MIRACLES.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4508, 1 September 1875, Page 3

MIRACLES.

[Advertisement. ]

TO THE EDITOR OP THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. “ For this cause God shall send them strong delusion. that they should believe a lie." (2 Theas. ii. II.) “Now, therefore, behold the Lord hath put a lying spirit In the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.” (1 Kings xxii.,23.) “And if the prophet bo deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I, the Lord have deceived that prophet.” (Ezek, xiv. 9.) Sir, —It has been well observed by Fielding, let a man abuse a physician, he makes another physician his friend ; let him rail at a lawyer, another pleads his cause gratis if he libels this courtier—that courtier receives him into his bosom, but let him attack an hornet’s nest or a priest, both nests are instantly sure to be upon him. At a period like the present, when the voice of reason and free inquiry is rousing the intellectual faculties of the people from their dormancy and enslavement, when the luminary of true knowledge is diffusing its ennobling influence among mankind, giving at once a vitality and intensity to their highest and noblest aspirations ; when men are becoming intelligent and reflective, instead of ignorant and credulous beings, it is not to ho wondered at that the priesthood and their abettors should feel so alarmed, and have recourse to all kinds of expedients in order to the maintenance of their power and influence. The subject of miracles has evidently caused considerably excitement and discussion in your valuable and liberal columns. I anticipated the attack in reply to mine, not, indeed, witli the weapons of reason and argument, because such writers are unaccustomed to the use of them, but with those of anetheum and denunciation. I ask “A Christian” how can the attributes of God be vindicated in having performed so great a number of miracles for a long succession of distant ages and so few in latter times ? If they were performed for the instruction of those times only, are they not equally necessary at present for us? or if those ancient miracles were intended likewise for our instruction, arc they adequate to the purpose? Can God, who gave us reason, act inconsistently with its dictates ; and is it rational or fair to demand our belief of things which are in their own nature far removed from common belief or common sense, and require something more than the usual testimony of history for their support ?. The miracles of the Old Testament were all performed in those ages of which we have no creditable history. The most incredible prodigies have been performed by all nations, and in those periods in which the people could scarcely read or write, but that they disappeared in proportion as men became enlightened and capable of discovering imposture and priestcraft. Divine truths are so different from those which carnal minds are used to contemplate that it must be very difficult, by the force of mere human reason, to persuade mankind in general that when (Exodus vli., 10, &c.) Aaron turned the waters of Egypt into blood, their streams, their rivers, their ponds, and all their pools, together with all the water throughout the land of Egypt, &c., the magicians of Egypt did so likewise with their enchantments. Here the man of reason, who, with more curiosity than faith, might take the liberty to enquire whether the magicians formed water to practice their arts upon since Aaron had already turned it into blood. Miracles reported to have happened are urged in favor of Christianity being true, but as other systems offer the same kind of evidence, this docs not specially assist the Christian, and it is not obvious that any doctrine which is not true and reasonable without miracle, would be so with miracle. A miracle is that which did not happen in the past, does not In the present, and will not in the future ; and if nature is in its mode of action invariable, and the ascertained facts of scienco (which divines call modern stuff and nonsense) are to be relied on, this definition of a miracle is worthy of all acceptation. Look at one miracle, the most useful if it could be wrought. According to Luke (ix.), an evening party or pic-nic was hold away from the towns and cities, and the natural question arose about refreshments. About 5000 men, besides women and children, formed the party. After inquiry, it was found that there wore only five loaves and two fishes amongst them all. They sat down and were waited on by the disciples, and were all filled ; and twelve baskets of fragments remained after this. Now, at a moderate computation, each of these fishes, which one writer describes as “small fishes,” must have weighed over 25001b5., and each of the loaves lOOOlbs.: and the time required to hand it round in the manner described, at the rate of serving one every minute, would bo over seven hours, long before which time the whole party had gone homo. It is highly improbable that a “lad” had such loaves and fishes “in a basket”; and if not, Jesus must have enlarged the fishes to the magnitude described, or contracted the stomachs to fit the occasion. But this is not left doubtful, because after all had eaten there were eleven baskets full moie than before the eating began. I ask “A Christian" and his common-sense adherents in this controversy to admit that it is unreasonable to suppose