Criticism on the Theological Idea of Deity: Contrasting the Views Entertained ... by the Ancient ...

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Chapter I

The Hebrew conception of a Divine Being contrasted with that of the Grecian Sages, with (Quotations from and Criticisms on various Theologians, ancient and moden^.

CHAPTER IL

V

Same subject continued, in connection with the doctrine of Immortality being embraced by Pagan nations before it was by the Jews.

Chapter III

Changeability and inconsistency of the Hebrew idea of God — Contradictory statements of different Biblical writers in regard to seeing Gk>d, etc.

CHAPTER lY.

Angelic communications with the Hebrews — Jewish idea of the Spirit of the Lord — View of Diety in connection with the history of Jephthah, etc.

CHAPTER Y.

The Hindoo faculty — Christian Missions — Images not supposed by Pagans to be deities — C/hristlan worship contrasted with Paganism — Various opinions of God — The worship of a Supreme Being prevalent among all the Polytheistic nations of antiquity, etc.

CHAPTER VI.

The Indian belief in God more spiritual than the Hebrew — Hebrew custom of pronoanclng curses — Irrelevant Ideas of Deity entertained by the Prophets — Platonic philosophy contrasted with Pauline Christianity and Judaism — Trmlty^ of Pagan origin, etc.

4 * CONTENTS.

CHAPTER VII.

The curse of Balaam — Ancient Sacrificing — ^Micaiah and the Prophets of Baal — Gideon's Judgeship — Israel's perverseness — The Lord's anger with them — Character of Balaam reviewed by various Theologians, etc.

CHAPTER Vin.

Slaughter of the Midianites — God's friendly feeling for the Moabites — ^Israelites compared with Heathens in dedicating spoils to Deity — Plundering by the Israelites consistent with their ideas of God — Israelites compared with Mormons, etc.

CHAPTER IX

Judaism and Paganism blended together in the narrative of Jonah — Repentance changed from God to man, etc.

CHAPTER X.

The Lord and Satan placed on a social equality in the book of Job — Curse of the original Serpent in the person of Satan. — y lews concerning Job, and the book that bears his name, by various Theologians.

CHAPTER XI.

Satan, and his supposed influence Theologically the work of God — origin of evil — Moral depravity of the human race, and God's curse the result of Adam's transgression, with quotations from and criticisms on various Theologians.

CHAPTER XII.

Same subject continued — Inference that the Bible fiirnishes no reliable evidence that the moral affairs of the world are controlled by a Being of Almighty power and Infinite goodness — Incomprehensibility of God, etc.

CHAPTER Xm.

View of the Devil, as incorporated into the works of Divinity — ^Veracity of the Serpent vindicated — Tree of Life- Satan a myth, etc.

NOTICE TO THE READER.

"When the propriety of having this Essay published separately was suggested, we revised it and appended a Chapter to the closing part, where some observations are made in regard to that reputed foe of the human race, theologically known as the Devil. We hope to be excused for the slight manner in which his Satanic Majesty is treated and blended into the history, on the ground that we lack faith in the moral utility of such a character in the works of Divinity.

We would state, that on issuing the first part of the " Triumph of Criticism," a city Editor in criticising it, asserted in his paper that if the writer consulted his own interest, the whole work would not be published on account of its unsaleable nature. Though the admonition was no doubt as pious as it was judicious in a pecuniary sense, the result has now induced us to offer the second part of it for the criticism or censure of a religiously biased community; and in which we opine some repair is made for that deficiency of critical^ which another Editor, in his contumelious remarks called attention to — though graciously conceding to ua a hroadfi^ldof general reading in its composition.

