CHAPTER VIII.

PAGAN ORIGIN OF THE DOCTRINE OF A FIRST JUDGMENT, BY JESUS CHRIST,

IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SEPARATION OF THE SOUL FROM THE BODY.

IT will be evident that the origin of the doctrine of a first judgment,

by Jesus Christ, immediately after the separation of the soul from the

body, is Pagan, if it can be proved, 1st, That the Pagans believed in a

first judgment, by a god, immediately after the separation of the soul

from the body; 2d, That the particulars of this first judgment, believed

in by the Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity

with the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans;

and 3d, That the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century,

transmitted to the now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches this

doctrine of a first judgment, which they accepted full and entire, did

not hold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ nor from the Jews.

But it can be proved, 1st, That the Pagans believed in a first judgment,

by a god, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body;

2d, That the particulars of this first judgment, believed in by the

Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity with the

particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans; and 3d,

that the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century transmitted to

the now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches this doctrine of a first

judgment, which they accepted full and entire, did not hold it from the

Apostles of Jesus Christ nor from the Jews.

1st, It can be proved that the Pagans believed in a first judgment, by a

god, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body.

We extract the following from the History of the Egyptians, by Rollin.

Article--Funerals: "Before the dead were admitted in the sacred asylum

of the tomb, they underwent a solemn judgment. And this circumstance of

the funerals among the Egyptians, is one of the most remarkable things

in the ancient history. It is a consolation to us to leave behind us,

when we die, a name honored among men; and of all blessings it is the

only one of which we cannot be deprived by death. But in Egypt, it was

not permitted to indistinctly praise the dead; this honor was conferred

only after a favorable public judgment. The assembly of the judges was

held on the other side of a lake, which they crossed on a bark. He who

conducted the bark was called, in the Egyptian tongue, _Charon_; and it

is from this name that the Greeks, instructed by Orpheus, who had been

in Egypt, had invented the fable of the bark of _Charon_.

"When a man died he was brought to judgment. The public accuser was

heard. If he proved that the conduct of the dead had been wicked, his

memory was stigmatized, and he was deprived of the honor of funerals.

The people admired the power of the laws, which extended even beyond

death; and everybody, influenced by the example of others, was afraid to

dishonor his family, and his own memory. If the dead was not convicted

of any crime, he was honorably buried. What was the most astonishing in

this judgment of the dead was that royalty itself was not spared. The

kings were not judged during their life, the public good demanded it;

but they were not exempted from the after death's judgment, and several

of them were deprived of honorable funerals. This custom passed among

the Israelites. We read in the Old Testament that wicked kings were not

buried in the tombs of their fathers. Thus kings learned, that, if their

majesty places them above the judgments of men, it is so no longer when

death has placed them on the same level with their fellow-men.

"When the judgment, which had been pronounced, was favorable to the

dead, they proceeded to the ceremony of the burial. A panegyric was

delivered in which nothing was said of his birth, because every Egyptian

was considered to be a noble man. His personal virtues only were

praised. Then the whole assembly supplicated the gods to welcome him in

the assembly of the virtuous dead, and to associate him to their

eternal bliss."

This judgment gave birth to the fable of a judgment rendered by the

gods, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body. Charon

was represented carrying the souls of the dead on board his bark, across

the Styx river, to be judged by the great judge, Minos. This became a

general belief among the Pagans, not only in Egypt, but in Greece, in

Italy, and in nearly all the Oriental countries; as proved by the

unanimous consent of the mythological authors. This belief has been

perpetuated among the Pagans of those countries. Even in our days, the

Indians believe in this judgment, and call the great judge, Zomo, or

according to others, Jamen. The Japanese, followers of Buda, also

believe in this judgment; and they call the great judge, Zomo. Likewise

the Lamas believe in this judgment, and call the great judge Erlik-kan.

Therefore the Pagans believed in a first judgment, by a god, immediately

after the separation of the soul from the body.

2d. It can be proved that the particulars of this first judgment,

believed in by the Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking

similarity with the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by

the Pagans:

The Pagans believed that their great judge, Minos, sat on a throne, to

judge the souls immediately after their separation from the bodies that

they animated; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that Jesus

Christ sits on a throne, to judge the souls, immediately after their

separation from the bodies that they animated. The Pagans believed that,

near to Minos' throne, and at his right hand, good geniuses, or spirits,

stood; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that, near to Jesus

Christ's throne, and at his right hand, good angels stand. The Pagans

believed that, near to Minos' throne, and at his left hand, furies

stood; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that, near to Jesus

Christ's throne, and at his left hand, devils stand.

