Bible Myths and their Parallels in other Religions / Being a Comparison of the Old and New Testament Myths and Miracles with those of the Heathen Nations of Antiquity Considering also their Origin and Meaning

by T. W. Doane

PART II.

THE NEW TESTAMENT.

---

CHAPTER XII.

THE MIRACULOUS BIRTH OF CHRIST JESUS.

According to the dogma of the deity of Jesus, he who is said to have lived on earth some eighteen centuries ago, as Jesus of Nazareth, is second of the three persons in the Trinity, the Son, God as absolutely as the Father and the Holy Spirit, except as eternally deriving his existence from the Father. What, however, especially characterizes the Son, and distinguishes him from the two other persons united with him in the unity of the Deity, is this, that the Son, at a given moment of time, became incarnate, and that, without losing anything of his divine nature, he thus became possessed of a complete human nature; so that he is at the same time, without injury to the unity of his person, "truly man and truly God."

The story of the miraculous birth of Jesus is told by the Matthew narrator as follows:[111:1]

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph, her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying: Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."[111:2]

A Deliverer was hoped for, expected, prophesied, in the time of Jewish misery[112:1] (and Cyrus was perhaps the first referred to); but as no one appeared who did what the Messiah, according to prophecy, should do, they went on degrading each successive conqueror and hero from the Messianic dignity, and are still expecting the true Deliverer. Hebrew and Christian divines both start from the same assumed unproven premises, viz.: that a Messiah, having been foretold, must appear; but there they diverge, and the Jews show themselves to be the sounder logicians of the two: the Christians assuming that Jesus was the Messiah intended (though not the one expected), wrest the obvious meaning of the prophecies to show that they were fulfilled in him; while the Jews, assuming the obvious meaning of the prophecies to be their real meaning, argue that they were not fulfilled in Christ Jesus, and therefore that the Messiah is yet to come.

We shall now see, in the words of Bishop Hawes: "that God should, in some extraordinary manner, visit and dwell with man, is an idea which, as we read the writings of the ancient Heathens, meets us in a thousand different forms."

Immaculate conceptions and celestial descents were so currently received among the ancients, that whoever had greatly distinguished himself in the affairs of men was thought to be of supernatural lineage. Gods descended from heaven and were made incarnate in men, and men ascended from earth, and took their seat among the gods, so that these incarnations and apotheosises were fast filling Olympus with divinities.

In our inquiries on this subject we shall turn first to Asia, where, as the learned Thomas Maurice remarks in his Indian Antiquities, "in every age, and in almost every region of the Asiatic world, there seems uniformly to have flourished an immemorial tradition that one god had, from all eternity, begotten another god."[112:2]

In India, there have been several Avatars, or incarnations of Vishnu,[112:3] the most important of which is Heri Crishna,[112:4] or Crishna the Saviour.

In the Maha-bharata, an Indian epic poem, written about the sixth century B. C., Crishna is associated or identified with Vishnu the Preserving god or Saviour.[113:1]

Sir William Jones, first President of the Royal Asiatic Society, instituted in Bengal, says of him:

"Crishna continues to this hour the darling god of the Indian woman. The sect of Hindoos who adore him with enthusiastic, and almost exclusive devotion, have broached a doctrine, which they maintain with eagerness, and which seems general in these provinces, that he was distinct from all the Avatars (incarnations) who had only an ansa, or a portion, of his (Vishnu's) divinity, while Crishna was the person of Vishnu himself in human form."[113:2]

The Rev. D. O. Allen, Missionary of the American Board, for twenty-five years in India, speaking of Crishna, says:

"He was greater than, and distinct from, all the Avatars which had only a portion of the divinity in them, while he was the very person of Vishnu himself in human form."[113:3]

Thomas Maurice, in speaking of Mathura, says:

"It is particularly celebrated for having been the birth-place of Crishna, who is esteemed in India, not so much an incarnation of the divine Vishnu, as the deity himself in human form."[113:4]

Again, in his "History of Hindostan," he says:

"It appears to me that the Hindoos, idolizing some eminent character of antiquity, distinguished, in the early annals of their nation, by heroic fortitude and exalted piety, have applied to that character those ancient traditional accounts of an incarnate God, or, as they not improperly term it, an Avatar, which had been delivered down to them from their ancestors, the virtuous Noachidæ, to descend amidst the darkness and ignorance of succeeding ages, at once to reform and instruct mankind. We have the more solid reason to affirm this of the Avatar of Crishna, because it is allowed to be the most illustrious of them all; since we have learned, that, in the seven preceding Avatars, the deity brought only an ansa, or portion of his divinity; but, in the eighth, he descended in all the plentitude of the Godhead, and was Vishnu himself in a human form."[113:5]

Crishna was born of a chaste virgin,[113:6] called Devaki, who, on account of her purity, was selected to become the "mother of God."

According to the "BHAGAVAT POORAUN," Vishnu said:

"I will become incarnate at Mathura in the house of Yadu, and will issue forth to mortal birth from the womb of Devaki. . . . It is time I should display my power, and relieve the oppressed earth from its load."[114:1]

Then a chorus of angels exclaimed:

"In the delivery of this favored woman, all nature shall have cause to exult."[114:2]

In the sacred book of the Hindoos, called "Vishnu Purana," we read as follows:

"Eulogized by the gods, Devaki bore in her womb the lotus-eyed deity, the protector of the world. . . .

"No person could bear to gaze upon Devaki, from the light that invested her, and those who contemplated her radiance felt their minds disturbed. The gods, invisible to mortals, celebrated her praises continually from the time that Vishnu was contained in her person."[114:3]

Again we read:

"The divine Vishnu himself, the root of the vast universal tree, inscrutable by the understandings of all gods, demons, sages, and men, past, present, or to come, adored by Brahma and all the deities, he who is without beginning, middle, or end, being moved to relieve the earth of her load, descended into the womb of Devaki, and was born as her son, Vasudeva," i. e., Crishna.[114:4]

Again:

"Crishna is the very Supreme Brahma, though it be a mystery[114:5] how the Supreme should assume the form of a man."[114:6]

The Hindoo belief in a divine incarnation has at least, above many others, its logical side of conceiving that God manifests himself on earth whenever the weakness or the errors of humanity render his presence necessary. We find this idea expressed in one of their sacred books called the "Bhágavat Geeta," wherein it says:

"I (the Supreme One said), I am made evident by my own power, and as often as there is a decline of virtue, and an insurrection of vice and injustice in the world, I make myself evident, and thus I appear from age to age, for the preservation of the just, the destruction of the wicked, and the establishment of virtue."[114:7]

Crishna is recorded in the "Bhágavat Geeta" as saying to his beloved disciple Arjouna:

"He, O Arjoun, who, from conviction, acknowledgeth my divine birth (upon quitting his mortal form), entereth into me."[115:1]

Again, he says:

"The foolish, being unacquainted with my supreme and divine nature, as Lord of all things, despise me in this human form, trusting to the evil, diabolic, and deceitful principle within them. They are of vain hope, of vain endeavors, of vain wisdom, and void of reason; whilst men of great minds, trusting to their divine natures, discover that I am before all things and incorruptible, and serve me with their hearts undiverted by other gods."[115:2]

The next in importance among the God-begotten and Virgin-born Saviours of India, is Buddha[115:3] who was born of the Virgin Maya or Mary. He in mercy left Paradise, and came down to earth because he was filled with compassion for the sins and miseries of mankind. He sought to lead them into better paths, and took their sufferings upon himself, that he might expiate their crimes, and mitigate the punishment they must otherwise inevitably undergo.[115:4]

According to the Fo-pen-hing,[115:5] when Buddha was about to descend from heaven, to be born into the world, the angels in heaven, calling to the inhabitants of the earth, said:

"Ye mortals! adorn your earth! for Bôdhisatwa, the great Mahâsatwa, not long hence shall descend from Tusita to be born amongst you! make ready and prepare! Buddha is about to descend and be born!"[115:6]

The womb that bears a Buddha is like a casket in which a relic is placed; no other being can be conceived in the same receptacle; the usual secretions are not formed; and from the time of conception, Maha-maya was free from passion, and lived in the strictest continence.[115:7]

The resemblance between this legend and the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary the mother of Jesus, cannot but be remarked. The opinion that she had ever borne other children was called heresy by Epiphanius and Jerome, long before she had been exalted to the station of supremacy she now occupies.[115:8]

M. l'Abbé Huc, a French Missionary, in speaking of Buddha, says:

"In the eyes of the Buddhists, this personage is sometimes a man and sometimes a god, or rather both one and the other, a divine incarnation, a man-god; who came into the world to enlighten men, to redeem them, and to indicate to them the way of safety.

"This idea of redemption by a divine incarnation is so general and popular among the Buddhists, that during our travels in Upper Asia, we everywhere found it expressed in a neat formula. If we addressed to a Mongol or a Thibetan the question, 'Who is Buddha?' he would immediately reply: 'The Saviour of Men.'"[116:1]

He further says:

"The miraculous birth of Buddha, his life and instructions, contain a great number of the moral and dogmatic truths professed in Christianity."[116:2]

This Angel-Messiah was regarded as the divinely chosen and incarnate messenger, the vicar of God. He is addressed as "God of Gods," "Father of the World," "Almighty and All-knowing Ruler," and "Redeemer of All."[116:3] He is called also "The Holy One," "The Author of Happiness," "The Lord," "The Possessor of All," "He who is Omnipotent and Everlastingly to be Contemplated," "The Supreme Being, the Eternal One," "The Divinity worthy to be Adored by the most praiseworthy of Mankind."[116:4] He is addressed by Amora—one of his followers—thus:

"Reverence be unto thee in the form of Buddha! Reverence be unto thee, the Lord of the Earth! Reverence be unto thee, an incarnation of the Deity! Of the Eternal One! Reverence be unto thee, O God, in the form of the God of Mercy; the dispeller of pain and trouble, the Lord of all things, the deity, the guardian of the universe, the emblem of mercy."[116:5]

The incarnation of Gautama Buddha is recorded to have been brought about by the descent of the divine power called The "Holy Ghost" upon the Virgin Maya.[116:6] This Holy Ghost, or Spirit, descended in the form of a white elephant. The Tikas explain this as indicating power and wisdom.[117:1]

The incarnation of the angel destined to become Buddha took place in a spiritual manner. The Elephant is the symbol of power and wisdom; and Buddha was considered the organ of divine power and wisdom, as he is called in the Tikas. For these reasons Buddha is described by Buddhistic legends as having descended from heaven in the form of an Elephant to the place where the Virgin Maya was. But according to Chinese Buddhistic writings, it was the Holy Ghost, or Shing-Shin, who descended on the Virgin Maya.[117:2]

The Fo-pen-hing says:

"If a mother, in her dream, behold
A white elephant enter her right side,
That mother, when she bears a son,
Shall bear one chief of all the world (Buddha);
Able to profit all flesh;
Equally poised between preference and dislike;
Able to save and deliver the world and men
From the deep sea of misery and grief."[117:3]

In Prof. Fergusson's "Tree and Serpent Worship" may be seen (Plate xxxiii.) a representation of Maya, the mother of Buddha, asleep, and dreaming that a white elephant appeared to her, and entered her womb.

This dream being interpreted by the Brahmans learned in the Rig Veda, was considered as announcing the incarnation of him who was to be in future the deliverer of mankind from pain and sorrow. It is, in fact, the form which the Annunciation took in Buddhist legends.[117:4]

"——Awaked,
Bliss beyond mortal mother's filled her breast,
And over half the earth a lovely light
Forewent the morn. The strong hills shook; the waves
Sank lulled; all flowers that blow by day came forth
As 'twere high noon; down to the farthest hells
Passed the Queen's joy, as when warm sunshine thrills
Wood-glooms to gold, and into all the deeps
A tender whisper pierced. 'Oh ye,' it said,
'The dead that are to live, the live who die,
Uprise, and hear, and hope! Buddha is come!'
Whereat in Limbos numberless much peace
Spread, and the world's heart throbbed, and a wind blew
With unknown freshness over land and seas.
And when the morning dawned, and this was told,
The grey dream-readers said, 'The dream is good!
The Crab is in conjunction with the Sun;
The Queen shall bear a boy, a holy child
Of wondrous wisdom, profiting all flesh,
Who shall deliver men from ignorance,
Or rule the world, if he will deign to rule.'
In this wise was the holy Buddha born."

In Fig. 4, Plate xci., the same subject is also illustrated. Prof. Fergusson, referring to it, says:

"Fig. 4 is another edition of a legend more frequently repeated than almost any other in Buddhist Scriptures. It was, with their artists, as great a favorite as the Annunciation and Nativity were with Christian painters."[118:1]

When Buddha avatar descended from the regions of the souls, and entered the body of the Virgin Maya, her womb suddenly assumed the appearance of clear, transparent crystal, in which Buddha appeared, beautiful as a flower, kneeling and reclining on his hands.[118:2]

Buddha's representative on earth is the Dalai Lama, or Grand Lama, the High Priest of the Tartars. He is regarded as the vicegerent of God, with power to dispense divine blessings on whomsoever he will, and is considered among the Buddhists to be a sort of divine being. He is the Pope of Buddhism.[118:3]

The Siamese had a Virgin-born God and Saviour whom they called Codom. His mother, a beautiful young virgin, being inspired from heaven, quitted the society of men and wandered into the most unfrequented parts of a great forest, there to await the coming of a god which had long been announced to mankind. While she was one day prostrate in prayer, she was impregnated by the sunbeams. She thereupon retired to the borders of a lake, between Siam and Cambodia, where she was delivered of a "heavenly boy," which she placed within the folds of a lotus, that opened to receive him. When the boy grew up, he became a prodigy of wisdom, performed miracles, &c.[118:4]

The first Europeans who visited Cape Comorin, the most southerly extremity of the peninsula of Hindostan, were surprised to find the inhabitants worshiping a Lord and Saviour whom they called Salivahana. They related that his father's name was Taishaca, but that he was a divine child horn of a Virgin, in fact, an incarnation of the Supreme Vishnu.[119:1]

The belief in a virgin-born god-man is found in the religions of China. As Sir John Francis Davis remarks,[119:2] "China has her mythology in common with all other nations, and under this head we must range the persons styled Fo-hi (or Fuh-he), Shin-noong, Hoang-ty and their immediate successors, who, like the demi gods and heroes of Grecian fable, rescued mankind by their ability or enterprise from the most primitive barbarism, and have since been invested with superhuman attributes. The most extravagant prodigies are related of these persons, and the most incongruous qualities attributed to them."

Dean Milman, in his "History of Christianity" (Vol. i. p. 97), refers to the tradition, found among the Chinese, that Fo-hi was born of a virgin; and remarks that, the first Jesuit missionaries who went to China were appalled at finding, in the mythology of that country, a counterpart of the story of the virgin of Judea.

Fo-hi is said to have been born 3463 years B. C., and, according to some Chinese writers, with him begins the historical era and the foundation of the empire. When his mother conceived him in her womb, a rainbow was seen to surround her.[119:3]

The Chinese traditions concerning the birth of Fo-hi are, some of them, highly poetical. That which has received the widest acceptance is as follows:

"Three nymphs came down from heaven to wash themselves in a river; but scarce had they got there before the herb lotus appeared on one of their garments, with its coral fruit upon it. They could not imagine whence it proceeded, and one was tempted to taste it, whereby she became pregnant and was delivered of a boy, who afterwards became a great man, a founder of religion, a conqueror, and legislator."[119:4]

The sect of Xaca, which is evidently a corruption of Buddhism, claim that their master was also of supernatural origin. Alvarez Semedo, speaking of them, says:

"The third religious sect among the Chinese is from India, from the parts of Hindostan, which sect they call Xaca, from the founder of it, concerning whom they fable—that he was conceived by his mother Maya, from a white elephant, which she saw in her sleep, and for more purity she brought him from one of her sides."[120:1]

Lao-kiun, sometimes celled Lao-tsze, who is said to have been born in the third year of the emperor Ting-wang, of the Chow dynasty (604 B. C.), was another miraculously-born man. He acquired great reputation for sanctity, and marvelous stories were told of his birth. It was said that he had existed from all eternity; that he had descended on earth and was born of a virgin, black in complexion, described "marvelous and beautiful as jasper." Splendid temples were erected to him, and he was worshiped as a god. His disciples were called "Heavenly Teachers." They inculcated great tenderness toward animals, and considered strict celibacy necessary for the attainment of perfect holiness. Lao-kiun believed in One God whom he called Tao, and the sect which he formed is called Tao-tse, or "Sect of Reason." Sir Thomas Thornton, speaking of him, says:

"The mythological history of this 'prince of the doctrine of the Taou,' which is current amongst his followers, represents him as a divine emanation incarnate in a human form. They term him the 'most high and venerable prince of the portals of gold of the palace of the genii,' and say that he condescended to a contact with humanity when he became incorporated with the 'miraculous and excellent Virgin of jasper.' Like Buddha, he came out of his mother's side, and was born under a tree.

"The legends of the Taou-tse declare their founder to have existed antecedent to the birth of the elements, in the Great Absolute; that he is the 'pure essence of the tëen;' that he is the 'original ancestor of the prime breath of life;' and that he gave form to the heavens and the earth."[120:2]

M. Le Compte says:

"Those who have made this (the religion of Taou-tsze) their professed business, are called Tien-se, that is, 'Heavenly Doctors;' they have houses (Monasteries) given them to live together in society; they erect, in divers parts, temples to their master, and king and people honor him with divine worship."

Yu was another virgin-born Chinese sage, who is said to have lived upon earth many ages ago. Confucius—as though he had been questioned about him—says: "I see no defect in the character of Yu. He was sober in eating and drinking, and eminently pious toward spirits and ancestors."[120:3]

Hâu-ki, the Chinese hero, was of supernatural origin.

The following is the history of his birth, according to the "Shih-King:"

"His mother, who was childless, had presented a pure offering and sacrificed, that her childlessness might be taken away. She then trod on a toe-print made by God, and was moved,[121:1] in the large place where she rested. She became pregnant; she dwelt retired; she gave birth to and nourished a son, who was Hâu-ki. When she had fulfilled her months, her first-born son came forth like a lamb. There was no bursting, no rending, no injury, no hurt; showing how wonderful he would be. Did not God give her comfort? Had he not accepted her pure offering and sacrifice, so that thus easily she brought forth her son?"[121:2]

Even the sober Confucius (born B. C. 501) was of supernatural origin. The most important event in Chinese literary and ethical history is the birth of Kung-foo-tsze (Confucius), both in its effects on the moral organization of this great empire, and the study of Chinese philosophy in Europe.

Kung-foo-tsze (meaning "the sage Kung" or "the wise excellence") was of royal descent; and his family the most ancient in the empire, as his genealogy was traceable directly up to Hwang-te, the reputed organizer of the state, the first emperor of the semi-historical period (beginning 2696 B. C.).

At his birth a prodigious quadruped, called the Ke-lin, appeared and prophesied that the new-born infant "would be a king without throne or territory." Two dragons hovered about the couch of Yen-she (his mother), and five celestial sages, or angels, entered at the moment of the birth of the wondrous child; heavenly strains were heard in the air, and harmonious chords followed each other, fast and full. Thus was Confucius ushered into the world.

His disciples, who were to expound his precepts, were seventy-two in number, twelve of whom were his ordinary companions, the depositories of his thoughts, and the witnesses of all his actions. To them he minutely explained his doctrines, and charged them with their propagation after his death. Yan-hwuy was his favorite disciple, who, in his opinion, had attained the highest degree of moral perfection. Confucius addressed him in terms of great affection, which denoted that he relied mainly upon him for the accomplishment of his work.[121:3]

Even as late as the seventeenth century of our era, do we find the myth of the virgin-born God in China.[121:4]

All these god-begotten and virgin-born men were called Tien-tse, i. e., "Sons of Heaven."