6 NOTICE TO THE BEADEB.

The most efficient weapon with which we wejre assailed by those editors of the antiqae order — who favored as with a passing notice, was the fact of our confession that orthodox publishers declined to engage in the work. This acknowledgment on our part was made chiefly for the purpose of exhibiting a continuation of that religious prejudice with which pioneers in reform have had in all ages to contend. The trifold idea of Deity is not especially criticised, as that is made a theme of consideration in a subsequent part, under the head of Trinity, Neither is the subject of " Modern Spiritualism"— to which we devoted a portion of the Prolegomena^ again made a topic of special notice until the 12th, and concluding part, where it is introduced and dwelt upon briefly, for the purpose of showing that communications now in process with the inhabitants of the supramundane spheres, is the prophesied coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven — and to orthodoxy — as predicted — like a thief in the night] but whose advent, Dr. Saiss and his hundred other authors^ are now anticipating by an open manifestation from heaven, in a supernatural manner at variance with the established order of Nature. But the idea of his coming in this unlooked for and unostentatious manner, is of course as repugnant to their feelings, and is as contemptuously repudiated by them, as his first coming was by ancient orthodox Judaism as their predicted Messiah^ in the person of a wandering and despised Nazarene. , Christendo^^ in a theological point of view, now

NOTICE TO THE RBADBB, 7

occupies a position in the world analagous to that of Judaism in the days of Christ. The ecclesiastical state of the Jews was then in a more flourishing condition than it had been since the days of Solomon ; and they were living in expectation of an earthly Prince, of the lineage of David, to establish their worldly pre-eminence over all others. But they failed to realize their earthly anticipations, and their calculations were signally defeated by an obscure Galilean reformer, who wag substituted by his followers for the expected temporal deliverer. He discarded worldly greatness, and by a life of humility and humane teaching, gave religion a more internal and spiritual application than had been taught or conceived by their Lawgiver, whose religious teachings were limited in their consequences to worldly prosperity.

Nominal Christianity now occupies a higher position in the estimation of the world than it has at any period in its former history, and the condition and prospect of the Church is considered by its votaries to be unprecedently prosperous. The embassadors of the Cross are said to be converting the Heathen with a success only equalled by that of the Jews in proselyting the Gentiles at the coming of Christ, and they are now looking for his second advent in power and majesty from heaven to crown their religious anticipations and confirm the alleged prophecies of former ages. But unfortunately for their expectations, their hopes — like that of the ancient Jews, are apparently to be thwarted by an

8 NOTICE TO THE READER.

obscure, and to them unsatisfactory and perniciou3 spiritual development, which presents a different aspect to that c^ the old religions system, and plants theology on a new basis.

Christ said that he ^ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil :^ when, at the same time, his teaching and the subsequent preaching of his followers, abrogated those rites and ceremonies in connection with the Law, whereby its devotees identified themr selves as the only chosen people of God, and opened a door of acceptance to the Gentile world. Thus Spiritualism through modern development, annuls the exclusive right claimed by Christians to salvation, and, devoid of sectarian fanaticism, or my thotragical romance, gives conclusive evidence that the whole race of God's offspring occupy the same broad and generous platform in his care and estimation.

Though Christianity is encumbered with the bigotry and superstition entailed to it by the ancient Jews and Therapeuts of Egypt, yet, believing the morality of its teachings — though borrowed from the Pagan nations of antiquity — ^to constitute the highest type of civilization, and its ethical precepts better adapted to the necessities and moral government of mankind than that of any other fystem,-the writer of this work comes no( to de- Btroy, but to assist in fulfilling it on the same principle that Chrisi fulfilled the Jewish law, and demonstrate the blood of Calvary and smoke of Sinai to be equally inadequate to satisfy the religious in^ of the age.

TRIUMPH OF CRmCISM.

Part Second. Theological View Of Deity

The Hebrew conception of a Divine Being contrasted with that of the Grecian Sages. Quotations from and Criticisms on Moses — Orpheus — ^Maimonides — Paley — Clarke — Hansel — Simonides — David — Hsesiod — Pythagoras — Chalmers — Dick — Reid — Locke— Brisbane — Paul — Aratus — Le Clero— Socrates — Xenophon — D wight — Eitto — Jenyns — Jalin— Varro — ^Beecher — Burder, and others.

The reader is not to suppose that it is our object to make an assault on the attributes of Deity, or advance theory derogatory to the immutable laws of Nature. Our design in treating the subject — as before stated, is merely to show that the narrow and

10 TRIUMPH OP CBlTICISlf.

selfish idea of what is adored as Ood — and his general character as conceived and portrayed by the Biblical authors, is becoming outgrown by the human mind in the present generous and scientific age, and only adapted to the religious intuitions of those periods that produced them.

