ページの画像
PDF
ePub

them

looked for Prince-had these Magi worshipped the child at Bethlehem, and presented the mother with gold, frankincense, and myrrh-had the shepherds called at the stable, and returned home, telling all their acquaintances what they had seen, having informed them previously of what the Angel said they would see-had Jesus been taken to Egypt for the reasons alleged-and, finally, had he, when a lad of twelve years old, conversed with the learned doctors in the temple, and exhibited a maturity and strength of mind that astonished them-if all these things had happened, as detailed by these writers, is it not probable, that he would have alluded to some one of them, when hard pressed to prove that he was some wonderful personage? Yet he never does allude to, or rely upon, one of These miracles were, therefore, all for nothing. To be serious. Is it probable they ever happened? If what these authors state be true, Christ had every thing cut and dried to his hand. There was no need of a harbinger to clear the way, and make ready a people prepared for him. He had only to identify himself, which he certainly could have easily done, especially among that people, who were so particular in the registration of births, as that an obscure carpenter could trace his descent regularly up to Adam. When those stubborn and stiff-necked Jews refused to believe in him, notwithstanding the miracles he was said to be daily exhibiting before them, instead of appealing to them alone, (the miracles) he could have appealed to facts which must have once astonished the court of Jerusalem, and even the court of Rome, (I allude to the visit of the wise men and the Bethlehem massacre,) facts which must have been announced, and well known in farther India-facts which, for the previous thirty years, must have been the favorite theme of conversation among the shepherds of Judea. He could have said: "You must recollect the visit of the Magi, and its object. I am the person whom, guided by the miraculous star, they came to worship. For what did Herod slaughter the innocents of Bethlehem, but to include him, who was born king of the Jews, among the victims? I am that person. Did not old Simeon and Anna take up a child, and declare to you all, that in him was the redemption of Israel? I am he. But eighteen years ago, your learned doctors were amazed at the wonderful precosity of a young lad, about twelve years old. You behold him in me. Your shepherds have whiled away many an hour on the hill side, in `reciting and listening to tales told them by their fathers concerning a child, whose birth was announced to them by numerous hosts of Angels. I am he, whose birth caused such joy to these heavenly beings." No such appeals as these were made.

It is rational to suppose, aye, and it is more than probable, that these wise men, on their return home, would have told their countrymen all they

saw and did in Judea; and how the star, after having lost its way, went straight along the great public road to Bethlehem, according to the directions of Herod's learned men. It is more than probable, also, that the star, and the object of its appearance, would have been known throughout the Indies, and not have been forgotten for centuries; yet we do not hear that the first missionaries found a people there prepared for the Lord; and our missionaries of this day report to their patrons, that these Indians are still obdurate. Jesus need not have made these appeals. The people would have put these questions to him. They would have made them the test by which to determine the pretensions of those Messiahs that were springing up, in that day, like mushroons, throughout Judea. They must have been fully convinced, if Matthew is to be believed, that the Messiah had been born. Identification was all they required.

Is it to be supposed, that a person, whose star drew the Magi from their far homes, and the annunciation of whose birth caused that unprecedented butchery, could have remained unknown, and lived in obscurity, till thirty years old? After reminding the reader that no author, sacred or profane, except Matthew, has ever alluded to this visit of the wise men, or the Bethlehem massacre, I shall leave it with him to determine upon the credibility of this writer.

We will now compare the first chapters of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, with John's. The former tell us that Christ, immediately after his baptism, was taken into the wilderness, and there tempted, by the Devil, for forty days; and that, after John the Baptist was put in prison, he went to Galilee, and commenced his ministry, and, soon after, began to call his twelve disciples. John commences his narrative, by telling us what John the Baptist testified. He states, that the next day after the Baptist's interview with the Pharisees, who had been sent to ask him by what authority he baptized, he said to some of the people who were assembled at Bethabara, on seeing Jesus, that he was the Lamb of God; that he knew him to be such, because he saw the spirit of God descending upon him, by which sign, he who sent him to baptize, told him he might know him. And the next day, this John the Baptist, standing with two of his disciples, saw Jesus, and told them he was the Lamb of God, by which they were induced to follow him. One of these was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. Andrew immediately leaves John to follow Jesus, and finds his brother, the famous Peter, and induces him to become a disciple of Jesus also. The next day, Jesus, after calling one or two more disciples, started for home. It will be remarked, that all this calling was at Bethabara, a place at least forty miles from the sea of Tiberias.

After this, that is, after his return to Galilee, he went with his mother,

brothers, and disciples, to Capernaum, stayed there a few days, and went to Jerusalem remained there during the great feast, and then went into the country with his disciples, and tarried and baptized. At which time, John the Baptist was baptising near Salim, "for he was not yet cast into prison.” Where, in the book of John the Evangelist, can you crowd in the forty days' temptation? You may answer, that he does not say when Jesus was baptized; but that when the Baptist pointed him out to the people, he spoke of his baptism in the past tense, and, therefore, Jesus might have been on his return from the wilderness when the circumstances here detailed occurred. Here you are met by the fact, that Jesus, according to the first three, did not leave the wilderness to go to Galilee, nor call a disciple, until John the Baptist, his cousin, was in prison. John the Evangelist, therefore, takes him and his disciples to Galilee, where he converts water into wine, at a wedding; thence to Capernaum; thence to Jerusalem; and thence to the place of his baptising, during the time that the other biographers keep him in the woods. How will you get along with this? Again. Mark says, expressly, that Jesus did not go into Galilee till after John was put in priJohn the Evangelist says, that Jesus went to Galilee, Capernaum, and Jerusalem, and to his baptising place, before John the Baptist was in prison. Here is a technical contradiction. Again. The three first say, that Andrew and Peter were called, while fishing on the sea of Tiberias. John says, they were called at Bethabara, at least forty miles from that sea. How are all these discrepancies to be reconciled?

son.

