REVIEW.

The Human Origin of Christianity.-London, 1831. pp. 132.

SECOND NOTICE.

In our last number, we endeavoured to shew that this work, though indicating considerable talent in the writer, was altogether the most inefficient that has ever been written against Christianity. There is too much wire-drawing, too much splitting of straws for the common class of readers: there is too little of novelty, or strength, in the argument, for those of a higher sort. Superior to Paine's in elegance and polish, it is as much beneath him in a certain coarse strength, and in the happy dexterity with which he passes over the weak places of his argument, while he places its strong points in the most clear and forcible light. The want of clear and precise thinking becomes indeed more and more apparent, as we advance farther into the book: we ramble on from page to page, from quotation to quotation, the plain and obvious meaning of which either makes strongly for Christianity, or leaves the question altogether untouched, until, all of a sudden, we are surprised by some conclusion altogether at variance with the train of reasoning we have been vainly (it would seem) endeavouring to follow. There is a confusion of ideas running through every part of the book, which we strive in vain to unravel. For instance, wishing to obtain some key to the main argument, as to the trust-worthiness of the Gospel historians, we find," that in all matters of ordinary history, they display that minute accuracy of statement and allusion which eyewitnesses or cotemporaries usually do," p. 9. In such matters their minds were under no bias, and they are always to be believed but in their account of all matters which fall in with, or run contrary to the ruling passion, we are not to hold them trustworthy. Now this, though a mere assumption, certainly looks intelligible enough; but the moment we descend to particulars, all is confusion. There is no distinct line of demarcation drawn between the ordinary history, and the extraordinary; no index to point out where and how far the mind leaves the straight road. This, however, is simplicity itself to that which meets us, when we are fairly past the neutral ground. We are to believe certain cures, as real*, but we are not to believe others+; we are to believe that Jesus said that he was tempted of the devil in the wilderness, and ministered unto by angels; we are not to believe that he called himself the Son of God§: at one time, we are to believe that one event followed another, in the order stated by the historian; at another, in an order altogether different: we are to receive certain parts of the doctrines and discourses of Jesus, as truly reported; we are to reject certain other parts||. If a miracle be recorded, p. 87. ‡ p. 27. § p. 34. See particularly p. 64. Not having space to quote the passages, we re

*

+ p. 89.

:

which nothing but the power of God can account for, and which plainly leaves no room for imagination or imposture, it is pure apostolical invention. But it is said to have been done publicly that the man was well known; that it was examined at the moment by the priests, the most bitter and powerful enemies of Jesus; that they strove to silence or confound the man himself, by threats and abuse: that his parents bore unwilling testimony to the truth; and that after all no fraud could be discovered. It matters not; the thing must be false*. Every part of a statement, that squares with the hypothesis of the moment, is undoubtedly true; every part of the very same statement, that stands in opposition to it, is as undoubtedly false. And, as in the case of our Lord's eloquence, any particulars necessary for a purpose, are supplied unhesitatingly from conjecture; because the Apostles, writing in Greek, and some time after the time of the event, have no doubt left it out by mistake;— "Should it be objected that I have, without foundation, attributed to Jesus a power of fervent eloquence, of which quality his exhortations contained in the evangelical narratives afford no examples,-the reason is plain; it was not to be expected that after the lapse of years, these discourses should be remembered and committed to writing, with the same fulness and fervour they were orally delivered."

"In fine, since all we now possess of the discourses of Jesus are but fragments, and since these fragments themselves are but Greek translations from the dialect in which they were originally spoken by him, it ought not to surprise if we now look in vain for the poetic glow of diction, the lustre of imagery, the full expression of that tenderness of love or sorrow which he felt towards the sinful beings he addressed, or the animation, the fervour, the overwhelming passion, which lightened and burned in his oratory, as it came fresh from the feelings which gave it birth." pp. 62, 64.

In this sentence, the gracefulness and beauty of the diction is not more conspicuous than the exceeding weakness of the sophism. The eloquence of Jesus Christ was like his character, calm and majestic as the heavens; and the attempt to paint him, at one time, as a crazed and heated enthusiast, mistaking the illusions of his imagination for real and palpable interpositions of heavent, and at another, as a crafty impostor, taking artful advantage of the passions and prejudices of his nation, or, in a cowardly spirit, hiding under dark hints, and unintelligible similes every thing fer our readers to the book itself: our Review, being intended for those only who have read the book, and from their peculiar circumstances, cannot be supposed to know either the Evidences or the Doctrines of Christianity.

* We strongly recommend to our Hindoo readers to compare the account of the cure of the blind man in the ix. Chapter of John with the attempt to account for it in the Human Origin, p. 108. The thorough sifting of the Pharisees the sifting of malice, authority, and consummate skill-is there called "asking a few questions ;" and the opening of his eyes is ascribed to collusion, though the Apostle expressly says, he was known to have been "born blind."