this event ever happened, and the impracticability of dividing these seven small substances in seven or eight thousand parts of sufficient magnitude to fill an ordinary human stomach is plain to any person who devoted five minutes to the consideration of the subject. To say it was “a miracle” is not to‘prove that such an event ever occurred. If such a tale were told by the disciples of any other prophet, the Christians themselves would reject it as imposture. But the Christians say “ wo firmly believe in all the miracles of our holy religion ; wo believe by faith not by reason, for when faith speaks reason ought to be silent. Wo have entire faith in our own miracles, but permit us to doubt the miracles of other nations." In a dialogue (quoted by Owen Powell Meredith) called the BhagvatGeota, between the Indian incarnate, God Chrestna, or the Christ of the Hindoos, and his favorite disciple Argoon—translated by Charles Wilkins, formerly of Bengal, from the ancient language of the Brahmins, in a letter prefixed to which translation— Warren Hastings says that the original “is affirmed to have been written four thousand years ago.”—ln this production, which, unquestionably, is exceedingly ancient, are to bo found innumerable Christian doctrines, which are said to bo revelations of the incarnate deity or Christ of the Hindoos. Mr, Warren Hastings pronounces it “theology accurately corresponding with that of the Christian despensation. and most powerfully illustrating its fundamental doctrines. Long before the time of Jesus wo find Pagan philosophers teaching the noble doctrine of refraining from avenging evil and of doing good to enemies. Confucius, 600 years before Christ, delivered such precepts as, “Desire not the death of thy enemy," “ Acknowlodo thy benefits by the return of other benefits, but never revenge injuries" (Confuc. mor. 51, 53, 03.) Pythagoras enjoined, “Let men revenge themselves on their enemies only by laboring to convert them into friends.’,' Therefore, what Jesus added to his precept of loving enemies, namely, “Bless them that curse you ; do good to them that hate you; and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you,” had been inculcated long before his time; and there is.atrong reason to conclude that he borrowed this from the Pagans, just as ho has borrowed much of the best morality of the Gospels. But the moment Jesus goes beyond these Pagan philosophers and talks about loving enemies, it shows

great Ignorance of humai nature, the constitution of which is to love only wha\is lovely.* All good moral precepts that Jesus tauglu had previously been written by such men as ThaleV Solon, Pythagoras, Confucias, Socrates, Plato, the Irahmin, and others. To teach men that it was for thtfr benefit both individually and collectively to shun Vce and practise virtue required no revelation from Haven. This they were daily taught by. experience aid observation, the sources of all their knowledge. “ A Christian ” says when it suits me I will reject foe testimony of the four Evangelists in support of foe resurrection of Christ. Giving “A Christian” credit for his wonderful powers of reasoning, I am still in great doubt as to the inconsistency of the following texts:—“ Behold my hands and my feet; that is I myself, handle me and see ; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see mo have” (Luke xxiv.,39). This, according to Luke, is what Christ said to His Apostles after His resurrection. And then Luke informs us—“ And it came to pass while He blessed them He was parted from them, and carried up into heaven” (Lukexxiv., 51). % Here, then, it appears Christ went up to heaven with His physical body as He Himself described it. Now, to show the harmony that exists between one part of the Word of God and another I need only refer to St. Paul’s Epistle to the Corinthians, “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (xv.,50). Here, then, are two inspired writers—the one an evangelist, and the other an apostle,—contradicting each other, and both under the influence of the Holy Ghost. I ask “A Christian how this agrees with his reference to holy Job, “ For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and in the last day I shall rise out of the earth, and be clothed again with my skin, and in my flesh I shall see my God.” What ! holy Job knew that Ins Redeemer liveth, surely he could not be the Christ, the Redeemer, that Christians adore, who was not born into the world for hundreds of years after Job had retired from this life. For “ Christian’s ” further knowledge of Holy Writ I respectfully refer him to Eccles. iii. 19 —22, “Forthat which befalleth the sons of man befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast; for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who kuoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast, &c.” With reference to the quotation from Josephus, no doubt it was important testimony in favor of Christ, to come from Josephus, who lived so near to the time when Christ is said to have lived. It was notorious, however, that Josephus was a Jew: and how lie could entertain these sentiments of Christ, and at the same time continue in this persuasion, seemed a paradox to many. This caused the passage to be suspected as an interpolation or forgery, and at length it was charged upon Christian writers as such. They, however, denied it. At last, the weight of evidence for the contrary position