Theologians assume that in consequence of ho^ man reason being unable to attain to any certain knowledge of the will, law, and attributes of the Supreme Being, a divine revelation was necessary, and that such a revelatiflk the Jews and Christians only have ever possesad^ However superior the Jewish and Christian idea of God, in connection with morality may have been in ethical utility to that of other nations, and however well adapted the Biblical view of the nature and qualities of Deity may have been to the inspired feeling of its authors, —it is our present purpose to demonstrate their reputed revelation of God, and his position in relation to his creatures, to be incongruous with the light and reason that humanity has inherited from Nature, that the views therein conveyed are only presumed by the writers, and that they in reality were as ignorant of the first Great Cause as the Pagan seers and sages, who claimed nothing more than the light of Nature in excogitating their more relevant ideas in regard to Deity and his so called attributes.

Mythology proves that Moses in declaring the supremacy of one God, did not differ thereby from the Pagan or Gentile nations. Orpheus — who was

TEIUMPH OP CRITICISM. 11

to the ancient Greeks what Moses was to the Jews, said, "There is a Being inoomprehensible, the most Ancient, the most exalted of all, the Creator of all things. This sublime Being is life, is light, is wisdom," 4;o. Sophocles, also says, "There is in truth only one God, who made the heaven and earth, the sea, the air," &c. Parmenides, Melissus, Euclid, and Xenophanes, together with Stoic, philosophers, also entertained similar views concerning the existence of one Supreme intelligence as the Creator of all things. Bat while the Eleusiniaa mysteries were popular in Egypt and Greece, this doctrine was secretly confined to the priests and learned sages ; and to Moses belongs the credit, (if credit it be,) of publicly divulging and rudely endeavoring to coerce that belief and form of worship among those ignorant people for whom he legislated.

Though he portrays God as a corporeal being ol bodily parts, and subject to human passions, yet Rabbi Maimonides, in the Articles of the Jewish Creed — as drawn up by him, — at variance with such sensuous conceptions, represents God to be incorporeal, without bodily parts or qualities, constituting the beginning and end of all things. Such a comprehensive idea we might suppose would necessarily include all things in the intermediate time : which is tantamount to the whole body of Nature, constituting God. This view is apparently confirmed by the appostle Paul, when he says, " In God we live, and move, and have our being," And Dr.

Dwight, says, " that the only way in which the existence of things universally prove the existence of God, is by supposing that God is demonstrated in things universally P

Our divines contend that by discarding belief in such a personal God as was conceived by Moses, we destroy the foundation for religion ; when in reality the rejection of his sentiment would only strike at the root of such a religion as he inculcated, which was based on fear, and only adapted to an age of tyranny and despotism,-soon to be prostrated by the march of humanity, and superceded by religion founded on and embodied in love. Fear of vengeance never was an auxiliary in the cause of love and virtue. Those inclined to be upright meet with no detriment to human welfare, by ignoring the assumed personalities ascribed to God by Moses. For in propagating his ideas of God, he assimulated the divine character with his own partial and vindictive nature. True godliness — which consists in charity and benevolence toward our fellow creatures —.with gratitude to Divinity for the blessings of existence, was not in the least enhanced by his revelation ; for he placed but little valuation on the lives of his own people, and much less on those of other nations. The intrinsic element of religion is manifestly a development of humanity, produced in natural accordance with the regular and established order of what in the present age of growing philanthropy, is supposed to constitute the Divine dple.

In vindication of a personal God as worshiped by Christians in harmony with the Bible, Dr. Paley, whose writings in its defence stood conspicuous in a past century, says " that contrivance establishes the personality of God ; and that the marks of design is conclusive that Design must have had a designer — that designer must have been a person — and that p."jrson God." If, as he maintains, God is a person, and in agreement with the Mosaic assumption assists in human destruction by fighting, we inquire whether he can be organized like a person and subject to all the filings that cbaracterize human nature ? Whence came he? or how did he originate? Could he have been produced by an agency in the same manner that he is said to have formed us ? It is as fallacious to suppose a person without an organization, as it is uureasonable to suppose design without a designer. And design and organization are equally dependent on antecedent causes.