I will here observe, that Andrew's, having previously been the disciple of John, appears to pass unnoticed by you all, as well as the fact, that Jesus baptized, which is twice positively asserted by John in his 3d chapter, and denied but once, (in the fourth) and that denial in a parenthesis, a mark, at least, of its being an interpolation. I have never heard any of your divines preach from either of these passages. Some father, no doubt, finding it difficult to explain why, and in what name, Jesus baptized, made this interpolation, by which this baptism was put on the disciples, but which you find as difficult to explain as Christ's.

Luke tells us, that Jesus was the last man baptized by John at Bethabara. If so, he could not have been on his return (as your bishops allege) from the temptation, when John pointed him out to Andrew and others; for he did not go into the wilderness till after his baptism; and it is idle to suppose that John remained forty days at Bethabara, with a great crowd, doing nothing. I assure you, it is impossible to find a place for this forty days' temptation in John's book.

CHAPTER VIII.

According to Luke, an angel of God, by the name of Gabriel, a celestial being, one not having his habitation on this earth, visited Mary and told her what should happen to her, viz. that the Holy Spirit, another heavenly being, whether God or not is a question yet mooted by the sectarians, should overshadow her and cause her to conceive, and that the holy thing or person to be born of her, should be called the son of God; that he should be great and be called the son of the highest; that the Lord God should give him the throne of his father David, and that she was in high favor with Deity, and should be blessed among women.

He also tells us that she did conceive (be it unto me according to thy word,) by the Holy Ghost; that, after this conception, she went to visit her cousin Elizabeth, about whose conception the angel had informed her, and whose fœtus leaped in her womb at the sound of Marys' voice; that these cousins compared notes, and spoke of the future greatness of their sons, especially of Mary's. The circumstances attending the birth and infancy of this child, have been already noticed. Now, I ask, if it be possible, not probable, but possible, that a mother, who knew that the spirit of God had overshadowed her and gotten her with child-a mother, who was told by this angel of God, that the child, thus begotten, should be called the son of the highest, and rule over the house of Jacob forever-a mother, who felt assured, that through this son, all generations would call her blesseda mother, the birth of whose son, was announced by angels to the shepherds of Judea, and by a wonderful star to the eastern Magi, all of whom visited her at her accouchment-a mother, whose husband was directed by deity, to take her and her son to Egypt, to preserve it from the fury of Herod—a mother, whose son was declared in its infancy, by the inspired Simeon and Anna, what the angel told her he should be; I say, is it possible, that a mother knowing, not believing, but knowing that her son was begotten by God, or his spirit; knowing that God's angel, the mighty Gabriel, had told her that he would be literally the son of God; could for a single moment of her life, reject his pretensions or deny his assertions, that he was this son of God.

Could she, for any moment of her life, treat him or speak of him with disrespect, or call him a madman; however extravagant his pretensions, or wild his conduct might appear to every other person of sane mind? She

Р

knew, that he was, in a peculiar manner, the son of God. She could not therefore scoff at his pretensions to this sonship.

That Mary according to these same evangelists, and one other, did disbelieve in him, mock at his pretensions and feel scandalized at his career, I now proceed to prove.

Matthew, in his 13th chapter, tells us that Jesus, having been treated rather cavalierly at his native city, made this observation: "A prophet is not without honor save in his own country and in his own house" (or family,). Mark makes him say; "A prophet is not without honor, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house" (or family,); that is, he was not esteemed or honored or believed in, in his own city, among his own kindred, in his own family. You may say, that no one of these expressions necessarily includes the mother. That the brothers were included is certain; for John expressly says that his brethren did not believe in him. It is probable, therefore, that by the words kin and house or family, Mark intended to include his mother. · I will now show, that it is certain he so intended.

Matthew, Mark and Luke, all tell us, that on a certain occasion, his mother and brothers came to a house filled with a crowd, listening to him. It was told to him, by one of his auditors, that his mother and brethren were without, desiring to speak to him; and that he, instead of sending them a civil answer back, said unto him who told: "Who is my mother and who are my brethren;" and then extending his hands towards his disciples, said: "Behold my mother and my brethren; for whosoever shall do the will of my father, which is in heaven, the same is my brother, my sister, and mother." This is Matthews' version. Luke says they could not get at him for the crowd or press, and that his answer to the person who told him that his mother and brethren were without and wished to speak with him, was in these words: "My mother and brethren, are these, (to wit. his disciples, who were listening to him,) which hear the word of God, and do it." That is, "those out of doors, there, are not my mother and brothers, because they do not acknowledge that my father is in heaven; you, sir, say, that those standing without there, are my mother and brothers, are mistaken; they are not my mother and brothers, but these persons here, who have followed me and are now listening to me, and believe that what I say, is the word of God; these, and not those, are my mother and broth

who

ers.

But Mark puts it beyond all doubt. He says in his 3d chapter, 21 verse, that his kinsfolk, * on hearing with what a multitude he was surrounded,

For this word see the margin of your large Bible.

« 前へ次へ »