If from China we should turn to Egypt we would find that, for ages before the time of Jesus of Nazareth, the mediating deity, born of a virgin, and without a worldly father, was a portion of the Egyptian belief.[122:1]

Horus, who had the epithet of "Saviour," was born of the virgin Isis. "His birth was one of the greatest Mysteries of the Egyptian religion. Pictures representing it appear on the walls of temples."[122:2] He is "the second emanation of Amon, the son whom he begot."[122:3] Egyptian monuments represent the infant Saviour in the arms of his virgin mother, or sitting on her knee.[122:4] An inscription on a monument, translated by Champollion, reads thus:

"O thou avenger, God, son of a God; O thou avenger, Horus, manifested by Osiris, engendered of the goddess Isis."[122:5]

The Egyptian god Ra was born from the side of his mother, but was not engendered.[122:6]

The ancient Egyptians also deified kings and heroes, in the same manner as the ancient Greeks and Romans. An Egyptian king became, in a sense, "the vicar of God on earth, the infallible, and the personated deity."[122:7]

P. Le Page Renouf, in his Hibbert Lectures on the Religion of Ancient Egypt, says:

"I must not quit this part of my subject without a reference to the belief that the ruling sovereign of Egypt was the living image and vicegerent of the Sun-god (Ra). He was invested with the attributes of divinity, and that in the earliest times of which we possess monumental evidence."[122:8]

Menes, who is said to have been the first king of Egypt, was believed to be a god.[122:9]

Almost all the temples of the left bank of the Nile, at Thebes, had been constructed in view of the worship rendered to the Pharaohs, their founders, after their death.[122:10]

On the wall of one of these Theban temples is to be seen a picture representing the god Thoth—the messenger of God—telling the maiden, Queen Mautmes, that she is to give birth to a divine son, who is to be King Amunothph III.[123:1]

An inscription found in Egypt makes the god Ra say to his son Ramses III.:

"I am thy father; by me are begotten all thy members as divine; I have formed thy shape like the Mendesian god; I have begotten thee, impregnating thy venerable mother."[123:2]

Raam-ses, or Ra-mé-ses, means "Son of the Sun," and Ramses Hek An, a name of Ramses III., means "engendered by Ra (the Sun), Prince of An (Heliopolis)."[123:3]

"Thotmes III., on the tablet of Karnak, presents offerings to his predecessors; so does Ramses on the tablet of Abydos. Even during his life-time the Egyptian king was denominated 'Beneficent God.'"[123:4]

The ancient Babylonians also believed that their kings were gods upon earth. A passage from Ménaut's translation of the great inscription of Nebuchadnezzar, reads thus:

"I am Nabu-kuder-usur . . . the first-born son of Nebu-pal-usur, King of Babylon. The god Bel himself created me, the god Marduk engendered me, and deposited himself the germ of my life in the womb of my mother."[123:5]

In the life of Zoroaster, the law-giver of the Persians, the common mythos is apparent. He was born in innocence, of an immaculate conception, of a ray of the Divine Reason. As soon as he was born the glory from his body enlightened the whole room.[123:6] Plato informs us that Zoroaster was said to be "the son of Oromasdes, which was the name the Persians gave to the Supreme God"[123:7]—therefore he was the Son of God.

From the East we will turn to the West, and shall find that many of the ancient heroes of Grecian and Roman mythology were regarded as of divine origin, were represented as men, possessed of god-like form, strength and courage; were believed to have lived on earth in the remote, dim ages of the nation's history; to have been occupied in their life-time with thrilling adventures and extraordinary services in the cause of human civilization, and to have been after death in some cases translated to a life among the gods, and entitled to sacrifice and worship. In the hospitable Pantheon of the Greeks and Romans, a niche was always in readiness for every new divinity who could produce respectable credentials.

The Christian Father Justin Martyr, says:

"It having reached the Devil's ears that the prophets had foretold the coming of Christ (the Son of God), he set the Heathen Poets to bring forward a great many who should be called the sons of Jove. The Devil laying his scheme in this, to get men to imagine that the true history of Christ was of the same character as the prodigious fables related of the sons of Jove."

Among these "sons of Jove" may be mentioned the following: Hercules was the son of Jupiter by a mortal mother, Alcmene, Queen of Thebes.[124:1] Zeus, the god of gods, spake of Hercules, his son, and said: "This day shall a child be born of the race of Perseus, who shall be the mightiest of the sons of men."[124:2]

Bacchus was the son of Jupiter and a mortal mother, Semele, daughter of Kadmus, King of Thebes.[124:3] As Montfaucon says, "It is the son of Jupiter and Semele which the poets celebrate, and which the monuments represent."[124:4]

Bacchus is made to say:

"I, son of Deus, am come to this land of the Thebans, Bacchus, whom formerly Semele the daughter of Kadmus brings forth, being delivered by the lightning-bearing flame: and having taken a mortal form instead of a god's, I have arrived at the fountains of Dirce and the water of Ismenus."[124:5]

Amphion was the son of Jupiter and a mortal mother, Antiope, daughter of Nicetus, King of Bœotia.[124:6]

Prometheus, whose name is derived from a Greek word signifying foresight and providence, was a deity who united the divine and human nature in one person, and was confessedly both man and god.[124:7]

Perseus was the son of Jupiter by the virgin Danae, daughter of Acrisius, King of Argos.[124:8] Divine honors were paid him, and a temple was erected to him in Athens.[124:9]

Justin Martyr (A. D. 140), in his Apology to the Emperor Adrian, says:

"By declaring the Logos, the first-begotten of God, our Master, Jesus Christ, to be born of a virgin, without any human mixture, we (Christians) say no more in this than what you (Pagans) say of those whom you style the Sons of Jove. For you need not be told what a parcel of sons the writers most in vogue among you assign to Jove. . . .

"As to the Son of God, called Jesus, should we allow him to be nothing more than man, yet the title of 'the Son of God' is very justifiable, upon the account of his wisdom, considering that you (Pagans) have your Mercury in worship under the title of the Word, a messenger of God. . . .

"As to his (Jesus Christ's) being born of a virgin, you have your Perseus to balance that."[125:1]

Mercury was the son of Jupiter and a mortal mother, Maia, daughter of Atlas. Cyllene, in Arcadia, is said to have been the scene of his birth and education, and a magnificent temple was erected to him there.[125:2]

Æolus, king of the Lipari Islands, near Sicily, was the son of Jupiter and a mortal mother, Acasta.[125:3]

Apollo was the son of Jupiter and a mortal mother, Latona.[125:4] Like Buddha and Lao-Kiun, Apollo, so the Ephesians said, was born under a tree; Latona, taking shelter under an olive-tree, was delivered there.[125:5] Then there was joy among the undying gods in Olympus, and the Earth laughed beneath the smile of Heaven.[125:6]

Aethlius, who is said to have been one of the institutors of the Orphic games, was the son of Jupiter by a mortal mother, Protogenia.[125:7]

Arcas was the son of Jupiter and a mortal mother.[125:8]

Aroclus was the son of Jupiter and a mortal mother.[125:9]

We might continue and give the names of many more sons of Jove, but sufficient has been seen, we believe, to show, in the words of Justin, that Jove had a great "parcel of sons." "The images of self-restraint, of power used for the good of others, are prominent in the lives of all or almost all the Zeus-born heroes."[125:10]

This Jupiter, who begat so many sons, was the supreme god of the Pagans. In the words of Orpheus:

"Jupiter is omnipotent; the first and the last, the head and the midst; Jupiter, the giver of all things, the foundation of the earth, and the starry heavens."[125:11]

The ancient Romans were in the habit of deifying their living and departed emperors, and gave to them the title of Divus, or the Divine One. It was required throughout the whole empire that divine honors should be paid to the emperors.[125:12] They had a ceremony called Apotheosis, or deification. After this ceremony, temples, altars, and images, with attributes of divinity, were erected to the new deity. It is related by Eusebius, Tertullian, and Chrysostom, that Tiberius proposed to the Roman Senate the Apotheosis or deification of Jesus Christ.[126:1] Ælius Lampridius, in his Life of Alexander Severus (who reigned A. D. 222-235), says:

"This emperor had two private chapels, one more honorable than the other; and in the former were placed the deified emperors, and also some eminent good men, among them Abraham, Christ, and Orpheus."[126:2]

Romulus, who is said to have been the founder of Rome, was believed to have been the son of God by a pure virgin, Rhea-Sylvia.[126:3] One Julius Proculus took a solemn oath, that Romulus himself appeared to him and ordered him to inform the Senate of his being called up to the assembly of the gods, under the name of Quirinus.[126:4]

Julius Cæsar was supposed to have had a god for a father.[126:5]

Augustus Cæsar was also believed to have been of celestial origin, and had all the honors paid to him as to a divine person.[126:6] His divinity is expressed by Virgil, in the following lines:

"——Turn, turn thine eyes, see here thy race divine,
Behold thy own imperial Roman Sine:
Cæsar, with all the Julian name survey;
See where the glorious ranks ascend to-day!—
This—this is he—the chief so long foretold,
To bless the land where Saturn ruled of old,
And give the Learnean realms a second eye of gold!
The promised prince, Augustus the divine,
Of Cæsar's race, and Jove's immortal line."[126:7]

"The honors due to the gods," says Tacitus, "were no longer sacred: Augustus claimed equal worship. Temples were built, and statues were erected, to him; a mortal man was adored, and priests and pontiffs were appointed to pay him impious homage."[126:8]

Divine honors were declared to the memory of Claudius, after his death, and he was added to the number of the gods. The titles "Our Lord," "Our Master," and "Our God," were given to the Emperors of Rome, even while living.[126:9]

In the deification of the Cæsars, a testimony upon oath, of an eagle's flying out of the funeral pile, toward heaven, which was supposed to convey the soul of the deceased, was the established proof of their divinity.[127:1]

Alexander the Great, King of Macedonia (born 356 B. C.), whom genius and uncommon success had raised above ordinary men, was believed to have been a god upon earth.[127:2] He was believed to have been the son of Jupiter by a mortal mother, Olympias.

Alexander at one time visited the temple of Jupiter Ammon, which was situated in an oasis in the Libyan desert, and the Oracle there declared him to be a son of the god. He afterwards issued his orders, letters, decrees, &c., styling himself "Alexander, son of Jupiter Ammon."[127:3]

The words of the oracle which declared him to be divine were as follows, says Socrates:

"Let altars burn and incense pour, please Jove Minerva eke;
The potent Prince though nature frail, his favor you must seek,
For Jove from heaven to earth him sent, lo! Alexander king,
As God he comes the earth to rule, and just laws for to bring."[127:4]

Ptolemy, who was one of Alexander's generals in his Eastern campaigns, and into whose hands Egypt fell at the death of Alexander, was also believed to have been of divine origin. At the siege of Rhodes, Ptolemy had been of such signal service to its citizens that in gratitude they paid divine honors to him, and saluted him with the title of Soter, i. e., Saviour. By that designation, "Ptolemy Soter," he is distinguished from the succeeding kings of the Macedonian dynasty in Egypt.[127:5]

Cyrus, King of Persia, was believed to have been of divine origin; he was called the "Christ," or the "Anointed of God," and God's messenger.[127:6]

Plato, born at Athens 429 B. C., was believed to have been the son of God by a pure virgin, called Perictione.[127:7]

The reputed father of Plato (Aris) was admonished in a dream to respect the person of his wife until after the birth of the child of which she was then pregnant by a god.[127:8]

Prof. Draper, speaking of Plato, says:

"The Egyptian disciples of Plato would have looked with anger on those who rejected the legend that Perictione, the mother of that great philosopher, a pure virgin, had suffered an immaculate conception through the influences of (the god) Apollo, and that the god had declared to Aris, to whom she was betrothed, the parentage of the child."[128:1]

Here we have the legend of the angel appearing to Joseph—to whom Mary was betrothed—believed in by the disciples of Plato for centuries before the time of Christ Jesus, the only difference being that the virgin's name was Perictione instead of Mary, and the confiding husband's name Aris instead of Joseph. We have another similar case.

The mother of Apollonius (B. C. 41) was informed by a god, who appeared to her, that he himself should be born of her.[128:2] In the course of time she gave birth to Apollonius, who became a great religious teacher, and performer of miracles.[128:3]

Pythagoras, born about 570 B. C., had divine honors paid him. His mother is said to have become impregnated through a spectre, or Holy Ghost. His father—or foster-father—was also informed that his wife should bring forth a son, who should be a benefactor to mankind.[128:4]

Æsculapius, the great performer of miracles,[128:5] was supposed to be the son of a god and a worldly mother, Coronis. The Messenians, who consulted the oracle at Delphi to know where Æsculapius was born, and of what parents, were informed that a god was his father, Coronis his mother, and that their son was born at Epidaurus.

Coronis, to conceal her pregnancy from her father, went to Epidaurus, where she was delivered of a son, whom she exposed on a mountain. Aristhenes, a goat-herd, going in search of a goat and a dog missing from his fold, discovered the child, whom he would have carried to his home, had he not, upon approaching to lift him from the earth, perceived his head encircled with fiery rays, which made him believe the child was divine. The voice of fame soon published the birth of a miraculous infant, upon which the people flocked from all quarters to behold this heaven-born child.[128:6]

Being honored as a god in Phenicia and Egypt, his worship passed into Greece and Rome.[128:7]

Simon the Samaritan, surnamed "Magus" or the "Magician," who was contemporary with Jesus, was believed to be a god. In Rome, where he performed wonderful miracles, he was honored as a god, and his picture placed among the gods.[129:1]

Justin Martyr, quoted by Eusebius, tells us that Simon Magus attained great honor among the Romans. That he was believed to be a god, and that he was worshiped as such. Between two bridges upon the River Tibris, was to be seen this inscription: "Simoni Deo Sancto," i. e. "To Simon the Holy God."[129:2]

It was customary with all the heroes of the northern nations (Danes, Swedes, Norwegians and Icelanders), to speak of themselves as sprung from their supreme deity, Odin. The historians of those times, that is to say, the poets, never failed to bestow the same honor on all those whose praises they sang; and thus they multiplied the descendants of Odin as much as they found convenient. The first-begotten son of Odin was Thor, whom the Eddas call the most valiant of his sons. "Baldur the Good," the "Beneficent Saviour," was the son of the Supreme Odin and the goddess Frigga, whose worship was transferred to that of the Virgin Mary.[129:3]

In the mythological systems of America, a virgin-born god was not less clearly recognized than in those of the Old World. Among the savage tribes his origin and character were, for obvious reasons, much confused; but among the more advanced nations he occupied a well-defined position. Among the nations of Anahuac, he bore the name of Quetzalcoatle, and was regarded with the highest veneration.

For ages before the landing of Columbus on its shores, the inhabitants of ancient Mexico worshiped a "Saviour"—as they called him—(Quetzalcoatle) who was born of a pure virgin.[129:4] A messenger from heaven announced to his mother that she should bear a son without connection with man.[129:5] Lord Kingsborough tells us that the annunciation of the virgin Sochiquetzal, mother of Quetzalcoatle,—who was styled the "Queen of Heaven"[129:6]—was the subject of a Mexican hieroglyph.[129:7]

The embassador was sent from heaven to this virgin, who had two sisters, Tzochitlique and Conatlique. "These three being alone in the house, two of them, on perceiving the embassador from heaven, died of fright, Sochiquetzal remaining alive, to whom the ambassador announced that it was the will of God that she should conceive a son."[130:1] She therefore, according to the prediction, "conceived a son, without connection with man, who was called Quetzalcoatle."[130:2]

Dr. Daniel Brinton, in his "Myths of the New World," says:

"The Central figure of Toltec mythology is Quetzalcoatle. Not an author on ancient Mexico, but has something to say about the glorious days when he ruled over the land. No one denies him to have been a god. He was born of a virgin in the land of Tula or Tlopallan."[130:3]

The Mayas of Yucatan had a virgin-born god, corresponding entirely with Quetzalcoatle, if he was not the same under a different name, a conjecture very well sustained by the evident relationship between the Mexican and Mayan mythologies. He was named Zama, and was the only-begotten son of their supreme god, Kinchahan.[130:4]

The Muyscas of Columbia had a similar hero-god. According to their traditionary history, he bore the name of Bochica. He was the incarnation of the Great Father, whose sovereignty and paternal care he emblematized.[130:5]

The inhabitants of Nicaragua called their principal god Thomathoyo; and said that he had a son, who came down to earth, whose name was Theotbilahe, and that he was their general instructor.[130:6]

We find a corresponding character in the traditionary history of Peru. The Sun—the god of the Peruvians—deploring their miserable condition, sent down his son, Manco Capac, to instruct them in religion, &c.[130:7]

We have also traces of a similar personage in the traditionary Votan of Guatemala; but our accounts concerning him are more vague than in the cases above mentioned.

We find this traditional character in countries and among tribes where we would be least apt to suspect its existence. In Brazil, besides the common belief in an age of violence, during which the world was destroyed by water, there is a tradition of a supernatural personage called Zome, whose history is similar, in some respects, to that of Quetzalcoatle.[130:8]

The semi-civilized agricultural tribes of Florida had like traditions. The Cherokees, in particular, had a priest and law-giver essentially corresponding to Quetzalcoatle and Bochica. He was their great prophet, and bore the name of Wasi. "He told them what had been from the beginning of the world, and what would be, and gave the people in all things directions what to do. He appointed their feasts and fasts, and all the ceremonies of their religion, and enjoined upon them to obey his directions from generation to generation."[131:1]

Among the savage tribes the same notions prevailed. The Edues of the Californians taught that there was a supreme Creator, Niparaga, and that his son, Quaagagp, came down upon the earth and instructed the Indians in religion, &c. Finally, through hatred, the Indians killed him; but although dead, he is incorruptible and beautiful. To him they pay adoration, as the mediatory power between earth and the Supreme Niparaga.[131:2]

The Iroquois also had a beneficent being, uniting in himself the character of a god and man, who was called Tarengawagan. He imparted to them the knowledge of the laws of the Great Spirit, established their form of government, &c.[131:3]

Among the Algonquins, and particularly among the Ojibways and other remnants of that stock of the North-west, this intermediate great teacher (denominated, by Mr. Schoolcraft, in his "Notes of the Iroquois," "the great incarnation of the North-west") is fully recognized. He bears the name of Michabou, and is represented as the first-born son of a great celestial Manitou, or Spirit, by an earthly mother, and is esteemed the friend and protector of the human race.[131:4]

I think we can now say with M. Dupuis, that "the idea of a God, who came down on earth to save mankind, is neither new nor peculiar to the Christians," and with Cicero, the great Roman orator and philosopher, that "brave, famous or powerful men, after death, came to be gods, and they are the very ones whom we are accustomed to worship, pray to and venerate."

Taking for granted that the synoptic Gospels are historical, there is no proof that Jesus ever claimed to be either God, or a god; on the other hand, it is quite the contrary.[131:5] As Viscount Amberly says: "The best proof of this is that Jesus never, at any period of his life, desired his followers to worship him, either as God, or as the Son of God," in the sense in which it is now understood. Had he believed of himself what his followers subsequently believed of him, that he was one of the constituent persons in a divine Trinity, he must have enjoined his Apostles both to address him in prayer themselves, and to desire their converts to do likewise. It is quite plain that he did nothing of the kind, and that they never supposed him to have done so.

Belief in Jesus as the Messiah was taught as the first dogma of Christianity, but adoration of Jesus as God was not taught at all.

But we are not left in this matter to depend on conjectural inferences. The words put into the mouth of Jesus are plain. Whenever occasion arose, he asserted his inferiority to the Father, though, as no one had then dreamt of his equality, it is natural that the occasions should not have been frequent.

He made himself inferior in knowledge when he said that of the day and hour of the day of judgment no one knew, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son; no one except the Father.[132:1]

He made himself inferior in power when he said that seats on his right hand and on his left in the kingdom of heaven were not his to give.[132:2]

He made himself inferior in virtue when he desired a certain man not to address him as "Good Master," for there was none good but God.[132:3]

The words of his prayer at Gethsemane, "all things are possible unto thee," imply that all things were not possible to him, while its conclusion "not what I will, but what thou wilt," indicates submission to a superior, not the mere execution of a purpose of his own.[132:4] Indeed, the whole prayer would have been a mockery, useless for any purpose but the deception of his disciples, if he had himself been identical with the Being to whom he prayed, and had merely been giving effect by his death to their common counsels. While the cry of agony from the cross, "My God, my God! why hast thou forsaken me?"[132:5] would have been quite unmeaning if the person forsaken, and the person forsaking, had been one and the same.

Either, then, we must assume that the language of Jesus has been misreported, or we must admit that he never for a moment pretended to be co-equal, co-eternal or consubstantial with God.

It also follows of necessity from both the genealogies,[133:1] that their compilers entertained no doubt that Joseph was the father of Jesus. Otherwise the descent of Joseph would not have been in the least to the point. All attempts to reconcile this inconsistency with the doctrine of the Angel-Messiah has been without avail, although the most learned Christian divines, for many generations past, have endeavored to do so.