+ pp. 30, 31.

calculated to offend*, revolts, not more by its inconsistency, than by its opposition, to the uniform stream of all history,-to the unanimous testimony of friend and foe. His wisdom, according to the unequalled description of his own apostle," was pure, peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy." James iii. 17. If he were a deceiver, what possible reason can be given for his holding unpopular opinions? If he were a zealot, is it not altogether unnatural that he should seek to disguise them? Here indeed our author knows not where to turn himself. Sometimes he thinks, that Jesus did not hold the doctrines of a spiritual kingdom, and the bringing in of the Gentiles† ; at other times, he seems to think, that he held them, but carefully concealed them from his apostlest; sometimes, that he preached (as John the Baptist did before him), the coming of a temporal kingdom only§; at other times, the spiritual and the temporal depend on each other, and are mixed up together. How natural and consistent is the truth! these doctrines are to be found in the prophesies of Isaiah, as clearly as they are transmitted to us in the pages of the apostles, -as fully, as they have been held by our blessed Lord, by his disciples, and by every Christian from that day to this. Jesus, adapting with consummate wisdom, his instructions to the character and the condition of his hearers, taught these truths in parables; those parables, so inimitable in their simplicity and point, which impress themselves indelibly on the memory, and which might well make the writer blush for his shallow and ungenerous sophisms. But this was not all; if occasionally he spake in parables, he omitted not at other times to express himself in the most plain and definite language. He, who bequeathed to us the exquisite parable of the good Samaritan, and the still more explicit one of the marriage supper, himself preached to the Samaritans, converting many; himself told them, that the end of the Jewish dispensation was at hand; himself pointed out to his disciples the multitude of Samaria as already white unto the harvest. But this was among the Samaritans; hear, then, what he said to the Jews, when he had healed the servant of the Roman centurion. "And I say unto you, that many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matt. viii. 11, 12. We think that this is plain speaking: and, though his apostles were sent first to the children of Israel, surely their greater light, and consequent greater responsibility, afford sufficient and unanswerable reasons for his conduct. There is still less doubt as to his preaching a spiritual kingdom; indeed, pp. 34-38, &c. † p. 34. + p. 36. § pp. 48, 49. || p. 40.

6

turning from the Gospels to the pages of the Human Origin, it seems incredible that its author has ever read them. Is he who never spoke of war but with abhorrence, the very spirit of whose Gospel was peace and good-will,-who declared that they, who used the sword, should perish by the sword,-who ever said that "His kingdom was not of this world,"-is he to be accused of preaching a kingdom, founded on violence and blood-shed? Is he who paid tribute money to Caesar, to be represented as lending countenance to the hope of deliverance from the Roman yoke? Can he, who wept over Jerusalem, as a city of which one stone should not be left on another, really have buoyed up his followers, with the delusion that she should be the queen of the earth? Yes,' says our author*, and more than that, when the multitudes would have taken him by force to make him a king, and he escaped out of their hands, that was but another proof of his preaching a temporal sovereignty; for instead of explicitly contradicting these expectations and wishes, he withdrew from the multitude secretly !' It is true that all this may be got over very simply, by supposing that the apostles have left a false account; but such an assumption, though very convenient, can scarcely be dignified with the name of reasoning. If the writer be indeed sincere, in thinking that Jesus adapted his doctrines to his hearers, (and however much we question the sincerity of his professions, we never doubted the sincerity of his opinions,) how could the following passage have escaped him? "But, saith Jesus to his disciples, take heed to yourselves; for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten, and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them."-" Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake." Mark xiii. 9, 12, 13. Again, John xvi. 2, "They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you, will think that he doeth God service." How far, the doctrines of a crucified Messiah, of a spiritual kingdom, a holy and self-denying life, separation from home and kindred, bitter mockings, ceaseless and thankless toil, persecution, and a cruel death, were adapted to the feelings and prejudices of any people, we might safely leave to the common sense of our readers; but the answer has been given by facts. We have it, so that he who runs may read, in the repeated stonings, in the cruel death of our Lord, in the martyrdom of James and Stephen, and other holy men and women; in the persecutions at Jerusalem; in the histories of the bloody Nero, of Domitian, of the philosophic Trajan, even of the mild and virtuous Pliny. These tell us, in characters

of blood and fire, how acceptable are the Christian doctrines to the carnal and unregenerated heart!

But we have wasted too much time on this subject; for surely to fill up half a book, with an attempt to palm upon the world, in the very face of the Old Testament, as well as the New, and of all history, sacred and profane, "that Jesus, in character, conduct, and doctrines, instead of standing in violent opposition to Jewish prejudices, maintained a perfect accordance with the religious feelings of the nation," (p. xxii.) is the work, rather of extravagance, than of ingenuity. Ask the first Jew you meet, what he thinks of Jesus Christ, and he will spit, and almost curse you at the bare mention of the name.

We pass to the second part of the hypothesis, "that he gained his followers by his doctrines and preaching alone, before he wrought any miracles." Our author having appealed to the Gospel accounts, and, as usual, most unfairly (if that be not too weak a word), we shall avail ourselves of the same privilege. "St. Matthew," says he, p. 32, "in his narrative of this selection of his personal followers, does not give a hint of any previous display of supernatural power. Jesus saw Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, casting nets into the sea, for they were fishermen at Jesus' word only, they left their nets and their father, and followed him, &c." In the end of the third chapter of Matthew, and previous to the calling of the Apostles, we find the two following verses: "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water; and, lo, 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." Was not this a previous display of supernatural agency? But, to proceed; Matthew simply states the fact, that Jesus called these men, and they followed him. Luke and John furnish us with the reasons why they obeyed. We are to bear in mind, that though our author pretends that Jesus did not at first lay claim to the title of the Messiah, the four evangelists are unanimous in the assertion, that in the commencement of his public ministry, he was pointed out by John, as the Messiah, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world." In consequence of this declaration, Andrew, one of John's disciples, left him to follow Jesus, and brought his brother Simon to see him. Some time after this, we find in Luke v. Simon and Andrew, James and John fishing together: Jesus enters into one of their ships, preaches to the people, performs a miracle; and, on the express ground of this miracle, the four forsake all and follow him. Now, we ask, what would be said of him, who would treat in

this manner any other book? The truth is, we can scarcely open