Dr. S. Clarke, whose theological genius stood unsurpassed in his day, on the " Being and Attributes of God," says, in answer to Hobbs, Spinoza, and others, " Now to be self existent^ is not, to be 'produced hy itself ; for that is an express contradiction. But it is, I say, to exist by an absolute necessity originally in the nature of the thing itself." If it is an express contradiction for a self existent being to have been produced by itself, it is equally illogical to suppose that a being that held its existence through any other cause, should bo the Creator of 2 all things. To merely assert that he exists through " absolute necessity according to the nature of the thing," without an original cause, is no stronger argument in defence of his personal existence, than that the disordered state of the moral world prove the absolute necessity of a Devil. And the modern conception that God is an incorporeal essence, utterly precludes the possibility of his being a representative of a material creature, and renders the theological idea of Deity as founded upon Mosaic revelation, incompatible ,with the impressions of the present more mature state of the human mind.

Yet the Eev. H. L. Mansel, on Miracles^ says, " Paley's criticism is, after all the correct one ; once believe there is a God, and miracles are not incredible ; for an impersonal God is no God at all." But we can with equal plausibility argue that a being who would deviate from his regular mode of procedure and resort to such eccentric and thaumaturgical exploits as performing miracles for the purpose of effecting what his natural and established system was ineffectual in accomplishing, can not, agreeable with the intellect and reason that marks the present day, be consistently termed Deity.

It is said the Pagan philosopher Simonides, on being asked the question. What is God ? required a day to think on it. When the day was spent, he asked for another ; and still more time for consideration. Finally, when asked a reason for his delay in giving an answer, he replied that the longer he meditated on the subject, the more obscure it became to him. And thus with all the presumed light that Christians claim to possess concerning a Diyine Being through the revelation of the Bible, — ^they would, with serious contemplation, find themselves involved in as much obscurity in regard to what OodiSj as the Grecian sage; and more influenced by that humble spirit that prompted Socrates to say on the subject that he only knew that he knew nothing.

Anaxagoras calls the Deity an Infinitb Mind. Pythagoras defines him to be a Mind dififused through all parts of the world, and permeating all Nature. Salustius says he is. not to be contained or comprehended in place. Thus the Gentile philosophers ascribe omnipresence to God — whereas Moses and Hebrew writers frequently assign him some locality for his residence ; as shown by the repeated use of such language as "going from the presence of the Lord." Though in fact, according to the record, he does not seem to have had any permanent or special dwelling place before the time of Solomon, for that voluptuous monarch is said to have built a house for a settled abode for him to abide in forever, (1 Kings 8.18). The idea of his having no home of his own, and being found in heaven, in hell, and the uttermost parts of the sea, wrought so effectually on the sympathy of the psalmist, David, that he both swareemd voived unto the Lord, that he would neither give sleep tp his eyes, nor slumber to his eyelids,* until he had found out a place for the

Lord, an habitation for the mighty God of Jacob, (Ps. 139 : 8, 9 and 132 : 2-5). But his oath and vow went for naught, as the Lord preferred Solomon for his builder ; who, with the help of a Tjrian architect and Pagan workmen, completed a house for him, (2. Chron. 2 : 13-18). When it was finished, the Lord expressed his approbation of it by saying, **mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually." As the house was subsequently destroyed by a more advanced and powerful Eastern nation, he could not have realiised it to be a perpetual dwelling place in agreement with his anticipations. But unfortunately for the harmony of opinion among Biblical authors in respect to God's dwelling place, Solomon, (1 Kings 8 : 12), states that he dwells in thick darkness ; whereas, according to Paul, he dwells in light that no man can approach unto, (1 Tim. 6:16).