So, too, of the stories of the Presentation in the Temple,[133:2] and of the child Jesus at Jerusalem,[133:3] Joseph is called his father. Jesus is repeatedly described as the son of the carpenter,[133:4] or the son of Joseph, without the least indication that the expression is not strictly in accordance with the fact.[133:5]

If his parents fail to understand him when he says, at twelve years old, that he must be about his Father's business;[133:6] if he afterwards declares that he finds no faith among his nearest relations;[133:7] if he exalts his faithful disciples above his unbelieving mother and brothers;[133:8] above all, if Mary and her other sons put down his prophetic enthusiasm to insanity;[133:9]—then the untrustworthy nature of these stories of his birth is absolutely certain. If even a little of what they tell us had been true, then Mary at least would have believed in Jesus, and would not have failed so utterly to understand him.[133:10]

The Gospel of Mark—which, in this respect, at least, abides most faithfully by the old apostolic tradition—says not a word about Bethlehem or the miraculous birth. The congregation of Jerusalem to which Mary and the brothers of Jesus belonged,[133:11] and over which the eldest of them, James, presided,[133:12] can have known nothing of it; for the later Jewish-Christian communities, the so-called Ebionites, who were descended from the congregation at Jerusalem, called Jesus the son of Joseph. Nay, the story that the Holy Spirit was the father of Jesus, must have risen among the Greeks, or elsewhere, and not among the first believers, who were Jews, for the Hebrew word for spirit is of the feminine gender.[134:1]

The immediate successors of the "congregation at Jerusalem"—to which Mary, the mother of Jesus, and his brothers belonged—were, as we have seen, the Ebionites. Eusebius, the first ecclesiastical historian (born A. D. 264), speaking of the Ebionites (i. e. "poor men"), tell us that they believed Jesus to be "a simple and common man," born as other men, "of Mary and her husband."[134:2]

The views held by the Ebionites of Jesus were, it is said, derived from the Gospel of Matthew, and what they learned direct from the Apostles. Matthew had been a hearer of Jesus, a companion of the Apostles, and had seen and no doubt conversed with Mary. When he wrote his Gospel everything was fresh in his mind, and there could be no object, on his part, in writing the life of Jesus, to state falsehoods or omit important truths in order to deceive his countrymen. If what is stated in the interpolated first two chapters, concerning the miraculous birth of Jesus, were true, Matthew would have known of it; and, knowing it, why should he omit it in giving an account of the life of Jesus?[134:3]

The Ebionites, or Nazarenes, as they were previously called were rejected by the Jews as apostates, and by the Egyptian and Roman Christians as heretics, therefore, until they completely disappear, their history is one of tyrannical persecution. Although some traces of that obsolete sect may be discovered as late as the fourth century, they insensibly melted away, either into the Roman Christian Church, or into the Jewish Synagogue,[134:4] and with them perished the original Gospel of Matthew, the only Gospel written by an apostle.

"Who, where masses of men are burning to burst the bonds of time and sense, to deify and to adore, wants what seems earth-born, prosaic fact? Woe to the man that dares to interpose it! Woe to the sect of faithful Ebionites even, and on the very soil of Palestine, that dare to maintain the earlier, humbler tradition! Swiftly do they become heretics, revilers, blasphemers, though sanctioned by a James, brother of the Lord."

Edward Gibbon, speaking of this most unfortunate sect, says:

"A laudable regard for the honor of the first proselytes has countenanced the belief, the hope, the wish, that the Ebionites, or at least the Nazarenes, were distinguished only by their obstinate perseverance in the practice of the Mosaic rites. Their churches have disappeared, their books are obliterated, their obscure freedom might allow a latitude of faith, and the softness of their infant creed would be variously moulded by the zeal of prejudice of three hundred years. Yet the most charitable criticism must refuse these sectaries any knowledge of the pure and proper divinity of Christ. Educated in the school of Jewish prophecy and prejudice, they had never been taught to elevate their hope above a human and temporal Messiah. If they had courage to hail their king when he appeared in a plebeian garb, their grosser apprehensions were incapable of discerning their God, who had studiously disguised his celestial character under the name and person of a mortal.

"The familiar companions of Jesus of Nazareth conversed with their friend and countryman, who, in all the actions of rational and human life, appeared of the same species with themselves. His progress from infancy to youth and manhood was marked by a regular increase in stature and wisdom; and after a painful agony of mind and body, he expired on the cross."[135:1]

The Jewish Christians then—the congregation of Jerusalem, and their immediate successors, the Ebionites or Nazarenes—saw in their master nothing more than a man. From this, and the other facts which we have seen in this chapter, it is evident that the man Jesus of Nazareth was deified long after his death, just as many other men had been deified centuries before his time, and even after. Until it had been settled by a council of bishops that Jesus was not only a God, but "God himself in human form," who appeared on earth, as did Crishna of old, to redeem and save mankind, there were many theories concerning his nature.

Among the early Christians there were a certain class called by the later Christians Heretics. Among these may be mentioned the "Carpocratians," named after one Carpocrates. They maintained that Jesus was a mere man, born of Joseph and Mary, like other men, but that he was good and virtuous. "Some of them have the vanity," says Irenæus, "to think that they may equal, or in some respects exceed, Jesus himself."[135:2]

These are called by the general name of Gnostics, and comprehend almost all the sects of the first two ages.[135:3] They said that "all the ancients, and even the Apostles themselves, received and taught the same things which they held; and that the truth of the Gospel had been preserved till the time of Victor, the thirteenth Bishop of Rome, but by his successor, Zephyrinus, the truth had been corrupted."[135:4]

Eusebius, speaking of Artemon and his followers, who denied the divinity of Christ, says:

"They affirm that all our ancestors, yea, and the Apostles themselves, were of the same opinion, and taught the same with them, and that this their true doctrine (for so they call it) was preached and embraced unto the time of Victor, the thirteenth Bishop of Rome after Peter, and corrupted by his successor Zephyrinus."[136:1]

There were also the "Cerinthians," named after one Cerinthus, who maintained that Jesus was not born of a virgin, which to them appeared impossible, but that he was the son of Joseph and Mary, born altogether as other men are; but he excelled all men in virtue, knowledge and wisdom. At the time of his baptism, "the Christ" came down upon him in the shape of a dove, and left him at the time of his crucifixion.[136:2]

Irenæus, speaking of Cerinthus and his doctrines, says:

"He represents Jesus as the son of Joseph and Mary, according to the ordinary course of human generation, and not as having been born of a virgin. He believed nevertheless that he was more righteous, prudent and wise than most men, and that the Christ descended upon, and entered into him, at the time of his baptism."[136:3]

The Docetes were a numerous and learned sect of Asiatic Christians who invented the Phantastic system, which was afterwards promulgated by the Marcionites, the Manicheans, and various other sects.

They denied the truth and authenticity of the Gospels, as far as they related to the conception of Mary, the birth of Jesus, and the thirty years that preceded the exercise of his ministry.

Bordering upon the Jewish and Gentile world, the Cerinthians labored to reconcile the Gnostic and the Ebionite, by confessing in the same Messiah the supernatural union of a man and a god; and this mystic doctrine was adopted, with many fanciful improvements, by many sects. The hypothesis was this: that Jesus of Nazareth was a mere mortal, the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary, but he was the best and wisest of the human race, selected as the worthy instrument to restore upon earth the worship of the true and supreme Deity. When he was baptized in the Jordan, and not till then, he became more than man. At that time, the Christ, the first of the Æons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry. When he was delivered into the hands of the Jews, the Christ forsook him, flew back to the world of spirits, and left the solitary Jesus to suffer, to complain, and to die. This is why he said, while hanging on the cross: "My God! My God! why hast thou forsaken me?"[137:1]

Here, then, we see the first budding out of—what was termed by the true followers of Jesus—heretical doctrines. The time had not yet come to make Jesus a god, to claim that he had been born of a virgin. As he must, however, have been different from other mortals—throughout the period of his ministry, at least—the Christ must have entered into him at the time of his baptism, and as mysteriously disappeared when he was delivered into the hands of the Jews.

In the course of time, the seeds of the faith, which had slowly arisen in the rocky and ungrateful soil of Judea, were transplanted, in full maturity, to the happier climes of the Gentiles; and the strangers of Rome and Alexandria, who had never beheld the manhood, were more ready to embrace the divinity of Jesus.

The polytheist and the philosopher, the Greek and the barbarian, were alike accustomed to receive—as we have seen in this chapter—a long succession and infinite chain of angels, or deities, or æons, or emanations, issuing from the throne of light. Nor could it seem strange and incredible to them, that the first of the æons, the Logos, or Word of God, of the same substance with the Father, should descend upon earth, to deliver the human race from vice and error. The histories of their countries, their odes, and their religions were teeming with such ideas, as happening in the past, and they were also looking for and expecting an Angel-Messiah.[137:2]

Centuries rolled by, however, before the doctrine of Christ Jesus, the Angel-Messiah, became a settled question, an established tenet in the Christian faith. The dignity of Christ Jesus was measured by private judgment, according to the indefinite rule of Scripture, or tradition or reason. But when his pure and proper divinity had been established on the ruins of Arianism, the faith of the Catholics trembled on the edge of a precipice where it was impossible to recede, dangerous to stand, dreadful to fall; and the manifold inconveniences of their creed were aggravated by the sublime character of their theology. They hesitated to pronounce that God himself, the second person of an equal and consubstantial Trinity, was manifested in the flesh,[137:3] that the Being who pervades the universe had been confined in the womb of Mary; that his eternal duration had been marked by the days, and months, and years of human existence; that the Almighty God had been scourged and crucified; that his impassible essence had felt pain and anguish; that his omniscience was not exempt from ignorance; and that the source of life and immortality expired on Mount Calvary.

These alarming consequences were affirmed with unblushing simplicity by Apollinaris, Bishop of Laodicea, and one of the luminaries of the Church. The son of a learned grammarian, he was skilled in all the sciences of Greece; eloquence, erudition, and philosophy, conspicuous in the volumes of Apollinaris, were humbly devoted to the service of religion.

The worthy friend of Athanasius, the worthy antagonist of Julian, he bravely wrestled with the Arians and polytheists, and though he affected the rigor of geometrical demonstration, his commentaries revealed the literal and allegorical sense of the Scriptures.

A mystery, which had long floated in the looseness of popular belief, was defined by his perverse diligence in a technical form, and he first proclaimed the memorable words, "One incarnate nature of Christ."[138:1]

This was about A. D. 362, he being Bishop of Laodicea, in Syria, at that time.[138:2]

The recent zeal against the errors of Apollinaris reduced the Catholics to a seeming agreement with the double-nature of Cerinthus. But instead of a temporary and occasional alliance, they established, and Christians still embrace, the substantial, indissoluble, and everlasting union of a perfect God with a perfect man, of the second person of the Trinity with a reasonable soul and human flesh. In the beginning of the fifth century, the unity of the two natures was the prevailing doctrine of the church.[138:3] From that time, until a comparatively recent period, the cry was: "May those who divide Christ[138:4] be divided with the sword; may they be hewn in pieces, may they be burned alive!" These were actually the words of a Christian synod.[139:1] Is it any wonder that after this came the dark ages? How appropriate is the name which has been applied to the centuries which followed! Dark indeed they were. Now and then, however, a ray of light was seen, which gave evidence of the coming morn, whose glorious light we now enjoy. But what a grand light is yet to come from the noon-day sun, which must shed its glorious rays over the whole earth, ere it sets.

---

FOOTNOTES:

[111:1] Matthew, i. 18-25.

[111:2] The Luke narrator tells the story in a different manner. His account is more like that recorded in the Koran, which says that Gabriel appeared unto Mary in the shape of a perfect man, that Mary, upon seeing him, and seeming to understand his intentions, said: "If thou fearest God, thou wilt not approach me." Gabriel answering said: "Verily, I am the messenger of the Lord, and am sent to give thee a holy son." (Koran, ch. xix.)

[112:1] Instead, however, of the benevolent Jesus, the "Prince of Peace"—as Christian writers make him out to be—the Jews were expecting a daring and irresistible warrior and conqueror, who, armed with greater power than Cæsar, was to come upon earth to rend the fetters in which their hapless nation had so long groaned, to avenge them upon their haughty oppressors, and to re-establish the kingdom of Judah.

[112:2] Vol. v. p. 294.

[112:3] Moor, in his "Pantheon," tells us that a learned Pandit once observed to him that the English were a new people, and had only the record of one Avatara, but the Hindoos were an ancient people, and had accounts of a great many.

[112:4] This name has been spelled in many different ways, such as Krishna, Khrishna, Krishnu, Chrisna, Cristna, Christna, &c. We have followed Sir Wm. Jones's way of spelling it, and shall do so throughout.

[113:1] See Asiatic Researches, vol. i. pp. 259-275.

[113:2] Ibid. p. 260. We may say that, "In him dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Colossians, ii. 9.)

[113:3] Allen's India, p. 397.

[113:4] Indian Antiquities, vol. iii. p. 45.

[113:5] Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 270.

[113:6] Like Mary, the mother of Jesus, Devaki is called the "Virgin Mother," although she, as well as Mary, is said to have had other children.

[114:1] Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 327.

[114:2] Ibid. p. 329.

[114:3] Vishnu Purana, p. 502.

[114:4] Ibid. p. 440.

[114:5] "Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began." (Romans, xvi. 15.) "And without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." (1 Timothy, iii. 16.)

[114:6] Vishnu Purana, p. 492, note 3.

[114:7] Geeta, ch. iv.

[115:1] Bhagavat Geeta, Lecture iv. p. 52.

[115:2] Ibid., Lecture iv. p. 79.

[115:3] It is said that there have been several Buddhas (see [ch. xxix]). We speak of Gautama. Buddha is variously pronounced and expressed Boudh, Bod, Bot, But, Bud, Budd, Buddou, Bouttu, Bota, Budso, Pot, Pout, Pota, Poti, and Pouti. The Siamese make the final t or d quiescent, and sound the word Po; whence the Chinese still further vary it to Pho or Fo. Buddha—which means awakened or enlightened (see Müller: Sci. of Relig., p. 308)—is the proper way in which to spell the name. We have adopted this throughout this work, regardless of the manner in which the writer from which we quote spells it.

[115:4] Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 86.

[115:5] Fo-pen-hing is the life of Gautama Buddha, translated from the Chinese Sanskrit by Prof. Samuel Beal.

[115:6] Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 25.

[115:7] Hardy: Manual of Buddhism, p. 141.

[115:8] A Christian sect called Collyridians believed that Mary was born of a virgin, as Christ is related to have been born of her (See note to the "Gospel of the Birth of Mary" [Apocryphal]; also King: The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 91, and Gibbon's Hist. of Rome, vol. v. p. 108, note). This idea has been recently adopted by the Roman Catholic Church. They now claim that Mary was born as immaculate as her son. (See Inman's Ancient Faiths, vol. i. p. 75, and The Lily of Israel, pp. 6-15; also [fig. 17], ch. xxxii.)

"The gradual deification of Mary, though slower in its progress, follows, in the Romish Church, a course analogous to that which the Church of the first centuries followed, in elaborating the deity of Jesus. With almost all the Catholic writers of our day, Mary is the universal mediatrix; all power has been given to her in heaven and upon earth. Indeed, more than one serious attempt has been already made in the Ultramontane camp to unite Mary in some way to the Trinity; and if Mariolatry lasts much longer, this will probably be accomplished in the end." (Albert Réville.)

[116:1] Huc's Travels, vol. i. pp. 326, 327.

[116:2] Ibid. p. 327.

[116:3] Oriental Religions, p. 604.

[116:4] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah.

[116:5] Asiatic Researches, vol. ii. p. 309, and King's Gnostics, p. 167.

[116:6] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 10, 25 and 44.

[117:1] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 36, note. Ganesa, the Indian God of Wisdom, is either represented as an elephant or a man with an elephant's head. (See Moore's Hindu Pantheon, and vol. i. of Asiatic Researches.)

[117:2] Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah, p. 83.

[117:3] Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 38, 39.

[117:4] Tree and Serpent Worship, p. 131.

[118:1] Tree and Serpent Worship, p. 212.

[118:2] King: The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 168, and Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 485. R. Spence Hardy says: "The body of the Queen was transparent, and the child could be distinctly seen, like a priest seated upon a throne in the act of saying bana, or like a golden image enclosed in a vase of crystal; so that it could be known how much he grew every succeeding day." (Hardy: Manual of Buddhism, p. 144.) The same thing was said of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Early art represented the infant distinctly visible in her womb. (See Inman's Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, and [chap. xxix.] this work.)

[118:3] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 34.

[118:4] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 185. See also Anacalypsis, vol. i. pp. 162 and 308.

[119:1] See Asiatic Res., vol. x., and Anac., vol. i. p. 662.

[119:2] Davis: Hist. China, vol. i. p. 161.

[119:3] Thornton: Hist. China, vol. i. pp. 21, 22.

[119:4] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 184.

[120:1] Semedo: Hist. China, p. 89, in Anac., vol. ii. p. 227.

[120:2] Thornton: Hist. China, vol. i. pp. 134-137. See also Chambers's Encyclo., art. Lao-tsze.

[120:3] Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. pp. 204, 205.

[121:1] "The 'toe-print made by God' has occasioned much speculation of the critics. We may simply draw the conclusion that the poet meant to have his readers believe with him that the conception of his hero was SUPERNATURAL." (James Legge.)

[121:2] The Shih-King, Decade ii. Ode 1.

[121:3] See Thornton's Hist. China, vol. i. pp. 199, 200, and Buckley's Cities of the Ancient World, pp. 168-170.

[121:4] "Le Dieu La des Lamas est né d'une Vierge: plusieurs princes de l'Asie, entr'autres l'Empereur Kienlong, aujourd'hui regnant à la Chine, et qui est de la race de ces Tartares Mandhuis, qui conquirent cet empire en 1644, croit, et assure lui-même, être descendu d'une Vierge." (D'Hancarville: Res. Sur l'Orig., p. 186, in Anac., vol. ii. p. 97.)

[122:1] See Mahaffy: Proleg. to Anct. Hist., p. 416, and Bonwick's Egyptian Belief, p. 406.

[122:2] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 157.

[122:3] Renouf: Relig. Anct. Egypt, p. 162.

[122:4] See the chapter on "[The Worship of the Virgin Mother]."

[122:5] "O toi vengeur, Dieu fils d'un Dieu; O toi vengeur, Horus, manifesté par Osiris, engendré d'Isis déesee." (Champollion, p. 190.)

[122:6] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 406.

[122:7] Ibid. p. 247.

[122:8] Renouf: Religion of Ancient Egypt, p. 161.

[122:9] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. pp. 67 and 147.

[122:10] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 248.

[123:1] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 407.

[123:2] Renouf: Relig. of Anct. Egypt, p. 163.

[123:3] See Herbert Spencer's Principles of Sociology, vol. i. p. 420.

[123:4] Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i. p. 431.

[123:5] Spencer's Principles of Sociology, vol. i. p. 421.

[123:6] Malcolm: Hist. Persia, vol. i. p. 494.

[123:7] Anac. vol. i. p. 117.

[124:1] Roman Antiq., p. 124. Bell's Panth., i. 128. Dupuis, p. 258.

[124:2] Tales of Anct. Greece, p. 55.

[124:3] Greek and Italian Mytho., p. 81. Bell's Panth., i. 117. Roman Antiq., p. 71, and Murray's Manual Mytho., p. 118.

[124:4] L'Antiquité Expliquée, vol. i. p. 229.

[124:5] Euripides: Bacchae. Quoted by Dunlap: Spirit Hist. of Man, p. 200.

[124:6] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 58. Roman Antiquities, p. 133.

[124:7] See the chapter on "[The Crucifixion of Jesus]," and Bell's Pantheon, ii. 195.

[124:8] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 170. Bulfinch: The Age of Fable, p. 161.

[124:9] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 171.

[125:1] Apol. 1, ch. xxii.

[125:2] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 67. Bulfinch: The Age of Fable, p. 19.

[125:3] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 25.

[125:4] Ibid. p. 74, and Bulfinch: p. 248.

[125:5] Tacitus: Annals, iii. lxi.

[125:6] Tales of Anct. Greece, p. 4.

[125:7] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 31.

[125:8] Ibid. p. 81.

[125:9] Ibid. p. 16.

[125:10] Bell's Pantheon, ii. p. 30.

[125:11] Cox: Aryan Mythology, ii. 45.

[125:12] The Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 3.

[126:1] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 78.

[126:2] Quoted by Lardner, vol. iii. p. 157.

[126:3] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 8.

[126:4] Middleton's Letters from Rome, p. 37. In the case of Jesus, one Saul of Tarsus, said to be of a worthy and upright character, declared most solemnly, that Jesus himself appeared to him while on his way to Damascus, and again while praying in the temple at Jerusalem. (Acts xxii.)

[126:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 345. Gibbon's Rome, vol. i. pp. 84, 85.

[126:6] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 611.

[126:7] Æneid, lib. iv.

[126:8] Tacitus: Annals, bk. i. ch. x.

[126:9] Ibid. bk. ii, ch. lxxxii. and bk. xiii. ch. ii.

[127:1] See Middleton's Letters from Rome, pp. 37, 38.

[127:2] See Religion of the Ancient Greeks, p. 81, and Gibbon's Rome, vol. i. pp. 84, 85.

[127:3] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 8.

[127:4] Socrates: Eccl. Hist. Lib. 3, ch. xix.

[127:5] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 17.

[127:6] See Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. i. p. 418. Bunsen: Bible Chronology, p. 5, and The Angel-Messiah, pp. 80 and 298.

[127:7] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 113, and Draper: Religion and Science, p. 8.

[127:8] Hardy: Manual Budd., p. 141. Higgins: Anac., i. 618.

[128:1] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 8. Compare Luke i. 26-35.

[128:2] Philostratus, p. 5.

[128:3] See the chapter on [Miracles].

[128:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 151.

[128:5] See the chapter on [Miracles].

[128:6] Bell's Pantheon, i. 27. Roman Ant., 136. Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150.

[128:7] Ibid.

[129:1] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 2, ch. xiii.

[129:2] Ibid. ch. xiii.

[129:3] See Mallet's Northern Antiquities.

[129:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 32, Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. 166 and 175-6.

[129:5] Ibid.

[129:6] See Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 176.

[129:7] Ibid. p. 175.

[130:1] See Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 176.

[130:2] Ibid. p. 166.

[130:3] Brinton: Myths of the New World, pp. 180, 181.

[130:4] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 187.