The Pagans believed that the souls were driven to the redoubtable

tribunal of Minos by their respective guardian angel, who had

accompanied them during their whole life on earth; had watched day and

night over their conduct; and had kept a record of all they had done,

right or wrong; so the Church of Rome, and some other Partialist

Christian Churches, believe that the souls are driven to the redoubtable

tribunal of Jesus Christ by their respective guardian angel, who has

accompanied them during their whole life on earth; has watched day and

night over their conduct, and has kept a record of all they have done,

right or wrong. The Pagans believed that Minos based his judgments on

the contents of two books, the one called book of life, and the other

book of death; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that Jesus

Christ bases his judgments on the contents of two books; the one called

book of life, and the other book of death. The Pagans believed that the

souls who had obtained from Minos a favorable sentence, were led to the

Elysium by their respective guardian angel; and that those who had been

condemned to the Tartarus, were apprehended by the furies, and hurled

into it; so the Partialist Christian Churches believe that the souls who

obtain from Jesus Christ a favorable sentence, are led to Paradise by

their respective guardian angel; or, [in the opinion of those of the

Partialist Christian Churches, which do not believe in a guardian angel]

by other angels.

Consequently the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the

Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity with the

particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans.

3d. It can be proved that the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth

century, transmitted to the now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches

the doctrine of a first judgment, which they accepted full and entire,

did not hold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ, nor from the Jews:--

The Church of Rome does not hold the doctrine of a first judgment from

the apostles of Jesus Christ, for this doctrine implies a

blasphemy--whether Jesus Christ be considered as being God himself--and

all the Partialist Christian Churches hold that he is God himself--and

whether Jesus Christ be considered as being only the Son of God. But

the doctrine of a first judgment implies a blasphemy, whether Jesus

Christ be considered as being God himself, and whether he be considered

as being only the Son of God.

First, it implies a blasphemy, if Jesus Christ is considered as being

God himself. Jesus Christ, being God himself, would necessarily know all

the good and bad actions done by the souls, while they animate their

respective bodies on earth, in consequence it is an insult to his

attribute of wisdom, and thereby a blasphemy, to say that the guardian

angels of the souls, as they bring them to his tribunal, inform him of

their good and bad actions, which they have recorded. Even in the case

of those of the Partialist Christian Churches, which reject the

circumstance of the guardian angels, the doctrine of a first judgment

implies an insult to the wisdom of Jesus Christ, (in their opinion God

himself), and thereby a blasphemy; for a judgment supposes a trial; a

trial supposes an investigation; an investigation supposes the ignorance

of the deeds to be pronounced upon, and the supposition that God has not

a perfect knowledge of those deeds, is an insult to his wisdom, and

thereby is a blasphemy.

Second, The doctrine of a first judgment implies a blasphemy, if Jesus

Christ is considered as being only the Son of God. If God had vested

Jesus Christ with the power of discerning rewards and punishments to the

souls after death, he would have given him a knowledge of the good and

bad actions of the souls. But the doctrine of a first judgment supposes

that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, would come to this knowledge only

through the means of a trial, which supposition is an insult to the

wisdom of God, and thereby a blasphemy.

Then the doctrine of a first judgment implies a blasphemy, whether Jesus

Christ be considered as being God himself, and whether Jesus Christ be

considered as being only the Son of God.

Therefore the Church of Rome does not hold the doctrine of a first

judgment from the apostles of Jesus Christ.

General conclusions:--

It has been proved in this chapter, 1st, That the Pagans believed in a

first judgment, by a god, immediately after the separation of the soul

from the body; 2d, That the particulars of this first judgment, believed

in by the Partialist Christian Churches, present a striking similarity

with the particulars of the first judgment, believed in by the Pagans;

and, 3d, That the Church of Rome, which, in the sixteenth century,

transmitted to the now self-called Orthodox Christian Churches this

doctrine of a first judgment, which they accepted full and entire, did

not hold it from the apostles of Jesus Christ; neither did she hold it

from the Jews; for not a single passage can be traced out in the Old

Testament, or in Josephus, referring to a first judgment.

_Therefore the origin of the doctrine of a first judgment, by Jesus

Christ, immediately after the separation of the soul from the body, is

Pagan._

Pagan Origin of Partialist Doctrines · 第 8 / 11 章