An acquaintance with the Pagan mode of worship anterior to the time of Solomon, furnishes ample evidence that this building a house for the Lord to dwell in, as conceived by David, when his success in agressive wars had brought his dominion to a rivalry with other powerful and opulent potentates, was in imitation of the Egyptians, Babylonians, and other Pagan nations, who had, long before his time erected costly temples which were dedicated to divine worship, as the dwelling places of their respective Gods.

The Greek poet Hesiod — ^who was cotemporary with Elijah, ascribes unlimited knowledge and universal wisdom to God. Thales, o» being asked whether a man in doing evil could be concealed from God ? answered no, nor in evil thinking either. Pindar says, if a man hopes any thing will be concealed ftom God, he is deceived. Thus the Grecian sages likewise ascribe omniscence to God, — when, according to the Hebrew conception of his atributes — as conveyed through divine revelation^ he was sometimes ignorant of worldly transactions, and disposed to be incredulous in regard to believing reports that came to him concerning the conduct of people ; which necessitated him to leave a certain place and go to another, for the purpose of witnessing the moral state of affairs for his own satisfaction. As an instance, "And the Lord said because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me ; and if not I will know, (Gen. 18 : 20, 21).

Pythagoras — who taught in the time of the latter Hebrew prophets, when describing the attributes of Deity, says, " God is neither the object of carnality, or the subject of passion, but invisible and supremely intelligent. In his body he is like unto Light, and in his soul he resembles Truth. He is the universal spirit that pervades and diffuseth itself over all Nature. All things receive their life from him. There is but One only God ! who is not as some are apt to suppose, seated above the world and beyond the orb of the universe; but being himself all in all, he sees all the things that fill his immensity ;

ft the only Principle, the Light of heaven, the Father of all. He produces every thing ; He orders and disposes every thing; He is the reason, the life, and motion of all things.'' Among his moral precepts were — "Admit not sleep to thine eyes, till thou hast thrice examined in thy soul the actions of the day. Ask thyself — What have I done ? What ought I to have done ? &c. Then after a holy life, when the body shall return to the elements, thou shalt become immortal and incorruptible, no longer liable to death." Sentiment commending such devotion to a virtuous life in view of immortality, so congenial to human nature, together with his sublime and generous ideas of God — so consistent with modern intuitions, are not to be found in the reputed divine revelation of Moses or the Prophets.

Dr. Chalmers when speaking of the disadvantage that the Pagans labored under in comparison with those whom he considered the recipients of a. reveal ed knowledge of God, says, " They have few of the facts in theology, and these may be seen too through the hazy medium of a dull and imperfect evidence, or perhaps have only been shadowed out to them by the power of immagination. Their theology may have arisen no higher than the passing suggestion of a God — a mere surmise or rumination about an unseen Spirit, who, attending all their footsteps, was their guardian and their guide through the dangers of the pathless wilderness, who provides all the sustenance whictt this earth can stipply, and hath lighted up the heavens in all their glory. . . .

These differences attest what man is, under the dark economy of Paganism ; and so give token to what he would be under the bright economy of a full and finished revelation." But let us examine the moral and literary condition of man under what he calls the dark economy of Paganism^ during the bright period of Grecian literature,-antecedent to the Christian dispensation, and see whether the history of his condition for more than a thousand years succeeding the inauguration of Christianity— which our author supposes to furnish a full and finished revelation^ gives any evidence of its recipients having been in the least benefitted thereby. A mere glance at his moral record during the dark ages which-followed the downfall of Pagan Eome, suffijpiently illustrates the fact that there was no amelioration produced, either in his temporal or spiritual condition, but rather a retrogression into sensuality and barbarism, seems to have been the actual result. Dr. Dick, in narrating the cruel and bloody wars with which Europe and Asia were convulsed after the fall of Paganism, and the establishment of Christianity in Europe, — during the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries, says, ■" Almost the whole earth appeared to be little else than a great battle field, in which the human race seemed to be threatened with extermination."