[130:5] Ibid. p. 188.

[130:6] Ibid.

[130:7] Ibid.

[130:8] Ibid. p. 190.

[131:1] Squire: Serpent Symbol, p. 191.

[131:2] Ibid.

[131:3] Ibid.

[131:4] Ibid. p. 192.

[131:5] "If we seek, in the first three Gospels, to know what his biographers thought of Jesus, we find his true humanity plainly stated, and if we possessed only the Gospel of Mark and the discourses of the Apostles in the Acts, the whole Christology of the New Testament would be reduced to this: that Jesus of Nazareth was 'a prophet mighty in deeds and in words, made by God Christ and Lord.'" (Albert Réville.)

[132:1] Mark, xiii. 32.

[132:2] Mark, x. 40.

[132:3] Mark, x. 18.

[132:4] Mark, xiv. 36.

[132:5] Mark, xv. 34.

[133:1] Matt. and Luke.

"The passages which appear most confirmatory of Christ's Deity, or Divine nature, are, in the first place, the narratives of the Incarnation and of the Miraculous Conception, as given by Matthew and Luke. Now, the two narratives do not harmonize with each other; they neutralize and negative the genealogies on which depend so large a portion of the proof of Jesus being the Messiah—the marvellous statement they contain is not referred to in any subsequent portion of the two Gospels, and is tacitly but positively negatived by several passages—it is never mentioned in the Acts or in the Epistles, and was evidently unknown to all the Apostles—and, finally, the tone of the narrative, especially in Luke, is poetical and legendary, and bears a marked similarity to the stories contained in the Apocryphal Gospels." (W. R. Greg: The Creed of Christendom, p. 229.)

[133:2] Luke, ii. 27.

[133:3] Luke, ii. 41-48.

[133:4] Matt. xiii. 55.

[133:5] Luke, iv. 22. John, i. 46; vi. 42. Luke, iii. 23.

[133:6] Luke, ii. 50.

[133:7] Matt. xiii. 57. Mark, vi. 4.

[133:8] Matt. xii. 48-50. Mark, iii. 33-35.

[133:9] Mark, iii. 21.

[133:10] Dr. Hooykaas.

[133:11] Acts, i. 14.

[133:12] Acts, xxi. 18. Gal. ii. 19-21.

[134:1] See The Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 57.

[134:2] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 3, ch. xxiv.

[134:3] Mr. George Reber has thoroughly investigated this subject in his "Christ of Paul," to which the reader is referred.

[134:4] See Gibbon's Rome, vol. i. pp. 515-517.

[135:1] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. pp. 488, 489.

[135:2] See Lardner's Works, vol. viii. pp. 395, 396.

[135:3] Ibid. p. 306.

[135:4] Ibid. p. 571.

[136:1] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 5, ch. xxv.

[136:2] Lardner: vol. viii. p. 404.

[136:3] Irenæus: Against Heresies, bk. i. c. xxiv.

[137:1] See Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. pp. 492-495.

[137:2] Not a worldly Messiah, as the Jews looked for, but an Angel-Messiah, such an one as always came at the end of a cycle. We shall treat of this subject anon, when we answer the question why Jesus was believed to be an Avatar, by the Gentiles, and not by the Jews; why, in fact, the doctrine of Christ incarnate in Jesus succeeded and prospered.

[137:3] "This strong expression might be justified by the language of St. Paul (God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, &c. I. Timothy, iii. 16), but we are deceived by our modern Bibles. The word which was altered to God at Constantinople in the beginning of the sixth century: the true meaning, which is visible in the Latin and Syriac versions, still exists in the reasoning of the Greek, as well as of the Latin fathers; and this fraud, with that of the three witnesses of St. John (I. John, v. 7), is admirably detected by Sir Isaac Newton." (Gibbon's Rome, iv. 496, note.) Dean Milman says: "The weight of authority is so much against the common reading of both these points (i. e., I. Tim. iii. 16, and I. John, v. 7), that they are no longer urged by prudent controversialists." (Note in Ibid.)

[138:1] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. pp. 492-497.

[138:2] See Chambers's Encyclopædia, art. "Apollinaris."

[138:3] Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. p. 498.

[138:4] That is, separate him from God the Father, by saying that he, Jesus of Nazareth, was not really and truly God Almighty himself in human form.

[139:1] See Gibbon's Rome, vol. iv. p. 516.

---

CHAPTER XIII.

THE STAR OF BETHLEHEM.

Being born in a miraculous manner, as other great personages had been, it was necessary that the miracles attending the births of these virgin-born gods should be added to the history of Christ Jesus, otherwise the legend would not be complete.

The first which we shall notice is the story of the star which is said to have heralded his birth, and which was designated "his star." It is related by the Matthew narrator as follows:[140:1]

"When Jesus was born in Bethlehem, of Judea, in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, saying: 'Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.'"

Herod the king, having heard these things, he privately called the wise men, and inquired of them what time the star appeared, at the same time sending them to Bethlehem to search diligently for the young child. The wise men, accordingly, departed and went on their way towards Bethlehem. "The star which they saw in the east went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was."

The general legendary character of this narrative—its similarity in style with those contained in the apocryphal gospels—and more especially its conformity with those astrological notions which, though prevalent in the time of the Matthew narrator, have been exploded by the sounder scientific knowledge of our days—all unite to stamp upon the story the impress of poetic or mythic fiction.

The fact that the writer of this story speaks not of a star but of his star, shows that it was the popular belief of the people among whom he lived, that each and every person was born under a star, and that this one which had been seen was his star.

All ancient nations were very superstitious in regard to the influence of the stars upon human affairs, and this ridiculous idea has been handed down, in some places, even to the present day. Dr. Hooykaas, speaking on this subject, says:

"In ancient times the Jews, like other peoples, might very well believe that there was some immediate connection between the stars and the life of man—an idea which we still preserve in the forms of speech that so-and-so was born under a lucky or under an evil star. They might therefore suppose that the birth of great men, such as Abraham, for instance, was announced in the heavens. In our century, however, if not before, all serious belief in astrology has ceased, and it would be regarded as an act of the grossest superstition for any one to have his horoscope drawn; for the course, the appearance and the disappearance of the heavenly bodies have been long determined with mathematical precision by science."[141:1]

The Rev. Dr. Geikie says, in his Life of Christ:[141:2]

"The Jews had already, long before Christ's day, dabbled in astrology, and the various forms of magic which became connected with it. . . . They were much given to cast horoscopes from the numerical value of a name. Everywhere throughout the whole Roman Empire, Jewish magicians, dream expounders, and sorcerers, were found.

"'The life and portion of children,' says the Talmud, 'hang not on righteousness, but on their star.' 'The planet of the day has no virtue, but the planet of the hour (of nativity) has much.' 'When the Messiah is to be revealed,' says the book Sohar, 'a star will rise in the east, shining in great brightness, and seven other stars round it will fight against it on every side.' 'A star will rise in the east, which is the star of the Messiah, and will remain in the east fifteen days.'"

The moment of every man's birth being supposed to determine every circumstance in his life, it was only necessary to find out in what mode the celestial bodies—supposed to be the primary wheels to the universal machine—operated at that moment, in order to discover all that would happen to him afterward.

The regularity of the risings and settings of the fixed stars, though it announced the changes of the seasons and the orderly variations of nature, could not be adapted to the capricious mutability of human actions, fortunes, and adventures: wherefore the astrologers had recourse to the planets, whose more complicated revolutions offered more varied and more extended combinations. Their different returns to certain points of the Zodiac, their relative positions and conjunctions with each other, were supposed to influence the affairs of men; whence daring impostors presumed to foretell, not only the destinies of individuals, but also the rise and fall of empires, and the fate of the world itself.[141:3]

The inhabitants of India are, and have always been, very superstitious concerning the stars. The Rev. D. O. Allen, who resided in India for twenty-five years, and who undoubtedly became thoroughly acquainted with the superstitions of the inhabitants, says on this subject:

"So strong are the superstitious feelings of many, concerning the supposed influence of the stars on human affairs, that some days are lucky, and others again are unlucky, that no arguments or promises would induce them to deviate from the course which these stars, signs, &c., indicate, as the way of safety, prosperity, and happiness. The evils and inconveniences of these superstitions and prejudices are among the things that press heavily upon the people of India."[142:1]

The Nakshatias—twenty-seven constellations which in Indian astronomy separate the moon's path into twenty-seven divisions, as the signs of the Zodiac do that of the sun into twelve—are regarded as deities who exert a vast influence on the destiny of men, not only at the moment of their entrance into the world, but during their whole passage through it. These formidable constellations are consulted at births, marriages, and on all occasions of family rejoicing, distress or calamity. No one undertakes a journey or any important matter except on days which the aspect of the Nakshatias renders lucky and auspicious. If any constellation is unfavorable, it must by all means be propitiated by a ceremony called S'anti.

The Chinese were very superstitious concerning the stars. They annually published astronomical calculations of the motions of the planets, for every hour and minute of the year. They considered it important to be very exact, because the hours, and even the minutes, are lucky or unlucky, according to the aspect of the stars. Some days were considered peculiarly fortunate for marrying, or beginning to build a house; and the gods are better pleased with sacrifice offered at certain hours than they are with the same ceremony performed at other times.[142:2]

The ancient Persians were also great astrologers, and held the stars in great reverence. They believed and taught that the destinies of men were intimately connected with their motions, and therefore it was important to know under the influence of what star a human soul made its advent into this world. Astrologers swarmed throughout the country, and were consulted upon all important occasions.[142:3]

The ancient Egyptians were exactly the same in this respect. According to Champollion, the tomb of Ramses V., at Thebes, contains tables of the constellations, and of their influence on human beings, for every hour of every month of the year.[142:4]

The Buddhists' sacred books relate that the birth of Buddha was announced in the heavens by an asterism which was seen rising on the horizon. It is called the "Messianic star."[143:1]

The Fo-pen-hing says:

"The time of Bôdhisatwa's incarnation is, when the constellation Kwei is in conjunction with the Sun."[143:2]

"Wise men," known as "Holy Rishis," were informed by these celestial signs that the Messiah was born.[143:3]

In the Rāmāyana (one of the sacred books of the Hindoos) the horoscope of Rama's birth is given. He is said to have been born on the 9th Tithi of the month Caitra. The planet Jupiter figured at his birth; it being in Cancer at that time.[143:4] Rama was an incarnation of Vishnu. When Crishna was born "his stars" were to be seen in the heavens. They were pointed out by one Nared, a great prophet and astrologer.[143:5]

Without going through the list, we can say that the birth of every Indian Avatar was foretold by celestial signs.[143:6]

The same myth is to be found in the legends of China. Among others they relate that a star figured at the birth of Yu, the founder of the first dynasty which reigned in China,[143:7] who—as we saw in the last chapter—was of heavenly origin, having been born of a virgin. It is also said that a star figured at the birth of Laou-tsze, the Chinese sage.[143:8]

In the legends of the Jewish patriarchs and prophets, it is stated that a brilliant star shone at the time of the birth of Moses. It was seen by the Magi of Egypt, who immediately informed the king.[143:9]

When Abraham was born "his star" shone in the heavens, if we may believe the popular legends, and its brilliancy outshone all the other stars.[143:10] Rabbinic traditions relate the following:

"Abraham was the son of Terah, general of Nimrod's army. He was born at Ur of the Chaldees 1948 years after the Creation. On the night of his birth, Terah's friends—among whom were many of Nimrod's councillors and soothsayers—were feasting in his house. On leaving, late at night, they observed an unusual star in the east, it seemed to run from one quarter of the heavens to the other, and to devour four stars which were there. All amazed in astonishment at this wondrous sight, 'Truly,' said they, 'this can signify nothing else but that Terah's new-born son will become great and powerful.'"[144:1]

It is also related that Nimrod, in a dream, saw a star rising above the horizon, which was very brilliant. The soothsayers being consulted in regard to it, foretold that a child was born who would become a great prince.[144:2]

A brilliant star, which eclipsed all the other stars, was also to be seen at the birth of the Cæsars; in fact, as Canon Farrar remarks, "The Greeks and Romans had always considered that the births and deaths of great men were symbolized by the appearance and disappearance of heavenly bodies, and the same belief has continued down to comparatively modern times."[144:3]

Tacitus, the Roman historian, speaking of the reign of the Emperor Nero, says:

"A comet having appeared, in this juncture, the phenomenon, according to the popular opinion, announced that governments were to be changed, and kings dethroned. In the imaginations of men, Nero was already dethroned, and who should be his successor was the question."[144:4]

According to Moslem authorities, the birth of Ali—Mohammed's great disciple, and the chief of one of the two principal sects into which Islam is divided—was foretold by celestial signs. "A light was distinctly visible, resembling a bright column, extending from the earth to the firmament."[144:5] Even during the reign of the Emperor Hadrian, a hundred years after the time assigned for the death of Jesus, a certain Jew who gave himself out as the "Messiah," and headed the last great insurrection of his country, assumed the name of Bar-Cochba—that is, "Son of a Star."[144:6]

This myth evidently extended to the New World, as we find that the symbol of Quetzalcoatle, the virgin-born Saviour, was the "Morning Star."[144:7]

We see, then, that among the ancients there seems to have been a very general idea that the birth of a great person would be announced by a star. The Rev. Dr. Geikie, who maintains to his utmost the truth of the Gospel narrative, is yet constrained to admit that:

"It was, indeed, universally believed, that extraordinary events, especially the birth and death of great men, were heralded by appearances of stars, and still more of comets, or by conjunctions of the heavenly bodies."[145:1]

The whole tenor of the narrative recorded by the Matthew narrator is the most complete justification of the science of astrology; that the first intimation of the birth of the Son of God was given to the worshipers of Ormuzd, who have the power of distinguishing with certainty his peculiar star; that from these heathen the tidings of his birth are received by the Jews at Jerusalem, and therefore that the theory must be right which connects great events in the life of men with phenomena in the starry heavens.

If this divine sanction of astrology is contested on the ground that this was an exceptional event, in which, simply to bring the Magi to Jerusalem, God caused the star to appear in accordance with their superstitious science, the difficulty is only pushed one degree backwards, for in this case God, it is asserted, wrought an event which was perfectly certain to strengthen the belief of the Magi, of Herod, of the Jewish priests, and of the Jews generally, in the truth of astrology.

If, to avoid the alternative, recourse be had to the notion that the star appeared by chance, or that this chance or accident directed the Magi aright, is the position really improved? Is chance consistent with any notion of supernatural interposition?

We may also ask the question, why were the Magi brought to Jerusalem at all? If they knew that the star which they saw was the star of Christ Jesus—as the narrative states[145:2]—and were by this knowledge conducted to Jerusalem, why did it not suffice to guide them straight to Bethlehem, and thus prevent the Slaughter of the Innocents? Why did the star desert them after its first appearance, not to be seen again till they issued from Jerusalem? or, if it did not desert them, why did they ask of Herod and the priests the road which they should take, when, by the hypothesis, the star was ready to guide them?[145:3]

It is said that in the oracles of Zoroaster there is to be found a prophecy to the effect that, in the latter days, a virgin would conceive and bear a son, and that, at the time of his birth, a star would shine at noonday. Christian divines have seen in this a prophecy of the birth of Christ Jesus, but when critically examined, it does not stand the test. The drift of the story is this:

Ormuzd, the Lord of Light, who created the universe in six periods of time, accomplished his work by making the first man and woman, and infusing into them the breath of life. It was not long before Ahriman, the evil one, contrived to seduce the first parents of mankind by persuading them to eat of the forbidden fruit. Sin and death are now in the world; the principles of good and evil are now in deadly strife. Ormuzd then reveals to mankind his law through his prophet Zoroaster; the strife between the two principles continues, however, and will continue until the end of a destined term. During the last three thousand years of the period Ahriman is predominant. The world now hastens to its doom; religion and virtue are nowhere to be found; mankind are plunged in sin and misery. Sosiosh is born of a virgin, and redeems them, subdues the Devs, awakens the dead, and holds the last judgment. A comet sets the world in flames; the Genii of Light combat against the Genii of Darkness, and cast them into Duzakh, where Ahriman and the Devs and the souls of the wicked are thoroughly cleansed and purified by fire. Ahriman then submits to Ormuzd; evil is absorbed into goodness; the unrighteous, thoroughly purified, are united with the righteous, and a new earth and a new heaven arise, free from all evil, where peace and innocence will forever dwell.

Who can fail to see that this virgin-born Sosiosh was to come, not eighteen hundred years ago, but, in the "latter days," when the world is to be set on fire by a comet, the judgment to take place, and the "new heaven and new earth" is to be established? Who can fail to see also, by a perusal of the New Testament, that the idea of a temporal Messiah (a mighty king and warrior, who should liberate and rule over his people Israel), and the idea of an Angel-Messiah (who had come to announce that the "kingdom of heaven was at hand," that the "stars should fall from heaven," and that all men would shortly be judged according to their deeds), are both jumbled together in a heap?

---

FOOTNOTES:

[140:1] Matthew, ch. ii.

[141:1] Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 72.

[141:2] Vol. i. p. 145.

[141:3] See Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, p. 52.

[142:1] Allen's India, p. 456.

[142:2] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 221.

[142:3] Ibid. p. 261.

[142:4] See Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i. p. 456.

[143:1] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 22, 23, 38.

[143:2] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 23, 33, 35.

[143:3] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 36.

[143:4] Williams's Indian Wisdom, p. 347.

[143:5] See Hist. Hindostan, ii. 336.

[143:6] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 561. For that of Crishna, see Vishnu Purana, book v. ch. iii.

[143:7] See Ibid. p. 618.

[143:8] Thornton: Hist. China, vol. i. p. 137.

[143:9] See Anac., i. p. 560, and Geikie's Life of Christ, i. 559.

[143:10] See Ibid., and The Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 72, and Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."

[144:1] Baring-Gould: Legends of the Patriarchs, p. 149.

[144:2] Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."

[144:3] Farrar's Life of Christ, p. 52.

[144:4] Tacitus: Annals, bk. xiv. ch. xxii.

[144:5] Amberly's Analysis of Religious Belief, p. 227.

[144:6] Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 73.

[144:7] Brinton: Myths of the New World, pp. 180, 181, and Squire: Serpent Symbol.

[145:1] Life of Christ, vol. i. p. 144.

[145:2] Matthew ii. 2.

[145:3] See Thomas Scott's English Life of Jesus for a full investigation of this subject.

---

CHAPTER XIV.

THE SONG OF THE HEAVENLY HOST.

The story of the Song of the Heavenly Host belongs exclusively to the Luke narrator, and, in substance, is as follows:

At the time of the birth of Christ Jesus, there were shepherds abiding in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. And the angel of the Lord appeared among them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them, and the angel said: "I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people; for unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the Heavenly Host, praising God in song, saying: "Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace, good will towards men." After this the angels went into heaven.[147:1]

It is recorded in the Vishnu Purana[147:2] that while the virgin Devaki bore Crishna, "the protector of the world," in her womb, she was eulogized by the gods, and on the day of Crishna's birth, "the quarters of the horizon were irradiate with joy, as if moonlight was diffused over the whole earth." "The spirits and the nymphs of heaven danced and sang," and, "at midnight,[147:3] when the support of all was born, the clouds emitted low pleasing sounds, and poured down rain of flowers."[147:4]

Similar demonstrations of celestial delight were not wanting at the birth of Buddha. All beings everywhere were full of joy. Music was to be heard all over the land, and, as in the case of Crishna, there fell from the skies a gentle shower of flowers and perfumes. Caressing breezes blew, and a marvellous light was produced.[147:5]

The Fo-pen-hing relates that:

"The attending spirits, who surrounded the Virgin Maya and the infant Saviour, singing praises of 'the Blessed One,' said: 'All joy be to you, Queen Maya, rejoice and be glad, for the child you have borne is holy.' Then the Rishis and Devas who dwelt on earth exclaimed with great joy: 'This day Buddha is born for the good of men, to dispel the darkness of their ignorance.' Then the four heavenly kings took up the strain and said: 'Now because Bôdhisatwa is born, to give joy and bring peace to the world, therefore is there this brightness.' Then the gods of the thirty-three heavens took up the burden of the strain, and the Yama Devas and the Tûsita Devas, and so forth, through all the heavens of the Kama, Rupa, and Arupa worlds, even up to the Akanishta heavens, all the Devas joined in this song, and said: 'To-day Bôdhisatwa is born on earth, to give joy and peace to men and Devas, to shed light in the dark places, and to give sight to the blind."[148:1]

Even the sober philosopher Confucius did not enter the world, if we may believe Chinese tradition, without premonitory symptoms of his greatness.[148:2]

Sir John Francis Davis, speaking of Confucius, says:

"Various prodigies, as in other instances, were the forerunners of the birth of this extraordinary person. On the eve of his appearance upon earth, celestial music sounded in the ears of his mother; and when he was born, this inscription appeared on his breast: 'The maker of a rule for setting the World.'"[148:3]

In the case of Osiris, the Egyptian Saviour, at his birth, a voice was heard proclaiming that: "The Ruler of all the Earth is born."[148:4]

In Plutarch's "Isis" occurs the following:

"At the birth of Osiris, there was heard a voice that the Lord of all the Earth was coming in being; and some say that a woman named Pamgle, as she was going to carry water to the temple of Ammon, in the city of Thebes, heard that voice, which commanded her to proclaim it with a loud voice, that the great beneficent god Osiris was born."[148:5]

Wonderful demonstrations of delight also attended the birth of the heavenly-born Apollonius. According to Flavius Philostratus, who wrote the life of this remarkable man, a flock of swans surrounded his mother, and clapping their wings, as is their custom, they sang in unison, while the air was fanned by gentle breezes.