being so strong, the Christian writers were compelled to yield the point in dispute and confess the fraud; and among the number who bear evidence to this infamous fraud on the part of Christian advocates arc the names of Vandall, Le Clerc, Bishop Warburton, and Dr. Gardner, all celebrated writers in favor of Christianity. This forgery, with many others, proved very useful when quoted to show that Josephus bore testimony to the truth of the Christian doctrines, and the forger must have largely imbibed the spirit of Paul, who asks, “If the truth of God hath more abounded through ray lie unto his glorjr, why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Rom. iii., 7.) The pious Oasaubon (as quoted in Gardner, vol. iv., p. 524,) says:—“lt greatly affects me to see the numbers who, in the earliest times of the Church, considered it an excellent thing to lend to heavenly truth the help of their own inventions, in order that the new doctrine might bo more readily allowed by the wise among the Gentiles. Mosheim (Ecclea. Hist.) says :—“ It was an almost universally adopted maxim that it was an act of virtue to deceive and lie when by such means the interests of the Church might be promoted.” With anxious inquiry I respectfully desire to call “A Christian’s” attention to the following miracle: — About eighteen centuries ago (according to the prophecy of-Christ ami his apostle Paul) the sun was darkened, the moon ceased to give light, and the stars fell from Heaven, &c., &c. (Matt, xxiv., 2D, 34). It is astonishing that a phenomenon so awful as the destruction of the system of nature should have made no interruption in*the state of nations and affairs at that time—that all the historians should omit to record so dreadful an event. Here was a miracle that was well calculated to establish the Christian religion and confute all the arguments of the Jews, heathens, and unbelievers. “ A Christian’s” attention is invited to the following splendid maxims which he refers to in his letter:—“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you ; do good to them that hate you, &c.” But when he sent hia disciples to preach the Gospel lie told them to shake off the dust from their feet as they departed from any house or city which refused to receive them. &c. (Matt. v,. 44, x. 15,15). Now these two moral precepts are quite at variance with each other. The one enjoins the disciples to return good for evil; the other bids them to evince a scornful and contemptuous feeling diametrically opposed to love, the loveevenof one’s enemies. Theono, namely, that which commands us to love our enemies, is impracticable, and the other is immoral, because the practice of it is an incentive to anger, and therefore an infringement of the social law-. To bless those that curse you is contradictory to this doctrine on Jesus’s words when ho says “Whosoever shall deny me before men them will I also deny before my Father which is in Heaven” (Matthew x., 33.) “Those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them bring hither and slay them before me” (Luke xix., 27.) The spirit of cruelty and revenge which these passages breathe is at utter variance with the humane feeling of returning good for evil. Those who believe like “ A Christian ” that the mission of Jesus was peace, love, harmony, and goodwill either do not believe the word of God, or require great latitude in interpreting the following—“l am come to send fire on the earth” (Luke xii.) “ Suppose yo that I am come to give peace on earth, I tell you nay, but rather division. Think not that lam come to send peace on earth. &c., I am come to set a man at variance against his father and the daughter, &c.” (Matthew x.) So far ns experience and history enable me to judge this is the only part of the Gospel of glad tidings and great joy which has been successfully reduced to practice. Professor Newman, one of the Anglican clergy, in his “ Phases of Faith ” in reference to the doctrine of poverty as taught by Jesus, remarks, Protestants universally reject it as a deplorable absurdity, not merely wealthy Bishops, squires, and merchants, but the poorest curate also. A man could not preach such a doctrine in a pulpit without incurring deep reprobation and contempt, but when preached by Jesus it is extolled as Divine wisdom, and disobeyed. To conclude, the Gospel teaches men not to resist evil- -if our coat is taken to hand over our cloak, and if our goods are taken away not even to ask for them back again (Mat. v., Luke vi.) Surely “A Christian” does not practice the philosophy of letting others take from him what lie wants, and lias worked for himself. The most extreme social theory never proposes that another shall take the loaf from my mouth to fill his own. To do this would bo to encourage all sorts of insult and robbery. “A Christian” is not such a lunatic as to put these doctrines in practice, but “ ho that believeth not shall be damned.” In conclusion, I maintain that the Book of Nature is much easier to bo understood by the meanest capacity than the Book of Christian revelation. It can be read without knowledge of Greek idioms or Hebrew points. No portion of it has or can bo forged, counterfeited, interpolated, altered, or lost. It requires neither to be transcribed or translated. It is an everlasting original, written in a universal language which all mankind can road and understand. A truce to miracles From yours, Aoe of Reason. August 21.