Le Clere, in his " History of the Ancient Greek Religion," — after quoting at considerable length from a hymn of Cleanthus, preserved by Stobaeus in vindication of the advanced state of ancient

Greek worship, says, " Neyer has any one spoken of the Divine Being with greater sublimity ; and if we consider the testimony of Varro, of Aristotle, of the divine Plato, and those others which Cicero has preserved, we will cease to accuse, of intellectual darkness, a people not less enlightened than ourselves, and who do not yield to us in grandeur and elevation of sentiment." Prof. Robertson, ,oa ** God's Revelation from Heaven," says : " It is in vain that we ransack the world, for probable evidences of God, and hypothesis of his existence." How, then, are we to suppose that those Gentile sages arrived at such exalted conceptions of Divinity in connection with immortality ? In his remarks on the Grecian mind in the time of Paul in his first Advent Lecture^ he says : " The Greek lookecjL upon this world in its fallen state and pronounced it all very good, . , . Had you asked the Greek hia highest wish, he would have replied. ** This world if it could only last — I ask no more. Immortal youth and this bright existence." What Rev. D D.,with health, friends, and the comforts of life around him, would be likely to ask any more, if he could only get that by praying for?

Chalmers, on " Natural Theology," when expatiating on Dr. S. Clarke's demonstration of the Attributes of Deity ^ says, " We give these merely as a specimen of a style of reasoning which we will not stop to appreciate — and instead of attempting any further to excogitate a Deity in this way ; let us now search if there be any reflection of him from the mirror of that universe which he has formed/' By this we infer that the evidence which the Christian possesses of God's existence is obtained by excogitation resulting from a search after tho " reflection of him from the mirror of the universe," while the Pagan idea of him is derived from what he designates as " surmisings and ruminations shadowed out to them by the power of imagination !" When commenting on Hume's objection to the a posteriori argument of Clarke, he says, " Now it appears to us that this argument of Hume has not been rightly met by any of his antagonists. Instead of resisting it they have retired from it — and, in fact, have done him the homage of conceding to him the principle on which it rests. They have sujffered him to bear away one of the prime supports of Natural Theism ; and to make up for their loss they have attempted to replace it with another support which I hold to be altogether precarious."

And Dr. Eeid, when paraphrasing the famous a priori argument of Clarke, in regard to the existence of Deity as the creator of matter, says, " These are the speculations of men of superior genius — ^but whether they be solid as they are sublime, or whether they be the wanderings of the imagination into a region beyond the limits of human understanding, I am unable to determine." Which testimony convinces us, that if, as Prof. Romaine says, " The Hottentots know as much about God .as the Ancient Greeks and Romans did ;" the evidence is satisfactory that those para* gous of intelligence — the Jews and Christians, know nothing more about the Supreme Being than the American Indians did at the time of their discovery, when they adored him as the Great Spirit. The Jewish and Christian revelation of Deity, amounts at best, to nothing more than what the metaphysical philosopher Locke, calls traditional revelation^ or revelation as we have it, in such a manner 4is to convey the idea that we have no evidence of the scripture being the word of God, but from a succession of witnesses having told us so.

The Eev. W. H. Brisbane, in the Introduction to his " Defence of the Bible against the Objections of Infidelity" — when giving his views in regard to the necessity of such a revelation as is given in the Bible, to satisfy the demand of man's instinct, says, that " the very idea of God is foreign to him in his original state." Instead of the idea of God being foreign to man in his original state, — when we compare the superior idea of him as conceived and taught by the Grecian philosophers without the aid of the Bible, with the nairo^^ and personal views adopted by the Hebrew writers, as derived from reputed divine revelation, the sophistry of such argument becomes apparent to every unprejudiced and intelligent mind. He further says, " Education supposes civilization, civilization supposes religion, and religion supposes some knowledge of God." Thus agreeable with his mode of reasoning, we perceive that the Greek poeta — who were the most educated and poliahed 'p^opY'^ m XJoa ^cst)A before the time of Christ, had advanced to a higher degree of religious literature and civilization without the revelation given in the Bible, than the Jews bad attained with it. This fact is substantially confirmed by the Apostle Paul when he says, " The Greeks seek after wisdom ;" — in consequence of which he confessed that his preaching Christ to them as a crucified God, was nothing but foolishness, and merely a stumbling-block to the Jews, who required only a sign — regardless of wisdom, (1 Cor. 1 : 22, 23)