When the god Apollo was born of the virgin Latona in the Island of Delos, there was joy among the undying gods in Olympus, and the Earth laughed beneath the smile of Heaven.[148:6]

At the time of the birth of "Hercules the Saviour," his father Zeus, the god of gods, spake from heaven and said:

"This day shall a child be born of the race of Perseus, who shall be the mightiest of the sons of men."[149:1]

When Æsculapius was a helpless infant, and when he was about to be put to death, a voice from the god Apollo was heard, saying:

"Slay not the child with the mother; he is born to do great things; but bear him to the wise centaur Cheiron, and bid him train the boy in all his wisdom and teach him to do brave deeds, that men may praise his name in the generations that shall be hereafter."[149:2]

As we stated above, the story of the Song of the Heavenly Host belongs exclusively to the Luke narrator; none of the other writers of the synoptic Gospels know anything about it, which, if it really happened, seems very strange.

If the reader will turn to the apocryphal Gospel called "Protevangelion" (chapter xiii.), he will there see one of the reasons why it was thought best to leave this Gospel out of the canon of the New Testament. It relates the "Miracles at Mary's labor," similar to the Luke narrator, but in a still more wonderful form. It is probably from this apocryphal Gospel that the Luke narrator copied.

---

FOOTNOTES:

[147:1] Luke, ii. 8-15.

[147:2] Translated from the original Sanscrit by H. H. Wilson, M. D., F. R. S.

[147:3] All the virgin-born Saviours are born at midnight or early dawn.

[147:4] Vishnu Purana, book v. ch. iii. p. 502.

[147:5] See Amberly's Analysis, p. 226. Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 45, 46, 47, and Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 35.

[148:1] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 43, 55, 56, and Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 35.

[148:2] See Amberly: Analysis of Religious Belief, p. 84.

[148:3] Davis: History of China, vol. ii. p. 48. See also Thornton: Hist. China, i. 152.

[148:4] See Prichard's Egyptian Mythology, p. 56, and Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i. p. 408.

[148:5] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 424, and Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i. p. 408.

[148:6] See Tales of Ancient Greece, p. 4.

[149:1] See Tales of Ancient Greece, p. 55.

[149:2] Ibid. p. 45.

---

CHAPTER XV.

THE DIVINE CHILD RECOGNIZED AND PRESENTED WITH GIFTS.

The next in order of the wonderful events which are related to have happened at the birth of Christ Jesus, is the recognition of the divine child, and the presentation of gifts.

We are informed by the Matthew narrator, that being guided by a star, the Magi[150:1] from the east came to where the young child was.

"And when they were come into the house (not stable) they saw the young child, with Mary his mother, and fell down and worshiped him. And when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts, gold, frankincense, and myrrh."[150:2]

The Luke narrator—who seems to know nothing about the Magi from the east—informs us that shepherds came and worshiped the young child. They were keeping their flocks by night when the angel of the Lord appeared before them, saying:

"Behold, I bring you good tidings—for unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

After the angel had left them, they said one to another:

"Let us go unto Bethlehem and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known to us. And they came with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger."[150:3]

The Luke narrator evidently borrowed this story of the shepherds from the "[Gospel of the Egyptians]" (of which we shall speak in another chapter), or from other sacred records of the biographies of Crishna or Buddha.

It is related in the legends of Crishna that the divine child was cradled among shepherds, to whom were first made known the stupendous feats which stamped his character with marks of the divinity. He was recognized as the promised Saviour by Nanda, a shepherd, or cowherd, and his companions, who prostrated themselves before the heaven-born child. After the birth of Crishna, the Indian prophet Nared, having heard of his fame, visited his father and mother at Gokool, examined the stars, &c., and declared him to be of celestial descent.[151:1]

Not only was Crishna adored by the shepherds and Magi, and received with divine honors, but he was also presented with gifts. These gifts were "sandal wood and perfumes."[151:2] (Why not "frankincense and myrrh?")

Similar stories are related of the infant Buddha. He was visited, at the time of his birth, by wise men, who at once recognized in the marvellous infant all the characters of the divinity, and he had scarcely seen the day before he was hailed god of gods.[151:3]

"'Mongst the strangers came
A grey-haired saint, Asita, one whose ears,
Long closed to earthly things, caught heavenly sounds,
And heard at prayer beneath his peepul-tree,
The Devas singing songs at Buddha's birth."

Viscount Amberly, speaking of him, says:[151:4]

"He was visited and adored by a very eminent Rishi, or hermit, known as Asita, who predicted his future greatness, but wept at the thought that he himself was too old to see the day when the law of salvation would be taught by the infant whom he had come to contemplate."

"I weep (said Asita), because I am old and stricken in years, and shall not see all that is about to come to pass. The Buddha Bhagavat (God Almighty Buddha) comes to the world only after many kalpas. This bright boy will be Buddha. For the salvation of the world he will teach the law. He will succor the old, the sick, the afflicted, the dying. He will release those who are bound in the meshes of natural corruption. He will quicken the spiritual vision of those whose eyes are darkened by the thick darkness of ignorance. Hundreds of thousands of millions of beings will be carried by him to the 'other shore'—will put on immortality. And I shall not see this perfect Buddha—this is why I weep."[151:5]

He returns rejoicing, however, to his mountain-home, for his eyes had seen the promised and expected Saviour.[151:6]

Paintings in the cave of Ajunta represent Asita with the infant Buddha in his arms.[152:1] The marvelous gifts of this child had become known to this eminent ascetic by supernatural signs.[152:2]

Buddha, as well as Crishna and Jesus, was presented with "costly jewels and precious substances."[152:3] (Why not gold and perfumes?)

Rama—the seventh incarnation of Vishnu for human deliverance from evil—is also hailed by "aged saints"—(why not "wise men"?)—who die gladly when their eyes see the long-expected one.[152:4]

How-tseich, who was one of those personages styled, in China, "Tien-Tse," or "Sons of Heaven,"[152:5] and who came into the world in a miraculous manner, was laid in a narrow lane. When his mother had fulfilled her time:

"Her first-born son (came forth) like a lamb.
There was no bursting, no rending,
No injury, no hurt—
Showing how wonderful he would be."

When born, the sheep and oxen protected him with loving care.[152:6]

The birth of Confucius (B. C. 551), like that of all the demi-gods and saints of antiquity, is fabled to have been attended with allegorical prodigies, amongst which was the appearance of the Ke-lin, a miraculous quadruped, prophetic of happiness and virtue, which announced that the child would be "a king without a throne or territory." Five celestial sages, or "wise men" entered the house at the time of the child's birth, whilst vocal and instrumental music filed the air.[152:7]

Mithras, the Persian Saviour, and mediator between God and man, was also visited by "wise men" called Magi, at the time of his birth.[152:8] He was presented with gifts consisting of gold, frankincense and myrrh.'[152:9]

According to Plato, at the birth of Socrates (469 B. C.) there came three Magi from the east to worship him, bringing gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh.[152:10]

Æsculapius, the virgin-born Saviour, was protected by goatherds (why not shepherds?), who, upon seeing the child, knew at once that he was divine. The voice of fame soon published the birth of this miraculous infant, upon which people flocked from all quarters to behold and worship this heaven-born child.[153:1]

Many of the Grecian and Roman demi-gods and heroes were either fostered by or worshiped by shepherds. Amongst these may be mentioned Bacchus, who was educated among shepherds,[153:2] and Romulus, who was found on the banks of the Tiber, and educated by shepherds.[153:3] Paris, son of Priam, was educated among shepherds,[153:4] and Ægisthus was exposed, like Æsculapius, by his mother, found by shepherds and educated among them.[153:5]

Viscount Amberly has well said that: "Prognostications of greatness in infancy are, indeed, among the stock incidents in the mythical or semi-mythical lives of eminent persons."

We have seen that the Matthew narrator speaks of the infant Jesus, and Mary, his mother, being in a "house"—implying that he had been born there; and that the Luke narrator speaks of the infant "lying in a manger"—implying that he was born in a stable. We will now show that there is still another story related of the place in which he was born.

---

FOOTNOTES:

[150:1] "The original word here is 'Magoi,' from which comes our word 'Magician.' . . . The persons here denoted were philosophers, priests, or astronomers. They dwelt chiefly in Persia and Arabia. They were the learned men of the Eastern nations, devoted to astronomy, to religion, and to medicine. They were held in high esteem by the Persian court; were admitted as councilors, and followed the camps in war to give advice." (Barnes's Notes, vol. i. p. 25.)

[150:2] Matthew, ii. 2.

[150:3] Luke, ii. 8-16.

[151:1] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. pp. 129, 130, and Maurice: Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. pp. 256, 257 and 317. Also, The Vishnu Purana.

[151:2] Oriental Religions, pp. 500, 501. See also, Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 353.

[151:3] Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 157.

[151:4] Amberly's Analysis, p. 177. See also, Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 36.

[151:5] Lillie: Buddha and Early Buddhism, p. 76.

[151:6] Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 6, and Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 58, 60.

[152:1] Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 36.

[152:2] See Amberly's Analysis p. 231, and Bunsen's Angel Messiah, p. 36.

[152:3] Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 58.

[152:4] Oriental Religions, p. 491.

[152:5] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 200.

[152:6] See Amberly's Analysis of Religious Belief, p. 226.

[152:7] See Thornton's Hist. China, vol. i. p. 152.

[152:8] King: The Gnostics and their Remains, pp. 134 and 149.

[152:9] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 353.

[152:10] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 96.

[153:1] Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150. Roman Antiquities, p. 136, and Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 27.

[153:2] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 322.

[153:3] Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 213.

[153:4] Ibid. vol. i. p. 47.

[153:5] Ibid. p. 20.

---

CHAPTER XVI.

THE BIRTH-PLACE OF CHRIST JESUS.

The writer of that portion of the Gospel according to Matthew which treats of the place in which Jesus was born, implies, as we stated in our last chapter, that he was born in a house. His words are these:

"Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east" to worship him. "And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother."[154:1]

The writer of the Luke version implies that he was born in a stable, as the following statement will show:

"The days being accomplished that she (Mary) should be delivered . . . she brought forth her first-born son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, there being no room for him in the inn."[154:2]

If these accounts were contained in these Gospels in the time of Eusebius, the first ecclesiastical historian, who flourished during the Council of Nice (A. D. 327), it is very strange that, in speaking of the birth of Jesus, he should have omitted even mentioning them, and should have given an altogether different version. He tells us that Jesus was neither born in a house, nor in a stable, but in a cave, and that at the time of Constantine a magnificent temple was erected on the spot, so that the Christians might worship in the place where their Saviour's feet had stood.[154:3]

In the apocryphal Gospel called "Protevangelion," attributed to James, the brother of Jesus, we are informed that Mary and her husband, being away from their home in Nazareth, and when within three miles of Bethlehem, to which city they were going, Mary said to Joseph:

"Take me down from the ass, for that which is in me presses to come forth."

Joseph, replying, said:

"Whither shall I take thee, for the place is desert?"

Then said Mary again to Joseph:

"Take me down, for that which is within me mightily presses me."

Joseph then took her down from off the ass, and he found there a cave and put her into it.

Joseph then left Mary in the cave, and started toward Bethlehem for a midwife, whom he found and brought back with him. When they neared the spot a bright cloud overshadowed the cave.

"But on a sudden the cloud became a great light in the cave, so their eyes could not bear it. But the light gradually decreased, until the infant appeared and sucked the breast of his mother."[155:1]

Tertullian (A. D. 200), Jerome (A. D. 375) and other Fathers of the Church, also state that Jesus was born in a cave, and that the heathen celebrated, in their day, the birth and Mysteries of their Lord and Saviour Adonis in this very cave near Bethlehem.[155:2]

Canon Farrar says:

"That the actual place of Christ's birth was a cave, is a very ancient tradition, and this cave used to be shown as the scene of the event even so early as the time of Justin Martyr (A. D. 150)."[155:3]

Mr. King says:

"The place yet shown as the scene of their (the Magi's) adoration at Bethlehem is a cave."[155:4]

The Christian ceremonies in the Church of the Nativity at Bethlehem are celebrated to this day in a cave,[155:5] and are undoubtedly nearly the same as were celebrated, in the same place, in honor of Adonis, in the time of Tertullian and Jerome; and as are yet celebrated in Rome every Christmas-day, very early in the morning.

We see, then, that there are three different accounts concerning the place in which Jesus was born. The first, and evidently true one, was that which is recorded by the Matthew narrator, namely, that he was born in a house. The stories about his being born in a stable or in a cave[155:6] were later inventions, caused from the desire to place him in as humble a position as possible in his infancy, and from the fact that the virgin-born Saviours who had preceded him had almost all been born in a position the most humiliating—such as a cave, a cow-shed, a sheep-fold, &c.—or had been placed there after birth. This was a part of the universal mythos. As illustrations we may mention the following:

Crishna, the Hindoo virgin-born Saviour, was born in a cave,[156:1] fostered by an honest herdsman,[156:2] and, it is said, placed in a sheep-fold shortly after his birth.

How-Tseih, the Chinese "Son of Heaven," when an infant, was left unprotected by his mother, but the sheep and oxen protected him with loving care.[156:3]

Abraham, the Father of Patriarchs, is said to have been born in a cave.[156:4]

Bacchus, who was the son of God by the virgin Semele, is said to have been born in a cave, or placed in one shortly after his birth.[156:5] Philostratus, the Greek sophist and rhetorician, says, "the inhabitants of India had a tradition that Bacchus was born at Nisa, and was brought up in a cave on Mount Meros."

Æsculapius, who was the son of God by the virgin Coronis, was left exposed, when an infant, on a mountain, where he was found and cared for by a goatherd.[156:6]

Romulus, who was the son of God by the virgin Rhea-Sylvia, was left exposed, when an infant, on the banks of the river Tiber, where he was found and cared for by a shepherd.[156:7]

Adonis, the "Lord" and "Saviour," was placed in a cave shortly after his birth.[156:8]

Apollo (Phoibos), son of the Almighty Zeus, was born in a cave at early dawn.[156:9]

Mithras, the Persian Saviour, was born in a cave or grotto,[156:10] at early dawn.

Hermes, the son of God by the mortal Maia, was born early in the morning, in a cave or grotto of the Kyllemian hill.[156:11]

Attys, the god of the Phrygians,[156:12] was born in a cave or grotto.[156:13]

The object is the same in all of these stories, however they may differ in detail, which is to place the heaven-born infant in the most humiliating position in infancy.

We have seen it is recorded that, at the time of the birth of Jesus "there was a great light in the cave, so that the eyes of Joseph and the midwife could not bear it." This feature is also represented in early Christian art. "Early Christian painters have represented the infant Jesus as welcoming three Kings of the East, and shining as brilliantly as if covered with phosphuretted oil."[157:1] In all pictures of the Nativity, the light is made to arise from the body of the infant, and the father and mother are often depicted with glories round their heads. This too was a part of the old mythos, as we shall now see.

The moment Crishna was born, his mother became beautiful, and her form brilliant. The whole cave was splendidly illuminated, being filled with a heavenly light, and the countenances of his father and his mother emitted rays of glory.[157:2]

So likewise, it is recorded that, at the time of the birth of Buddha, "the Saviour of the World," which, according to one account, took place in an inn, "a divine light diffused around his person," so that "the Blessed One" was "heralded into the world by a supernatural light."[157:3]

When Bacchus was born, a bright light shone round him,[157:4] so that, "there was a brilliant light in the cave."

When Apollo was born, a halo of serene light encircled his cradle, the nymphs of heaven attended, and bathed him in pure water, and girded a broad golden band around his form.[157:5]

When the Saviour Æsculapius was born, his countenance shone like the sun, and he was surrounded by a fiery ray.[157:6]

In the life of Zoroaster the common mythos is apparent. He was born in innocence of an immaculate conception of a Ray of the Divine Reason. As soon as he was born, the glory arising from his body enlightened the whole room, and he laughed at his mother.[157:7]

It is stated in the legends of the Hebrew Patriarchs that, at the birth of Moses, a bright light appeared and shone around.[157:8]

There is still another feature which we must notice in these narratives, that is, the contradictory statements concerning the time when Jesus was born. As we shall treat of this subject more fully in the chapter on "The Birthday of Christ Jesus," we shall allude to it here simply as far as necessary.

The Matthew narrator informs us that Jesus was born in the days of Herod the King, and the Luke narrator says he was born when Cyrenius was Governor of Syria, or later. This is a very awkward and unfortunate statement, as Cyrenius was not Governor of Syria until some ten years after the time of Herod.[158:1]

The cause of this dilemma is owing to the fact that the Luke narrator, after having interwoven into his story, of the birth of Jesus, the old myth of the tax or tribute, which is said to have taken place at the time of the birth of some previous virgin-born Saviours, looked among the records to see if a taxing had ever taken place in Judea, so that he might refer to it in support of his statement. He found the account of the taxing, referred to above, and without stopping to consider when this taxing took place, or whether or not it would conflict with the statement that Jesus was born in the days of Herod, he added to his narrative the words: "And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria."[158:2]

We will now show the ancient myth of the taxing. According to the Vishnu Purana, when the infant Saviour Crishna was born, his foster father, Nanda, had come to the city to pay his tax or yearly tribute to the king. It distinctly speaks of Nanda, and other cowherds, "bringing tribute or tax to Kansa" the reigning monarch.[158:3]

It also describes a scene which took place after the taxes had been paid.

Vasudeva, an acquaintance of Nanda's, "went to the wagon of Nanda, and found Nanda there, rejoicing that a son (Crishna) had been born to him.

"Vasudeva spoke to him kindly, and congratulated him on having a son in his old age.[158:4]

"'Thy yearly tribute,' he added, 'has been paid to the king . . . why do you delay, now that your affairs are settled? Up, Nanda, quickly, and set off to your own pastures.' . . . Accordingly Nanda and the other cowherds returned to their village."[158:5]

Now, in regard to Buddha, the same myth is found.

Among the thirty-two signs which were to be fulfilled by the mother of the expected Messiah (Buddha), the fifth sign was recorded to be, "that she would be on a journey at the time of her child's birth." Therefore, "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets," the virgin Maya, in the tenth month after her heavenly conception, was on a journey to her father, when lo, the birth of the Messiah took place under a tree. One account says that "she had alighted at an inn when Buddha was born."[159:1]

The mother of Lao-tsze, the Virgin-born Chinese sage, was away from home when her child was born. She stopped to rest under a tree, and there, like the virgin Maya, gave birth to her son.[159:2]

Pythagoras (B. C. 570), whose real father was the Holy Ghost,[159:3] was also born at a time when his mother was away from home on a journey. She was travelling with her husband, who was about his mercantile concerns, from Samos to Sidon.[159:4]

Apollo was born when his mother was away from home. The Ionian legend tells the simple tale that Leto, the mother of the unborn Apollo, could find no place to receive her in her hour of travail until she came to Delos. The child was born like Buddha and Lao-tsze—under a tree.[159:5] The mother knew that he was destined to be a being of mighty power, ruling among the undying gods and mortal men.[159:6]

Thus we see that the stories, one after another, relating to the birth and infancy of Jesus, are simply old myths, and are therefore not historical.

---

FOOTNOTES:

[154:1] Matthew, ii.

[154:2] Luke, ii.

[154:3] Eusebius's Life of Constantine, lib. 3, chs. xl., xli. and xlii.

[155:1] Protevangelion. Apoc. chs. xii., xiii., and xiv., and Lily of Israel, p. 95.

[155:2] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. pp. 98, 99.

[155:3] Farrar's Life of Christ, p. 38, and note. See also, Hist. Hindostan, ii. 311.

[155:4] King: The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 134.

[155:5] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 95.

[155:6] Some writers have tried to connect these by saying that it was a cave-stable, but why should a stable be in a desert place, as the narrative states?

[156:1] Aryan Myths, vol. ii. p. 107.

[156:2] See Asiatic Researches, vol. i. p. 259.

[156:3] See Amberly's Analysis, p. 226.

[156:4] See Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."

[156:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 321. Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 118, and Dupuis, p. 284.

[156:6] See Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150, and Bell's Pantheon under "Æsculapius."

[156:7] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 218.

[156:8] See Ibid. vol. i. p. 12.

[156:9] Aryan Mythology, vol. i. pp. 72, 158.

[156:10] See Dunlap's Mysteries of Adoni, p. 124, and Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 134.

[156:11] Ibid.

[156:12] See Dupuis: Origin of Religious Beliefs, p. 255.

[156:13] See Dunlap's Mysteries of Adoni, p. 124.

[157:1] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 460.

[157:2] Cox: Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 133. Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 130. See also, Vishnu Purana, p. 502, where it says:

"No person could bear to gaze upon Devaki from the light that invested her."

