Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

the mission, of the death, of the present, of the future agency of Christ, may be universal, though the religion be not universally known.

Secondly, I assert that Christianity is charged with many consequences for which it is not responsible. I believe that religious motives have had no more to do in the formation of nine-tenths of the intolerant and persecuting laws, which in different countries have been established upon the subject of religion, than they have had to do in England with the making of the game-laws. These measures, although they have the Christian religion for their subject, are resolvable into a principle which Christianity certainly did not plant (and which Christianity could not universally condemn, because it is not universally wrong), which principle is no other than this, that they who are in the possession of power do what they can to keep it. Christianity is answerable for no part of the mischief which has been brought upon the world by persecution, except that which has arisen from conscientious persecutors. Now these perhaps have never been either numerous or powerful. Nor is it to Christianity that even their mistake can fairly be imputed. They have been misled by an error not properly Christian or religious, but by an error in their moral philosophy. They pursued the particular, without adverting to the general consequence. Believing certain articles of faith, or a certain mode of worship, to be highly conducive, or perhaps essential, to salvation, they thought themselves bound to bring all they could, by every means, into them. And this they thought, without considering what would be the effect of such a conclusion, when adopted amongst mankind as a general rule of conduct. Had there been in the New Testament, what there are in the Koran, precepts authorising

coercion in the propagation of the religion, and the use of violence towards unbelievers, the case would have been different. This distinction could not have been

taken, nor this defence made.

I apologise for no species nor degree of persecution, but I think that even the fact has been exaggerated. The slave-trade destroys more in a year, than the inquisition does in a hundred, or perhaps hath done since its foundation.

If it be objected, as I apprehend it will be, that Christianity is chargeable with every mischief, of which it has been the occasion, though not the motive; I answer, that, if the malevolent passions be there, the world will never want occasions. The noxious element will always find a conductor. Any point will produce an explosion. Did the applauded intercommunity of the Pagan theology preserve the peace of the Roman world? did it prevent oppressions, proscriptions, massacres, devastations? Was it bigotry that carried Alexander into the East, or brought Cæsar into Gaul? Are the nations of the world, into which Christianity hath not found its way, or from which it hath been banished, free from contentions? Are their contentions less ruinous and sanguinary? Is it owing to Christianity, or to the want of it, that the finest regions of the East, the countries inter quatuor maria, the peninsula of Greece, together with a great part of the Mediterranean coast, are at this day

desert? or that the banks of the Nile, whose constantly renewed fertility is not to be impaired by neglect, or destroyed by the ravages of war, serve only for the scene of a ferocious anarchy, or the supply of unceasing hostilities? Europe itself has known no religious wars for some centuries, yet has hardly ever been without war. Are the calamities, which at this day afflict it, to

be imputed to Christianity? Hath Poland fallen by a Christian crusade? Was the overthrow in France of civil order and security, effected by the votaries of our religion, or by the foes? Amongst the awful lessons which the crimes and miseries of that country afford to mankind, this is one; that, in order to be a persecutor, it is not necessary to be a bigot; that in rage and cruelty, in mischief and destruction, fanaticism itself can be outdone by infidelity.

Finally, If war, as it is now carried on between nations, produces less misery and ruin than formerly, we are indebted perhaps to Christianity for the change, more than any other cause. Viewed therefore even in its relation to this subject, it appears to have been of advantage to the world. It hath humanised the conduct of wars; it hath ceased to excite them.

The differences of opinion, that have in all ages prevailed amongst Christians, fall very much within the alternative which has been stated. If we possessed the disposition which Christianity labors, above all other qualities, to inculcate, these differences would do little harm. If that disposition be wanting, other causes, even were these absent, would continually rise up to call forth the malevolent passions into action. Differences of opinions, when accompanied with mutual charity, which Christianity forbids them to violate, are for the most part innocent, and for some purposes useful. They promote inquiry, discussion, and knowledge. They help to keep up an attention to religious subjects, and a concern about them, which might be apt to die away in the calm and silence of universal agreement. I do not know that it is in any degree true, that the influence of religion is the greatest, where there are the fewest dis

senters.

SUN. Moses having recorded in Gen. i. 14. 19, that the Sun was not created till four days after light was made, affords an additional proof that he was divinely inspired. For, by what means (except from a direct communication from the Creator) could he have known that fact in natural philosophy, which has been only lately discovered, viz: that the Sun is not a body of fire constantly throwing out heat and light? See Light.

SUN, standing still. If this language proves that the sacred writer was ignorant of astronomy, it proves that the composers of the American Almanac, published in Boston, in 1836, are ignorant of astronomy, for they adopt similar language respecting the "rising" and "the setting" of the Sun! If the Deity had used philosophical language in his communications to man, it would have been unintelligible to all mankind, till within the last few years; and would still be unintelligible to ninetynine in a hundred of the human family! The principal object of the Creator in working this miracle (which however stupendous it appears to us, was not, with the OMNIPOTENT ONE, as difficult as our stopping the hand of our watch!) was to demonstrate to those idolaters, that their gods, (the Sun and Moon,) were in obedience to the God of Israel, Jehovah; and that although mortal man refused to obey his Creator's voice, yet that his gods dared not disobey. The Sun and Moon were the gods worshipped by the Heathen nations then at war with the Jews, or rather with their OMNIPOTEnt One, the God of Israel. This phenomenon has been indirectly alluded to by the most ancient heathen historians, and poets. To what could the double night so often alluded to by the Latin poets as having occurred in Europe, be connected with, but the double day in Palestine? A

double or protracted day, in the one part of the world, would necessarily produce a double or protracted night in another part! Moreover, a tradition of this event has been preserved by one of the most ancient nations, as we are informed by one of the most ancient historians-HERODOTUS. "They (the Egyptians) told me (says he) that the Sun had four times deviated from his course, having risen where he uniformly goes down, and twice gone down where he uniformly rises. This, however, had produced no alteration in the climate of Egypt; the fruits of the earth, and the phenomena of the Nile, had always been the same.” This confused tradition evidently refers to the miracle respecting the Sun in the Scriptures.

I will conclude this article with the following extract from the works of the very learned Dr. A. Clark, in which he incontrovertibly proves that Joshua's language was strictly philosophical.

"I consider," says he, "the present accredited system of the universe, called sometimes the Pythagorean, Copernican, or Newtonian system, to be genuine; and also to be the system of the universe, laid down in the Mosaic writings; that the SUN is in the centre of what is called the solar system; and that the earth, and all the other planets, whether primary or secondary, move round him in certain periodical times, according to the quantity of their matter, and distance from him, their centre.

66

"I consider the sun to have no revolution round any orbit, but to revolve round his own axis, and round the common centre of gravity in the planetary system, which centre of gravity is included within his own surface, and in all other respects I consider him to be at rest in the system. I consider the solar influence to be the CAUSE, both of the annual and diurnal motion of the earth; and and that while that influence continues to act upon it,

« FöregåendeFortsätt »