prophets, who had
not been on earth for a thousand years, should pay a visit to Jesus, and
hold converse with him. These miracles never occurred, and the world has
been imposed upon and plundered by men, who, by telling such tales, have
lived in idleness; and their quarrels about what Jesus said or somebody
said, or did, have in every age been the cause of evils of every kind,
and of rendering human beings ignorant and wretched.
Christians, in speaking of the divine mission of Jesus, urge is miracles
as proofs that he came from God with full authority to give laws to, and
finally _to judge both quick and dead_; but the proof is wanting that he
ever performed one miracle. All the evidence we derive from the miracles
said to have been performed is not, that we know they were wrought by
Jesus, but that it is by somebody recorded that he did the mighty works
attributed to him, and which to us is no evidence at all. To believe,
then, what is written, without knowing by whom, or at what time and
place it was written, is to believe without evidence, which would be a
voluntary degradation of the noble faculties which have been conferred
upon man.