[157:3] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 43, 46, or Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 34, 35.

[157:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 322, and Dupuis: Origin of Relig. Belief, p. 119.

[157:5] Tales of Anct. Greece, p. xviii.

[157:6] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 27. Roman Antiquities, p. 136.

[157:7] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 460. Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 649.

[157:8] See Hardy: Manual of Buddhism, p. 145.

[158:1] See the chapter on "[Christmas]."

[158:2] It may be that this verse was added by another hand some time after the narrative was written. We have seen it stated somewhere that, in the manuscript, this verse is in brackets.

[158:3] See Vishnu Purana, book v. chap. iii.

[158:4] Here is an exact counterpart to the story of Joseph—the foster-father, so-called—of Jesus. He too, had a son in his old age.

[158:5] Vishnu Purana, book v. chap. v.

[159:1] Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah, p. 34. See also, Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 32, and Lillie: Buddha and Early Buddhism, p. 73.

[159:2] Thornton: Hist. China, i. 138.

[159:3] As we saw in [Chapter XII].

[159:4] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 150.

[159:5] See Rhys David's Buddhism, p. 25.

[159:6] See Cox: Aryan Myths, vol. ii. p. 31.

---

CHAPTER XVII.

THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST JESUS.

The biographers of Jesus, although they have placed him in a position the most humiliating in his infancy, and although they have given him poor and humble parents, have notwithstanding made him to be of royal descent. The reasons for doing this were twofold. First, because, according to the Old Testament, the expected Messiah was to be of the seed of Abraham,[160:1] and second, because the Angel-Messiahs who had previously been on earth to redeem and save mankind had been of royal descent, therefore Christ Jesus must be so.

The following story, taken from Colebrooke's "Miscellaneous Essays,"[160:2] clearly shows that this idea was general:

"The last of the Jinas, Vardhamâna, was at first conceived by Devanandā, a Brahmānā. The conception was announced to her by a dream. Sekra, being apprised of his incarnation, prostrated himself and worshiped the future saint (who was in the womb of Devanandā); but reflecting that no great saint was ever born in an indigent or mendicant family, as that of a Brahmānā, Sekra commanded his chief attendant to remove the child from the womb of Devanandā to that of Trisala, wife of Siddhartha, a prince of the race of Jeswaca, of the Kasyapa family."

In their attempts to accomplish their object, the biographers of Jesus have made such poor work of it, that all the ingenuity Christianity has yet produced, has not been able to repair their blunders.

The genealogies are contained in the first and third Gospels, and although they do not agree, yet, if either is right, then Jesus was not the son of God, engendered by the "Holy Ghost," but the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary. In any other sense they amount to nothing. That Jesus can be of royal descent, and yet be the Son of God, in the sense in which these words are used, is a conclusion which can be acceptable to those only who believe in alleged historical narratives on no other ground than that they wish them to be true, and dare not call them into question.

The Matthew narrator states that all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen, from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen, and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Jesus are fourteen generations.[161:1] Surely nothing can have a more mythological appearance than this. But, when we confine our attention to the genealogy itself, we find that the generations in the third stage, including Jesus himself, amount to only thirteen. All attempts to get over this difficulty have been without success; the genealogies are, and have always been, hard nuts for theologians to crack. Some of the early Christian fathers saw this, and they very wisely put an allegorical interpretation to them.

Dr. South says, in Kitto's Biblical Encyclopædia:

"Christ's being the true Messiah depends upon his being the son of David and king of the Jews. So that unless this be evinced the whole foundation of Christianity must totter and fall."

Another writer in the same work says:

"In these two documents (Matthew and Luke), which profess to give us the genealogy of Christ, there is no notice whatever of the connection of his only earthly parent with the stock of David. On the contrary, both the genealogies profess to give us the descent of Joseph, to connect our Lord with whom by natural generation, would be to falsify the whole story of his miraculous birth, and overthrow the Christian faith."

Again, when the idea that one of the genealogies is Mary's is spoken of:

"One thing is certain, that our belief in Mary's descent from David is grounded on inference and tradition and not on any direct statement of the sacred writings. And there has been a ceaseless endeavor, both among ancients and moderns, to gratify the natural cravings for knowledge on this subject."

Thomas Scott, speaking of the genealogies, says:

"It is a favorite saying with those who seek to defend the history of the Pentateuch against the scrutiny of modern criticism, that the objections urged against it were known long ago. The objections to the genealogy were known long ago, indeed; and perhaps nothing shows more conclusively than this knowledge, the disgraceful dishonesty and willful deception of the most illustrious of Christian doctors."[161:2]

Referring to the two genealogies, Albert Barnes says:

"No two passages of Scripture have caused more difficulty than these, and various attempts have been made to explain them. . . . Most interpreters have supposed that Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, and Luke that of Mary. But though this solution is plausible and may be true, yet it wants evidence."

Barnes furthermore admits the fallibility of the Bible in his remarks upon the genealogies; 1st, by comparing them to our fallible family records; and 2d, by the remark that "the only inquiry which can now be fairly made is whether they copied these tables correctly."

Alford, Ellicott, Hervey, Meyer, Mill, Patritius and Wordsworth hold that both genealogies are Joseph's; and Aubertin, Ebrard, Greswell, Kurtz, Lange, Lightfoot and others, hold that one is Joseph's, and the other Mary's.

When the genealogy contained in Matthew is compared with the Old Testament they are found to disagree; there are omissions which any writer with the least claim to historical sense would never have made.

When the genealogy of the third Gospel is turned to, the difficulties greatly increase, instead of diminish. It not only contradicts the statements made by the Matthew narrator, but it does not agree with the Old Testament.

What, according to the three first evangelists, did Jesus think of himself? In the first place he made no allusion to any miraculous circumstances connected with his birth. He looked upon himself as belonging to Nazareth, not as the child of Bethlehem;[162:1] he reproved the scribes for teaching that the Messiah must necessarily be a descendant of David,[162:2] and did not himself make any express claim to such descent.[162:3]

As we cannot go into an extended inquiry concerning the genealogies, and as there is no real necessity for so doing, as many others have already done so in a masterly manner,[162:4] we will continue our investigations in another direction, and show that Jesus was not the only Messiah who was claimed to be of royal descent.

To commence with Crishna, the Hindoo Saviour, he was of royal descent, although born in a state the most abject and humiliating.[163:1] Thomas Maurice says of him:

"Crishna, in the male line, was of royal descent, being of the Yadava line, the oldest and noblest of India; and nephew, by his mother's side, to the reigning sovereign; but, though royally descended, he was actually born in a state the most abject and humiliating; and, though not in a stable, yet in a dungeon."[163:2]

Buddha was of royal descent, having descended from the house of Sakya, the most illustrious of the caste of Brahmans, which reigned in India over the powerful empire of Mogadha, in the Southern Bahr.[163:3]

R. Spence Hardy says, in his "Manual of Buddhism:"

"The ancestry of Gotama Buddha is traced from his father, Sodhódana, through various individuals and races, all of royal dignity, to Maha Sammata, the first monarch of the world. Several of the names, and some of the events, are met with in the Puranas of the Brahmins, but it is not possible to reconcile one order of statement with the other; and it would appear that the Buddhist historians have introduced races, and invented names, that they may invest their venerated sage with all the honors of heraldry, in addition to the attributes of divinity."

How remarkably these words compare with what we have just seen concerning the genealogies of Jesus!

Rama, another Indian avatar—the seventh incarnation of Vishnu—was also of royal descent.[163:4]

Fo-hi; or Fuh-he, the virgin-born "Son of Heaven," was of royal descent. He belonged to the oldest family of monarchs who ruled in China.[163:5]

Confucius was of royal descent. His pedigree is traced back in a summary manner to the monarch Hoang-ty, who is said to have lived and ruled more than two thousand years before the time of Christ Jesus.[163:6]

Horus, the Egyptian virgin-born Saviour, was of royal descent, having descended from a line of kings.[163:7] He had the title of "Royal Good Shepherd."[163:8]

Hercules, the Saviour, was of royal descent.[163:9]

Bacchus, although the Son of God, was of royal descent.[164:1]

Perseus, son of the virgin Danae, was of royal descent.[164:2]

Æsculapius, the great performer of miracles, although a son of God, was notwithstanding of royal descent.[164:3]

Many more such cases might be mentioned, as may be seen by referring to the histories of the virgin-born gods and demi-gods spoken of in [Chapter XII].

---

FOOTNOTES:

[160:1] That is, a passage in the Old Testament was construed to mean this, although another and more plausible meaning might be inferred. It is when Abraham is blessed by the Lord, who is made to say: "In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because thou hast obeyed my voice." (Genesis, xxii. 18.)

[160:2] Vol. ii. p. 214.

[161:1] Matthew, i. 17.

[161:2] Scott's English Life of Jesus.

[162:1] Matthew, xiii. 54; Luke, iv. 24.

[162:2] Mark, ii. 35.

[162:3] "There is no doubt that the authors of the genealogies regarded him (Jesus), as did his countrymen and contemporaries generally, as the eldest son of Joseph, Mary's husband, and that they had no idea of anything miraculous connected with his birth. All the attempts of the old commentators to reconcile the inconsistencies of the evangelical narratives are of no avail." (Albert Réville: Hist. Dogma, Deity, Jesus, p. 15.)

[162:4] The reader is referred to Thomas Scott's English Life of Jesus, Strauss's Life of Jesus, The Genealogies of Our Lord, by Lord Arthur Hervey, Kitto's Biblical Encyclopædia, and Barnes' Notes.

[163:1] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 130. Asiatic Researches, vol. i. p. 259, and Allen's India, p. 379.

[163:2] Hist. Hindostan, ii. p. 310.

[163:3] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 157. Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah. Davis: Hist. of China, vol. ii. p. 80, and Huc's Travels, vol. i. p. 327.

[163:4] Allen's India, p. 379.

[163:5] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 200, and Chambers's Encyclo., art. "Fuh-he."

[163:6] Davis: History of China, vol. ii. p. 48, and Thornton: Hist. China, vol. i. p. 151.

[163:7] See almost any work on Egyptian history or the religions of Egypt.

[163:8] See Lundy: Monumental Christianity, p. 403.

[163:9] See Taylor's Diegesis, p. 152. Roman Antiquities, p. 124, and Bell's Pantheon, i. 382.

[164:1] See Greek and Italian Mythology, p. 81. Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 117. Murray: Manual of Mythology, p. 118, and Roman Antiquities, p. 71.

[164:2] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 170, and Bulfinch: The Age of Fable, p. 161.

[164:3] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 27. Roman Antiquities, p. 136, and Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150.

---

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS.

Interwoven with the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus, the star, the visit of the Magi, &c., we have a myth which belongs to a common form, and which, in this instance, is merely adapted to the special circumstances of the age and place. This has been termed "the myth of the dangerous child." Its general outline is this: A child is born concerning whose future greatness some prophetic indications have been given. But the life of the child is fraught with danger to some powerful individual, generally a monarch. In alarm at his threatened fate, this person endeavors to take the child's life, but it is preserved by divine care.

Escaping the measures directed against it, and generally remaining long unknown, it at length fulfills the prophecies concerning its career, while the fate which he has vainly sought to shun falls upon him who had desired to slay it. There is a departure from the ordinary type, in the case of Jesus, inasmuch as Herod does not actually die or suffer any calamity through his agency. But this failure is due to the fact that Jesus did not fulfill the conditions of the Messiahship, according to the Jewish conception which Matthew has here in mind. Had he—as was expected of the Messiah—become the actual sovereign of the Jews, he must have dethroned the reigning dynasty, whether represented by Herod or his successors. But as his subsequent career belied the expectations, the evangelist was obliged to postpone to a future time his accession to that throne of temporal dominion which the incredulity of his countrymen had withheld from him during his earthly life.

The story of the slaughter of the infants which is said to have taken place in Judea about the time of the birth of Jesus, is to be found in the second chapter of Matthew, and is as follows:

"When Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of Herod the king, there came wise men from the East to Jerusalem, saying: 'Where is he that is born king of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the East and have come to worship him.' When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled and all Jerusalem with him. Then Herod, when he had privately called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said: 'Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word.'"

The wise men went to Bethlehem and found the young child, but instead of returning to Herod as he had told them, they departed into their own country another way, having been warned of God in a dream, that they should not return to Herod.

"Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under."

We have in this story, told by the Matthew narrator—which the writers of the other gospels seem to know nothing about,—almost a counterpart, if not an exact one, to that related of Crishna of India, which shows how closely the mythological history of Jesus has been copied from that of the Hindoo Saviour.

Joguth Chunder Gangooly, a "Hindoo convert to Christ," tells us, in his "Life and Religion of the Hindoos," that:

"A heavenly voice whispered to the foster father of Crishna and told him to fly with the child across the river Jumna, which was immediately done.[166:1] This was owing to the fact that the reigning monarch, King Kansa, sought the life of the infant Saviour, and to accomplish his purpose, he sent messengers 'to kill all the infants in the neighboring places.'"[166:2]

Mr. Higgins says:

"Soon after Crishna's birth he was carried away by night and concealed in a region remote from his natal place, for fear of a tyrant whose destroyer it was foretold he would become; and who had, for that reason, ordered all the male children born at that period to be slain."[166:3]

Sir William Jones says of Crishna:

"He passed a life, according to the Indians, of a most extraordinary and incomprehensible nature. His birth was concealed through fear of the reigning tyrant Kansa, who, at the time of his birth, ordered all new-born males to be slain, yet this wonderful babe was preserved."[166:4]

In the Epic poem Mahabarata, composed more than two thousand years ago, we have the whole story of this incarnate deity, born of a virgin, and miraculously escaping in his infancy from the reigning tyrant of his country, related in its original form.

Representations of this flight with the babe at midnight are sculptured on the walls of ancient Hindoo temples.[167:1]

This story is also the subject of an immense sculpture in the cave-temple at Elephanta, where the children are represented as being slain. The date of this sculpture is lost in the most remote antiquity. It represents a person holding a drawn sword, surrounded by slaughtered infant boys. Figures of men and women are also represented who are supposed to be supplicating for their children.[167:2]

Thomas Maurice, speaking of this sculpture, says:

"The event of Crishna's birth, and the attempt to destroy him, took place by night, and therefore the shadowy mantle of darkness, upon which mutilated figures of infants are engraved, darkness (at once congenial with his crime and the season of its perpetration), involves the tyrant's bust; the string of death heads marks the multitude of infants slain by his savage mandate; and every object in the sculpture illustrates the events of that Avatar."[167:3]

Another feature which connects these stories is the following:

Sir Wm. Jones tells us that when Crishna was taken out of reach of the tyrant Kansa who sought to slay him, he was fostered at Mathura by Nanda, the herdsman;[167:4] and Canon Farrar, speaking of the sojourn of the Holy Family in Egypt, says:

"St. Matthew neither tells us where the Holy Family abode in Egypt, nor how long their exile continued; but ancient legends say that they remained two years absent from Palestine, and lived at Mataréëh, a few miles north-east of Cairo."[167:5]

Chemnitius, out of Stipulensis, who had it from Peter Martyr, Bishop of Alexandria, in the third century, says, that the place in Egypt where Jesus was banished, is now called Matarea, about ten miles beyond Cairo, that the inhabitants constantly burn a lamp in remembrance of it, and that there is a garden of trees yielding a balsam, which was planted by Jesus when a boy.[167:6]

Here is evidently one and the same legend.

Salivahana, the virgin-born Saviour, anciently worshiped near Cape Comorin, the southerly part of the Peninsula of India, had the same history. It was attempted to destroy him in infancy by a tyrant who was afterward killed by him. Most of the other circumstances, with slight variations, are the same as those told of Crishna and Jesus.[167:7]

Buddha's life was also in danger when an infant. In the southern country of Magadha, there lived a king by the name of Bimbasara, who, being fearful of some enemy arising that might overturn his kingdom, frequently assembled his principal ministers together to hold discussion with them on the subject. On one of these occasions they told him that away to the north there was a respectable tribe of people called the Sâkyas, and that belonging to this race there was a youth newly-born, the first-begotten of his mother, &c. This youth, who was Buddha, they said was liable to overturn him, they therefore advised him to "at once raise an army and destroy the child."[168:1]

In the chronicles of the East Mongols, the same tale is to be found repeated in the following story:

"A certain king of a people called Patsala, had a son whose peculiar appearance led the Brahmins at court to prophesy that he would bring evil upon his father, and to advise his destruction. Various modes of execution having failed, the boy was laid in a copper chest and thrown into the Ganges. Rescued by an old peasant who brought him up as his son, he, in due time, learned the story of his escape, and returned to seize upon the kingdom destined for him from his birth."[168:2]

Hau-ki, the Chinese hero of supernatural origin, was exposed in infancy, as the "Shih-king" says:

"He was placed in a narrow lane, but the sheep and oxen protected him with loving care. He was placed in a wide forest, where he was met with by the wood-cutters. He was placed on the cold ice, and a bird screened and supported him with its wings," &c.[168:3]

Mr. Legge draws a comparison with this to the Roman legend of Romulus.

Horus, according to the Egyptian story, was born in the winter, and brought up secretly in the Isle of Buto, for fear of Typhon, who sought his life. Typhon at first schemed to prevent his birth and then sought to destroy him when born.[168:4]

Within historical times, Cyrus, king of Persia (6th cent. B. C.), is the hero of a similar tale. His grandfather, Astyages, had dreamed certain dreams which were interpreted by the Magi to mean that the offspring of his daughter Mandane would expel him from his kingdom.

Alarmed at the prophecy, he handed the child to his kinsman Harpagos to be slain; but this man having entrusted it to a shepherd to be exposed, the latter contrived to save it by exhibiting to the emissaries of Harpagos the body of a still-born child of which his own wife had just been delivered. Grown to man's estate Cyrus of course justified the prediction of the Magi by his successful revolt against Astyages and assumption of the monarchy.

Herodotus, the Grecian Historian (B. C. 484), relates that Astyages, in a vision, appeared to see a vine grow up from Mandane's womb, which covered all Asia. Having seen this and communicated it to the interpreters of dreams, he put her under guard, resolving to destroy whatever should be born of her; for the Magian interpreters had signified to him from his vision that the child born of Mandane would reign in his stead. Astyages therefore, guarding against this, as soon as Cyrus was born sought to have him destroyed. The story of his exposure on the mountain, and his subsequent good fortune, is then related.[169:1]

Abraham was also a "dangerous child." At the time of his birth, Nimrod, king of Babylon, was informed by his soothsayers that "a child should be born in Babylonia, who would shortly become a great prince, and that he had reason to fear him." The result of this was that Nimrod then issued orders that "all women with child should be guarded with great care, and all children born of them should be put to death."[169:2]

The mother of Abraham was at that time with child, but, of course, he escaped from being put to death, although many children were slaughtered.

Zoroaster, the chief of the religion of the Magi, was a "dangerous child." Prodigies had announced his birth; he was exposed to dangers from the time of his infancy, and was obliged to fly into Persia, like Jesus into Egypt. Like him, he was pursued by a king, his enemy, who wanted to get rid of him.[169:3]

His mother had alarming dreams of evil spirits seeking to destroy the child to whom she was about to give birth. But a good spirit came to comfort her and said: "Fear nothing! Ormuzd will protect this infant. He has sent him as a prophet to the people. The world is waiting for him."[169:4]

Perseus, son of the Virgin Danae, was also a "dangerous child." Acrisius, king of Argos, being told by the oracle that a son born of his virgin daughter would destroy him, immured his daughter Danae in a tower, where no man could approach her, and by this means hoped to keep his daughter from becoming enceinte. The god Jupiter, however, visited her there, as it is related of the Angel Gabriel visiting the Virgin Mary,[170:1] the result of which was that she bore a son—Perseus. Acrisius, on hearing of his daughter's disgrace, caused both her and the infant to be shut up in a chest and cast into the sea. They were discovered by one Dictys, and liberated from what must have been anything but a pleasant position.[170:2]

Æsculapius, when an infant, was exposed on the Mount of Myrtles, and left there to die, but escaped the death which was intended for him, having been found and cared for by shepherds.[170:3]

Hercules, son of the virgin Leto, was left to die on a plain, but was found and rescued by a maiden.[170:4]

Œdipous was a "dangerous child." Laios, King of Thebes, having been told by the Delphic Oracle that Œdipous would be his destroyer, no sooner is Œdipous born than the decree goes forth that the child must be slain: but the servant to whom he is intrusted contents himself with exposing the babe on the slopes of Mount Kithairon, where a shepherd finds him, and carries him, like Cyrus or Romulus, to his wife, who cherishes the child with a mother's care.[170:5]

The Theban myth of Œdipous is repeated substantially in the Arcadian tradition of Telephos. He is exposed, when a babe, on Mount Parthenon, and is suckled by a doe, which represents the wolf in the myth of Romulus, and the dog of the Persian story of Cyrus. Like Moses, he is brought up in the palace of a king.[170:6]

As we read the story of Telephos, we can scarcely fail to think of the story of the Trojan Paris, for, like Telephos, Paris is exposed as a babe on the mountain-side.[170:7] Before he is born, there are portents of the ruin which he is to bring upon his house and people. Priam, the ruling monarch, therefore decrees that the child shall be left to die on the hill-side. But the babe lies on the slopes of Ida and is nourished by a she-bear. He is fostered, like Crishna and others, by shepherds, among whom he grows up.[170:8]

Iamos was left to die among the bushes and violets. Aipytos, the chieftain of Phaisana, had learned at Delphi that a child had been born who should become the greatest of all the seers and prophets of the earth, and he asked all his people where the babe was: but none had heard or seen him, for he lay away amid the thick bushes, with his soft body bathed in the golden and pure rays of the violets. So when he was found, they called him Iamos, the "violet child;" and as he grew in years and strength, he went down into the Alpheian stream, and prayed to his father that he would glorify his son. Then the voice of Zeus was heard, bidding him come to the heights of Olympus, where he should receive the gift of prophecy.[171:1]

Chandragupta was also a "dangerous child." He is exposed to great dangers in his infancy at the hands of a tributary chief who has defeated and slain his suzerain. His mother, "relinquishing him to the protection of the Devas, places him in a vase, and deposits him at the door of a cattle pen." A herdsman takes the child and rears it as his own.[171:2]

Jason is another hero of the same kind. Pelias, the chief of Iolkos, had been told that one of the children of Aiolos would be his destroyer, and decreed, therefore, that all should be slain. Jason only is preserved, and brought up by Cheiron.[171:3]

Bacchus, son of the virgin Semele, was destined to bring ruin upon Cadmus, King of Thebes, who therefore orders the infant to be put into a chest and thrown into a river. He is found, and taken from the water by loving hands, and lives to fulfill his mission.[171:4]

Herodotus relates a similar story, which is as follows:

"The constitution of the Corinthians was formerly of this kind; it was an oligarchy, (a government in the hands of a selected few), and those who were called Bacchiadæ governed the city. About this time one Eetion, who had been married to a maiden called Labda, and having no children by her, went to Delphi to inquire of the oracle about having offspring. Upon entering the temple he was immediately saluted as follows; 'Eetion, no one honors thee, though worthy of much honor. Labda is pregnant and will bring forth a round stone; it will fall on monarchs, and vindicate Corinth.' This oracle, pronounced to Eetion, was by chance reported to the Bacchiadæ, who well knew that it prophesied the birth of a son to Eetion who would overthrow them, and reign in their stead; and though they comprehended, they kept it secret, purposing to destroy the offspring that should be born to Eetion. As soon as the woman brought forth, they sent ten persons to the district where Eetion lived, to put the child to death; but, the child, by a divine providence, was saved. His mother hid him in a chest, and as they could not find the child they resolved to depart, and tell those who sent them that they had done all that they had commanded. After this, Eetion's son grew up, and having escaped this danger, the name of Cypselus was given him, from the chest. When Cypselus reached man's estate, and consulted the oracle, an ambiguous answer was given him at Delphi; relying on which he attacked and got possession of Corinth."[171:5]

Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome, were exposed on the banks of the Tiber, when infants, and left there to die, but escaped the death intended for them.

The story of the "dangerous child" was well known in ancient Rome, and several of their emperors, so it is said, were threatened with death at their birth, or when mere infants. Julius Marathus, in his life of the Emperor Augustus Cæsar, says that before his birth there was a prophecy in Rome that a king over the Roman people would soon be born. To obviate this danger to the republic, the Senate ordered that all the male children born in that year should be abandoned or exposed.[172:1]

The flight of the virgin-mother with her babe is also illustrated in the story of Astrea when beset by Orion, and of Latona, the mother of Apollo, when pursued by the monster.[172:2] It is simply the same old story, over and over again. Someone has predicted that a child born at a certain time shall be great, he is therefore a "dangerous child," and the reigning monarch, or some other interested party, attempts to have the child destroyed, but he invariably escapes and grows to manhood, and generally accomplishes the purpose for which he was intended. This almost universal mythos was added to the fictitious history of Jesus by its fictitious authors, who have made him escape in his infancy from the reigning tyrant with the usual good fortune.

When a marvellous occurrence is said to have happened everywhere, we may feel sure that it never happened anywhere. Popular fancies propagate themselves indefinitely, but historical events, especially the striking and dramatic ones, are rarely repeated. That this is a fictitious story is seen from the narratives of the birth of Jesus, which are recorded by the first and third Gospel writers, without any other evidence. In the one—that related by the Matthew narrator—we have a birth at Bethlehem—implying the ordinary residence of the parents there—and a hurried flight—almost immediately after the birth—from that place into Egypt,[172:3] the slaughter of the infants, and a journey, after many months, from Egypt to Nazareth in Galilee. In the other story—that told by the Luke narrator—the parents, who have lived in Nazareth, came to Bethlehem only for business of the State, and the casual birth in the cave or stable is followed by a quiet sojourn, during which the child is circumcised, and by a leisurely journey to Jerusalem; whence, everything having gone off peaceably and happily, they return naturally to their own former place of abode, full, it is said over and over again, of wonder at the things that had happened, and deeply impressed with the conviction that their child had a special work to do, and was specially gifted for it. There is no fear of Herod, who seems never to trouble himself about the child, or even to have any knowledge of him. There is no trouble or misery at Bethlehem, and certainly no mourning for children slain. Far from flying hurriedly away by night, his parents celebrate openly, and at the usual time, the circumcision of the child; and when he is presented in the temple, there is not only no sign that enemies seek his life, but the devout saints give public thanks for the manifestation of the Saviour.

Dr. Hooykaas, speaking of the slaughter of the innocents, says:

"Antiquity in general delighted in representing great men, such as Romulus, Cyrus, and many more, as having been threatened in their childhood by fearful dangers. This served to bring into clear relief both the lofty significance of their future lives, and the special protection of the deity who watched over them.

"The brow of many a theologian has been bent over this (Matthew) narrative! For, as long as people believed in the miraculous inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, of course they accepted every page as literally true, and thought that there could not be any contradiction between the different accounts or representations of Scripture. The worst of all such pre-conceived ideas is, that they compel those who hold them to do violence to their own sense of truth. For when these so-called religious prejudices come into play, people are afraid to call things by their right names, and, without knowing it themselves, become guilty of all kinds of evasive and arbitrary practices; for what would be thought quite unjustifiable in any other case is here considered a duty, inasmuch as it is supposed to tend toward the maintenance of faith and the glory of God!"[173:1]

As we stated above, this story is to be found in the fictitious gospel according to Matthew only; contemporary history has nowhere recorded this audacious crime. It is mentioned neither by Jewish nor Roman historians. Tacitus, who has stamped forever the crimes of despots with the brand of reprobation, it would seem then, did not think such infamies worthy of his condemnation. Josephus also, who gives us a minute account of the atrocities perpetrated by Herod up to even the very last moment of his life, does not say a single word about this unheard-of crime, which must have been so notorious. Surely he must have known of it, and must have mentioned it, had it ever been committed. "We can readily imagine the Pagans," says Mr. Reber, "who composed the learned and intelligent men of their day, at work in exposing the story of Herod's cruelty, by showing that, considering the extent of territory embraced in the order, and the population within it, the assumed destruction of life stamped the story false and ridiculous. A governor of a Roman province who dared make such an order would be so speedily overtaken by the vengeance of the Roman people, that his head would fall from his body before the blood of his victims had time to dry. Archelaus, his son, was deposed for offenses not to be spoken of when compared with this massacre of the infants."

No wonder that there is no trace at all in the Roman catacombs, nor in Christian art, of this fictitious story, until about the beginning of the fifth century.[174:1] Never would Herod dared to have taken upon himself the odium and responsibility of such a sacrifice. Such a crime could never have happened at the epoch of its professed perpetration. To such lengths were the early Fathers led, by the servile adaptation of the ancient traditions of the East, they required a second edition of the tyrant Kansa, and their holy wrath fell upon Herod. The Apostles of Jesus counted too much upon human credulity, they trusted too much that the future might not unravel their maneuvers, the sanctity of their object made them too reckless. They destroyed all the evidence against themselves which they could lay their hands upon, but they did not destroy it all.

---

FOOTNOTES:

[166:1] A heavenly voice whispered to the foster-father of Jesus, and told him to fly with the child into Egypt, which was immediately done. (See Matthew, ii. 13.)

[166:2] Life and Relig. of the Hindoos, p. 134.

[166:3] Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 129. See also, Cox: Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 134, and Maurice: Hist. Hindostan, vol. ii. p. 331.

[166:4] Asiatic Researches, vol. i. pp. 273 and 259.

[167:1] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 61.

[167:2] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. 130, 13-, and Maurice: Indian Antiquities, vol. i. pp. 112, 113, and vol. iii. pp. 45, 95.

[167:3] Indian Antiquities, vol. i. pp. 112, 113.

[167:4] Asiatic Researches, vol. i. p. 259.

[167:5] Farrar's Life of Christ, p. 58.

[167:6] See Introduction to Gospel of Infancy, Apoc.

[167:7] See vol. x. Asiatic Researches.

[168:1] Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 103, 104.

[168:2] Amberly's Analysis, p. 229.

[168:3] The Shih-king. Decade ii, ode 1.

[168:4] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, pp. 158 and 186.

[169:1] Herodotus, bk. 1, ch. 110.

[169:2] Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."

[169:3] See Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 240.

[169:4] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. "Religions of Persia."

[170:1] In the Apocryphal Gospel of the Birth of Mary and "Protevangelion."

[170:2] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 9. Cox: Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 58, and Bulfinch: The Age of Fable, p. 161.

[170:3] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 27. Cox: Aryan Mytho. vol. ii. p. 34.

[170:4] Cox: Aryan Mytho. vol. ii. p. 44.

[170:5] Ibid. p. 69, and Tales of Ancient Greece, p. xlii.

[170:6] Cox: Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 14.

[170:7] Ibid. p. 75.

[170:8] Ibid. p. 78.

[171:1] Cox: Aryan Mytho. ii. p. 81.

[171:2] Ibid. p. 84.

[171:3] Ibid. p. 150.

[171:4] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 188. Cox: Aryan Mytho. vol. ii. p. 296.

[171:5] Herodotus: bk. v. ch. 92.

[172:1] See Farrar's Life of Christ, p. 60.

[172:2] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 168.

[172:3] There are no very early examples in Christian art of the flight of the Holy Family into Egypt. (See Monumental Christianity, p. 289.)

[173:1] Bible for Learners, vol. iii. pp. 71-74.

[174:1] See Monumental Christianity, p. 238.

---

CHAPTER XIX.

THE TEMPTATION, AND FAST OF FORTY DAYS.

We are informed by the Matthew narrator that, after being baptized by John in the river Jordan, Jesus was led by the spirit into the wilderness "to be tempted of the devil."

"And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungered. And when the tempter came to him he said: 'If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.' . . . Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, and saith unto him: 'If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down.' . . . Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them, and saith unto him:' All these things will I give thee if thou wilt fall down and worship me.' Then saith Jesus unto him, 'Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.' Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him."[175:1]

This is really a very peculiar story; it is therefore not to be wondered at that many of the early Christian Fathers rejected it as being fabulous,[175:2] but this, according to orthodox teaching, cannot be done; because, in all consistent reason, "we must accept the whole of the inspired autographs or reject the whole,"[175:3] and, because, "the very foundations of our faith, the very basis of our hopes, the very nearest and dearest of our consolations, are taken from us, when one line of that sacred volume, on which we base everything, is declared to be untruthful and untrustworthy."[175:4]

The reason why we have this story in the New Testament is because the writer wished to show that Christ Jesus was proof against all temptations, that he too, as well as Buddha and others, could resist the powers of the prince of evil. This Angel-Messiah was tempted by the devil, and he fasted for forty-seven days and nights, without taking an atom of food.[175:5]

The story of Buddha's temptation, presented below, is taken from the "Siamese Life of Buddha," by Moncure D. Conway, and published in his "Sacred Anthology," from which we take it.[176:1] It is also to be found in the Fo-pen-hing,[176:2] and other works on Buddha and Buddhism. Buddha went through a more lengthy and severe trial than did Jesus, having been tempted in many different ways. The portion which most resembles that recorded by the Matthew narrator is the following:

"The Grand Being (Buddha) applied himself to practice asceticism of the extremest nature. He ceased to eat (that is, he fasted) and held his breath. . . . Then it was that the royal Mara (the Prince of Evil) sought occasion to tempt him. Pretending compassion, he said: 'Beware, O Grand Being, your state is pitiable to look on; you are attenuated beyond measure, . . . you are practicing this mortification in vain; I can see that you will not live through it. . . . Lord, that art capable of such vast endurance, go not forth to adopt a religious life, but return to thy kingdom, and in seven days thou shalt become the Emperor of the World, riding over the four great continents.'"

To this the Grand Being, Buddha, replied:

"'Take heed, O Mara; I also know that in seven days I might gain universal empire, but I desire not such possessions. I know that the pursuit of religion is better than the empire of the world. You, thinking only of evil lusts, would force me to leave all beings without guidance into your power. Avaunt! Get thou away from me!'

"The Lord (then) rode onwards, intent on his purpose. The skies rained flowers, and delicious odors pervaded the air."[176:3]

Now, mark the similarity between these two legends.

Was Jesus about "beginning to preach" when he was tempted by the evil spirit? So was Buddha about to go forth "to adopt a religious life," when he was tempted by the evil spirit.

Did Jesus fast, and was he "afterwards an hungered"? So did Buddha "cease to eat," and was "attenuated beyond measure."

Did the evil spirit take Jesus and show him "all the kingdoms of the world," which he promised to give him, provided he did not lead the life he contemplated, but follow him?

So did the evil spirit say to Buddha: "Go not forth to adopt a religious life, and in seven days thou shalt become an emperor of the world."

Did not Jesus resist these temptations, and say unto the evil one, "Get thee behind me, Satan"?

So did Buddha resist the temptations, and said unto the evil one, "Get thee away from me."

After the evil spirit left Jesus did not "angels come and minister unto him"?

So with Buddha. After the evil one had left him "the skies rained flowers, and delicious odors pervaded the air."

These parallels are too striking to be accidental.

Zoroaster, the founder of the religion of the Persians, was tempted by the devil, who made him magnificent promises, in order to induce him to become his servant and to be dependent on him, but the temptations were in vain.[177:1] "His temptation by the devil, forms the subject of many traditional reports and legends."[177:2]

Quetzalcoatle, the virgin-born Mexican Saviour, was also tempted by the devil, and the forty days' fast was found among them.[177:3]

Fasting and self-denial were observances practiced by all nations of antiquity. The Hindoos have days set apart for fasting on many different occasions throughout the year, one of which is when the birth-day of their Lord and Saviour Crishna is celebrated. On this occasion, the day is spent in fasting and worship. They abstain entirely from food and drink for more than thirty hours, at the end of which Crishna's image is worshiped, and the story of his miraculous birth is read to his hungry worshipers.[177:4]

Among the ancient Egyptians, there were times when the priests submitted to abstinence of the most severe description, being forbidden to eat even bread, and at other times they only ate it mingled with hyssop. "The priests in Heliopolis," says Plutarch, "have many fasts, during which they meditate on divine things."[177:5]

Among the Sabians, fasting was insisted on as an essential act of religion. During the month Tammuz, they were in the habit of fasting from sunrise to sunset, without allowing a morsel of food or drop of liquid to pass their lips.[177:6]

The Jews also had their fasts, and on special occasions they gave themselves up to prolonged fasts and mortifications.

Fasting and self-denial were observances required of the Greeks who desired initiation into the Mysteries. Abstinence from food, chastity and hard couches prepared the neophyte, who broke his fast on the third and fourth day only, on consecrated food.[177:7]

The same practice was found among the ancient Mexicans and Peruvians. Acosta, speaking of them, says:

"These priests and religious men used great fastings, of five and ten days together, before any of their great feasts, and they were unto them as our four ember weeks. . . .

"They drank no wine, and slept little, for the greatest part of their exercises (of penance) were at night, committing great cruelties and martyring themselves for the devil, and all to be reputed great fasters and penitents."[178:1]

In regard to the number of days which Jesus is said to have fasted being specified as forty, this is simply owing to the fact that the number forty as well as seven was a sacred one among most nations of antiquity, particularly among the Jews, and because others had fasted that number of days. For instance; it is related[178:2] that Moses went up into a mountain, "and he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights, and he did neither eat bread, nor drink water," which is to say that he fasted.

In Deuteronomy[178:3] Moses is made to say—for he did not write it, "When I was gone up into the mount to receive the tables of stone, . . . then I abode in the mount forty days and forty nights, I neither did eat bread nor drink water."

Elijah also had a long fast, which, of course, was continued for a period of forty days and forty nights.[178:4]

St. Joachim, father of the "ever-blessed Virgin Mary," had a long fast, which was also continued for a period of forty days and forty nights. The story is to be found in the apocryphal gospel Protevangelion.[178:5]

The ancient Persians had a religious festival which they annually celebrated, and which they called the "Salutation of Mithras." During this festival, forty days were set apart for thanksgiving and sacrifice.[178:6]

The forty days' fast was found in the New World.

Godfrey Higgins tells us that:

"The ancient Mexicans had a forty days' fast, in memory of one of their sacred persons (Quetzalcoatle) who was tempted (and fasted) forty days on a mountain."[178:7]

Lord Kingsborough says:

"The temptation of Quetzalcoatle, and the fast of forty days, . . . are very curious and mysterious."[178:8]

The ancient Mexicans were also in the habit of making their prisoners of war fast for a term of forty days before they were put to death.[179:1]

Mr. Bonwick says:

"The Spaniards were surprised to see the Mexicans keep the vernal forty days' fast. The Tammuz month of Syria was in the spring. The forty days were kept for Proserpine. Thus does history repeat itself."[179:2]

The Spanish monks accounted for what Lord Kingsborough calls "very curious and mysterious" circumstances, by the agency of the devil, and burned all the books containing them, whenever it was in their power.

The forty days' fast was also found among some of the Indian tribes in the New World. Dr. Daniel Brinton tells us that "the females of the Orinoco tribes fasted forty days before marriage,"[179:3] and Prof. Max Müller informs us that it was customary for some of the females of the South American tribes of Indians "to fast before and after the birth of a child," and that, among the Carib-Coudave tribe, in the West Indies, "when a child is born the mother goes presently to work, but the father begins to complain, and takes to his hammock, and there he is visited as though he were sick. He then fasts for forty days."[179:4]

The females belonging to the tribes of the Upper Mississippi, were held unclean for forty days after childbirth.[179:5] The prince of the Tezcuca tribes fasted forty days when he wished an heir to his throne, and the Mandanas supposed it required forty days and forty nights to wash clean the earth at the deluge.[179:6]

The number forty is to be found in a great many instances in the Old Testament; for instance, at the end of forty days Noah sent out a raven from the ark.[179:7] Isaac and Esau were each forty years old when they married.[179:8] Forty days were fulfilled for the embalming of Jacob.[179:9] The spies were forty days in search of the land of Canaan.[179:10] The Israelites wandered forty years in the wilderness.[179:11] The land "had rest" forty years on three occasions.[179:12] The land was delivered into the hand of the Philistines forty years.[179:13] Eli judged Israel forty years.[179:14] King David reigned forty years.[179:15]

King Solomon reigned forty years.[180:1] Goliath presented himself forty days.[180:2] The rain was upon the earth forty days at the time of the deluge.[180:3] And, as we saw above, Moses was on the mount forty days and forty nights on each occasion.[180:4] Can anything be more mythological than this?

The number forty was used by the ancients in constructing temples. There were forty pillars around the temple of Chilminar, in Persia; the temple at Baalbec had forty pillars; on the frontiers of China, in Tartary, there is to be seen the "Temple of the forty pillars." Forty is one of the most common numbers in the Druidical temples, and in the plan of the temple of Ezekiel, the four oblong buildings in the middle of the courts have each forty pillars.[180:5] Most temples of antiquity were imitative—were microcosms of the Celestial Templum—and on this account they were surrounded with pillars recording astronomical subjects, and intended both to do honor to these subjects, and to keep them in perpetual remembrance. In the Abury temples were to be seen the cycles of 650-608-600-60-40-30-19-12, etc.[180:6]

---

FOOTNOTES:

[175:1] Matthew, iv. 1-11.

[175:2] See Lardner's Works, vol. viii. p. 491.

[175:3] Words of the Rev. E. Garbett, M. A., in a sermon preached before the University of Oxford, England.

[175:4] The Bishop of Manchester (England), in the "Manchester Examiner and Times."

[175:5] See Lillie's Buddhism, p. 100.

[176:1] Pp. 44 and 172, 173.

[176:2] Translated by Prof. Samuel Beal.

[176:3] See also Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 38, 39. Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. xxviii., xxix., and 190, and Hardy: Buddhist Legends, p. xvii.

[177:1] Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 240.

[177:2] Chambers's Encyclo. art. "Zoroaster."

[177:3] See Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 200.

[177:4] Life and Relig. of the Hindoos, p. 134.

[177:5] Baring-Gould: Orig. Relig. Belief, vol. i. p. 341.

[177:6] Ibid.

[177:7] Ibid. p. 340.

[178:1] Acosta: Hist. Indies, vol. ii. p. 339.

[178:2] Exodus, xxiv. 28.

[178:3] Deut. ix. 18.

[178:4] 1 Kings, xix. 8.

[178:5] Chapter i.

[178:6] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 272.

[178:7] Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 19.

[178:8] Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. pp. 197-200.

[179:1] See Kingsborough's Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 223.

[179:2] Bonwick's Egyptian Belief, p. 370.

[179:3] Brinton: Myths of the New World, p. 94.

[179:4] Max Müller's Chips, vol. ii. p. 279.

[179:5] Brinton: Myths of the New World, p. 94.

[179:6] Ibid. According to Genesis, vii. 12, "the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights" at the time of the flood.

[179:7] Genesis, viii. 6.

[179:8] Gen. xxv. 20-xxvi. 34.

[179:9] Gen. i. 3.

[179:10] Numbers, xiii. 25.

[179:11] Numbers, xiii. 13.

[179:12] Jud. iii. 11; v. 31; viii. 28.

[179:13] Jud. xiii. 1.

[179:14] I. Samuel, iv. 18.

[179:15] I. Kings, ii. 11.

[180:1] I. Kings, xi. 42.

[180:2] I. Samuel, xvii. 16.

[180:3] Gen. vii. 12.

[180:4] Exodus, xxiv. 18-xxxiv. 28.

[180:5] See Higgins' Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 798; vol. ii. p. 402.

[180:6] See Ibid. vol. ii. p. 708.

---

CHAPTER XX.

THE CRUCIFIXION OF CHRIST JESUS.

The punishment of an individual by crucifixion, for claiming to be "King of the Jews," "Son of God," or "The Christ;" which are the causes assigned by the Evangelists for the Crucifixion of Jesus, would need but a passing glance in our inquiry, were it not for the fact that there is much attached to it of a dogmatic and heathenish nature, which demands considerably more than a "passing glance." The doctrine of atonement for sin had been preached long before the doctrine was deduced from the Christian Scriptures, long before these Scriptures are pretended to have been written. Before the period assigned for the birth of Christ Jesus, the poet Ovid had assailed the demoralizing delusion with the most powerful shafts of philosophic scorn: "When thou thyself art guilty," says he, "why should a victim die for thee? What folly it is to expect salvation from the death of another."

The idea of expiation by the sacrifice of a god was to be found among the Hindoos even in Vedic times. The sacrificer was mystically identified with the victim, which was regarded as the ransom for sin, and the instrument of its annulment. The Rig-Veda represents the gods as sacrificing Purusha, the primeval male, supposed to be coeval with the Creator. This idea is even more remarkably developed in the Tāndya-brāhmanas, thus:

"The lord of creatures (prajā-pati) offered himself a sacrifice for the gods."

And again, in the Satapatha-brāhmana:

"He who, knowing this, sacrifices the Purusha-medha, or sacrifice of the primeval male, becomes everything."[181:1]

Prof. Monier Williams, from whose work on Hindooism we quote the above, says:

"Surely, in these mystical allusions to the sacrifice of a representative man, we may perceive traces of the original institution of sacrifice as a divinely-appointed ordinance typical of the one great sacrifice of the Son of God for the sins of the world."[182:1]

This idea of redemption from sin through the sufferings and death of a Divine Incarnate Saviour, is simply the crowning-point of the idea entertained by primitive man that the gods demanded a sacrifice of some kind, to atone for some sin, or avert some calamity.

In primitive ages, when men lived mostly on vegetables, they offered only grain, water, salt, fruit, and flowers to the gods, to propitiate them and thereby obtain temporal blessings. But when they began to eat meat and spices, and drink wine, they offered the same; naturally supposing the deities would be pleased with whatever was useful or agreeable to themselves. They imagined that some gods were partial to animals, others to fruits, flowers, etc. To the celestial gods they offered white victims at sunrise, or at open day. To the infernal deities they sacrificed black animals in the night. Each god had some creature peculiarly devoted to his worship. They sacrificed a bull to Mars, a dove to Venus, and to Minerva, a heifer without blemish, which had never been put to the yoke. If a man was too poor to sacrifice a living animal, he offered an image of one made of bread.

In the course of time, it began to be imagined that the gods demanded something more sacred as offerings or atonements for sin. This led to the sacrifice of human beings, principally slaves and those taken in war, then, their own children, even their most beloved "first-born." It came to be an idea that every sin must have its prescribed amount of punishment, and that the gods would accept the life of one person as atonement for the sins of others. This idea prevailed even in Greece and Rome: but there it mainly took the form of heroic self-sacrifice for the public good. Cicero says: "The force of religion was so great among our ancestors, that some of their commanders have, with their faces veiled, and with the strongest expressions of sincerity, sacrificed themselves to the immortal gods to save their country."[182:2]

In Egypt, offerings of human sacrifices, for the atonement of sin, became so general that "if the eldest born of the family of Athamas entered the temple of the Laphystian Jupiter at Alos in Achaia, he was sacrificed, crowned with garlands like an animal victim."[182:3]

When the Egyptian priests offered up a sacrifice to the gods, they pronounced the following imprecations on the head of the victim:

"If any evil is about to befall either those who now sacrifice, or Egypt in general, may it be averted on this head."[183:1]

This idea of atonement finally resulted in the belief that the incarnate Christ, the Anointed, the God among us, was to save mankind from a curse by God imposed. Man had sinned, and God could not and did not forgive without a propitiatory sacrifice. The curse of God must be removed from the sinful, and the sinless must bear the load of that curse. It was asserted that divine justice required BLOOD.[183:2]

The belief of redemption from sin by the sufferings of a Divine Incarnation, whether by death on the cross or otherwise, was general and popular among the heathen, centuries before the time of Jesus of Nazareth, and this dogma, no matter how sacred it may have become, or how consoling it may be, must fall along with the rest of the material of which the Christian church is built.

Julius Firmicius, referring to this popular belief among the Pagans, says: "The devil has his Christs."[183:3] This was the general off-hand manner in which the Christian Fathers disposed of such matters. Everything in the religion of the Pagans which corresponded to their religion was of the devil. Most Protestant divines have resorted to the type theory, of which we shall speak anon.

As we have done heretofore in our inquiries, we will first turn to India, where we shall find, in the words of M. l'Abbé Huc, that "the idea of redemption by a divine incarnation," who came into the world for the express purpose of redeeming mankind, was "general and popular."[183:4]

"A sense of original corruption," says Prof. Monier Williams, seems to be felt by all classes of Hindoos, as indicated by the following prayer used after the Gāyatrī by some Vaishnavas:

"'I am sinful, I commit sin, my nature is sinful, I am conceived in sin. Save me, O thou lotus-eyed Heri (Saviour), the remover of sin.'"[184:1]

Moreover, the doctrine of bhakti (salvation by faith) existed among the Hindoos from the earliest times.[184:2]

Crishna, the virgin-born, "the Divine Vishnu himself,"[184:3] "he who is without beginning, middle or end,"[184:4] being moved "to relieve the earth of her load,"[184:5] came upon earth and redeemed man by his sufferings—to save him.

The accounts of the deaths of most all the virgin-born Saviours of whom we shall speak, are conflicting. It is stated in one place that such an one died in such a manner, and in another place we may find it stated altogether differently. Even the accounts of the death of Jesus, as we shall hereafter see, are conflicting; therefore, until the chapter on "[Explanation]" is read, these myths cannot really be thoroughly understood.

As the Rev. Geo. W. Cox remarks, in his Aryan Mythology, Crishna is described, in one of his aspects, as a self-sacrificing and unselfish hero, a being who is filled with divine wisdom and love, who offers up a sacrifice which he alone can make.[184:6]

The Vishnu Purana[184:7] speaks of Crishna being shot in the foot with an arrow, and states that this was the cause of his death. Other accounts, however, state that he was suspended on a tree, or in other words, crucified.

Mons. Guigniaut, in his "Religion de l'Antiquité" says:

"The death of Crishna is very differently related. One remarkable and convincing tradition makes him perish on a tree, to which he was nailed by the stroke of an arrow."[184:8]

Rev. J. P. Lundy alludes to this passage of Guigniaut's in his "Monumental Christianity," and translates the passage "un bois fatal" (see note below) "a cross." Although we do not think he is justified in doing this, as M. Guigniaut has distinctly stated that this "bois fatal" (which is applied to a gibbet, a cross, a scaffold, etc.) was "un arbre" (a tree), yet, he is justified in doing so on other accounts, for we find that Crishna is represented hanging on a cross, and we know that a cross was frequently called the "accursed tree." It was an ancient custom to use trees as gibbets for crucifixion, or, if artificial, to call the cross a tree.[185:1]

A writer in Deuteronomy[185:2] speaks of hanging criminals upon a tree, as though it was a general custom, and says:

"He that is hanged (on a tree) is accursed of God."

And Paul undoubtedly refers to this text when he says:

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us; for it is written, 'Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.'"[185:3]

It is evident, then, that to be hung on a cross was anciently called hanging on a tree, and to be hung on a tree was called crucifixion. We may therefore conclude from this, and from what we shall now see, that Crishna was said to have been crucified.

In the earlier copies of Moor's "Hindu Pantheon," is to be seen representations of Crishna (as Wittoba),[185:4] with marks of holes in both feet, and in others, of holes in the hands. In Figures 4 and 5 of Plate 11 (Moor's work), the figures have nail-holes in both feet. Figure 6 has a round hole in the side; to his collar or shirt hangs the emblem of a heart (which we often see in pictures of Christ Jesus) and on his head he has a Yoni-Linga (which we do not see in pictures of Christ Jesus.)

Our Figure [No. 7] (next page), is a pre-Christian crucifix of Asiatic origin,[185:5] evidently intended to represent Crishna crucified. Figure [No. 8] we can speak more positively of, it is surely Crishna crucified. It is unlike any Christian crucifix ever made, and, with that described above with the Yoni-Linga attached to the head, would probably not be claimed as such. Instead of the crown of thorns usually put on the head of the Christian Saviour, it has the turreted coronet of the Ephesian Diana, the ankles are tied together by a cord, and the dress about the loins is exactly the style with which Crishna is almost always represented.[185:6]

Rev. J. P. Lundy, speaking of the Christian crucifix, says:

"I object to the crucifix because it is an image, and liable to gross abuse, just as the old Hindoo crucifix was an idol."[186:1]

And Dr. Inman says:

"Crishna, whose history so closely resembles our Lord's, was also like him in his being crucified."[186:2]

The Evangelist[186:3] relates that when Jesus was crucified two others (malefactors) were crucified with him, one of whom, through his favor, went to heaven. One of the malefactors reviled him, but the other said to Jesus: "Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom." And Jesus said unto him: "Verily I say unto thee, to-day shalt thou be with me in paradise." According to the Vishnu Purana, the hunter who shot the arrow at Crishna afterwards said unto him: "Have pity upon me, who am consumed by my crime, for thou art able to consume me!" Crishna replied: "Fear not thou in the least. Go, hunter, through my favor, to heaven, the abode of the gods." As soon as he had thus spoken, a celestial car appeared, and the hunter, ascending it, forthwith proceeded to heaven. Then the illustrious Crishna, having united himself with his own pure, spiritual, inexhaustible, inconceivable, unborn, undecaying, imperishable and universal spirit, which is one with Vasudeva (God),[186:4] abandoned his mortal body, and the condition of the threefold equalities.[186:5] One of the titles of Crishna is "Pardoner of sins," another is "Liberator from the Serpent of death."[187:1]

The monk Georgius, in his Tibetinum Alphabetum (p. 203), has given plates of a crucified god who was worshiped in Nepal. These crucifixes were to be seen at the corners of roads and on eminences. He calls it the god Indra. Figures [No. 9] and [No. 10] are taken from this work. They are also different from any Christian crucifix yet produced. Georgius says:

"If the matter stands as Beausobre thinks, then the inhabitants of India, and the Buddhists, whose religion is the same as that of the inhabitants of Thibet, have received these new portents of fanatics nowhere else than from the Manicheans. For those nations, especially in the city of Nepal, in the month of August, being about to celebrate the festival days of the god Indra, erect crosses, wreathed with Abrotono, to his memory, everywhere. You have the description of these in letter B, the picture following after; for A is the representation of Indra himself crucified, bearing on his forehead, hands and feet the signs Telech."[187:2]

P. Andrada la Crozius, one of the first Europeans who went to Nepal and Thibet, in speaking of the god whom they worshiped there—Indra—tells us that they said he spilt his blood for the salvation of the human race, and that he was pierced through the body with nails. He further says that, although they do not say he suffered the penalty of the cross, yet they find, nevertheless, figures of it in their books.[188:1]

In regard to Beausobre's ideas that the religion of India is corrupted Christianity, obtained from the Manicheans, little need be said, as all scholars of the present day know that the religion of India is many centuries older than Mani or the Manicheans.[188:2]

In the promontory of India, in the South, at Tanjore, and in the North, at Oude or Ayoudia, was found the worship of the crucified god Bal-li. This god, who was believed to have been an incarnation of Vishnu, was represented with holes in his hands and side.[188:3]

The incarnate god Buddha, although said to have expired peacefully at the foot of a tree, is nevertheless described as a suffering Saviour, who, "when his mind was moved by pity (for the human race) gave his life like grass for the sake of others."[188:4]

A hymn, addressed to Buddha, says:

"Persecutions without end,
Revilings and many prisons,
Death and murder,
These hast thou suffered with love and patience
(To secure the happiness of mankind),
Forgiving thine executioners."[188:5]

He was called the "Great Physician,"[188:6] the "Saviour of the World,"[188:7] the "Blessed One,"[188:8] the "God among Gods,"[188:9] the "Anointed," or the "Christ,"[188:10] the "Messiah,"[188:11] the "Only Begotten,"[188:12] etc. He is described by the author of the "Cambridge Key"[188:13] as sacrificing his life to wash away the offenses of mankind, and thereby to make them partakers of the kingdom of heaven. This induces him to say "Can a Christian doubt that this Buddha was the TYPE of the Saviour of the World."[189:1]

As a spirit in the fourth heaven, he resolves to give up "all that glory, in order to be born into the world," "to rescue all men from their misery and every future consequence of it." He vows "to deliver all men, who are left as it were without a Saviour."[189:2]

While in the realms of the blest, and when about to descend upon earth to be born as man, he said:

"I am now about to assume a body; not for the sake of gaining wealth, or enjoying the pleasures of sense, but I am about to descend and be born, among men, simply to give peace and rest to all flesh; to remove all sorrow and grief from the world."[189:3]

M. l'Abbé Huc says:

"In the eyes of the Buddhists, this personage (Buddha) is sometimes a man and sometimes a god, or rather both one and the other—a divine incarnation, a man-god—who came into the world to enlighten men, to redeem them, and to indicate to them the way of safety. This idea of redemption by a divine incarnation is so general and popular among the Buddhists, that during our travels in Upper Asia we everywhere found it expressed in a neat formula. If we addressed to a Mongol or a Thibetan the question 'Who is Buddha?' he would immediately reply: 'The Saviour of Men!'"[189:4]

According to Prof. Max Müller, Buddha is reported as saying:

"Let all the sins that were committed in this world fall on me, that the world may be delivered."[189:5]

The Indians are no strangers to the doctrine of original sin. It is their invariable belief that man is a fallen being; admitted by them from time immemorial.[189:6] And what we have seen concerning their beliefs in Crishna and Buddha unmistakably shows a belief in a divine Saviour, who redeems man, and takes upon himself the sins of the world; so that "Baddha paid it all, all to him is due."[189:7]

The idea of redemption through the sufferings and death of a Divine Saviour, is to be found even in the ancient religions of China. One of their five sacred volumes, called the Y-King, says, in speaking of Tien, the "Holy One":

"The Holy One will unite in himself all the virtues of heaven and earth. By his justice the world will be re-established in the ways of righteousness. He will labor and suffer much. He must pass the great torrent, whose waves shall enter into his soul; but he alone can offer up to the Lord a sacrifice worthy of him."[190:1]

An ancient commentator says:

"The common people sacrifice their lives to gain bread; the philosophers to gain reputation; the nobility to perpetuate their families. The Holy One (Tien) does not seek himself, but the good of others. He dies to save the world."[190:2]

Tien, the Holy One, is always spoken of as one with God, existing with him from all eternity, "before anything was made."

Osiris and Horus, the Egyptian virgin-born gods, suffered death.[190:3] Mr. Bonwick, speaking of Osiris, says:

"He is one of the Saviours or deliverers of humanity, to be found in almost all lands." "In his efforts to do good, he encounters evil; in struggling with that he is overcome; he is killed."[190:4]

Alexander Murray says:

"The Egyptian Saviour Osiris was gratefully regarded as the great exemplar of self-sacrifice, in giving his life for others."[190:5]

Sir J. G. Wilkinson says of him:

"The sufferings and death of Osiris were the great Mystery of the Egyptian religion, and some traces of it are perceptible among other peoples of antiquity. His being the Divine Goodness, and the abstract idea of 'good,' his manifestation upon earth (like a Hindoo god), his death and resurrection, and his office as judge of the dead in a future state, look like the early revelation of a future manifestation of the deity converted into a mythological fable."[190:6]

Horus was also called "The Saviour." "As Horus Sneb, he is the Redeemer. He is the Lord of Life and the Eternal One."[190:7] He is also called "The Only-Begotten."[190:8]

Attys, who was called the "Only Begotten Son"[190:9] and "Saviour," was worshiped by the Phrygians (who were regarded as one of the oldest races of Asia Minor). He was represented by them as a man tied to a tree, at the foot of which was a lamb,[191:1] and, without doubt, also as a man nailed to the tree, or stake, for we find Lactantius making this Apollo of Miletus (anciently, the greatest and most flourishing city of Ionia, in Asia Minor) say that:

"He was a mortal according to the flesh; wise in miraculous works; but, being arrested by an armed force by command of the Chaldean judges, he suffered a death made bitter with nails and stakes."[191:2]

In this god of the Phrygians, we again have the myth of the crucified Saviour of Paganism.

By referring to Mrs. Jameson's "History of Our Lord in Art,"[191:3] or to illustrations in [chapter xl.] this work, it will be seen that a common mode of representing a crucifixion was that of a man, tied with cords by the hands and feet, to an upright beam or stake. The lamb, spoken of above, which signifies considerable, we shall speak of in its proper place.

Tammuz, or Adonis, the Syrian and Jewish Adonai (in Hebrew "Our Lord"), was another virgin-born god, who suffered for mankind, and who had the title of Saviour. The accounts of his death are conflicting, just as it is with almost all of the so-called Saviours of mankind (including the Christian Saviour, as we shall hereafter see) one account, however, makes him a crucified Saviour.[191:4]

It is certain, however, that the ancients who honored him as their Lord and Saviour, celebrated, annually, a feast in commemoration of his death. An image, intended as a representation of their Lord, was laid on a bed or bier, and bewailed in mournful ditties—just as the Roman Catholics do at the present day in their "Good Friday" mass.

During this ceremony the priest murmured:

"Trust ye in your Lord, for the pains which he endured, our salvation have procured."[191:5]

The Rev. Dr. Parkhurst, in his "Hebrew Lexicon," after referring to what we have just stated above, says:

"I find myself obliged to refer Tammuz to that class of idols which were originally designed to represent the promised Saviour, the Desire of all Nations. His other name, Adonis, is almost the very Hebrew Adoni or Lord, a well-known title of Christ."[191:6]

Prometheus was a crucified Saviour. He was "an immortal god, a friend of the human race, who does not shrink even from sacrificing himself for their salvation."[192:1]

The tragedy of the crucifixion of Prometheus, written by Æschylus, was acted in Athens five hundred years before the Christian Era, and is by many considered to be the most ancient dramatic poem now in existence. The plot was derived from materials even at that time of an infinitely remote antiquity. Nothing was ever so exquisitely calculated to work upon the feelings of the spectators. No author ever displayed greater powers of poetry, with equal strength of judgment, in supporting through the piece the august character of the Divine Sufferer. The spectators themselves were unconsciously made a party to the interest of the scene: its hero was their friend, their benefactor, their creator, and their Saviour; his wrongs were incurred in their quarrel—his sorrows were endured for their salvation; "he was wounded for their transgressions, and bruised for their iniquities; the chastisement of their peace was upon him, and by his stripes they were healed;" "he was oppressed and afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth." The majesty of his silence, whilst the ministers of an offended god were nailing him by the hands and feet to Mount Caucasus,[192:2] could be only equaled by the modesty with which he relates, while hanging with arms extended in the form of a cross, his services to the human race, which had brought on him that horrible crucifixion.[192:3] "None, save myself," says he, "opposed his (Jove's) will,"

"I dared;
And boldly pleading saved them from destruction,
Saved them from sinking to the realms of night.
For this offense I bend beneath these pains,
Dreadful to suffer, piteous to behold:
For mercy to mankind I am not deem'd
Worthy of mercy; but with ruthless hate
In this uncouth appointment am fix'd here
A spectacle dishonorable to Jove."[192:4]

In the catastrophe of the plot, his especially professed friend, Oceanus, the Fisherman—as his name Petræus indicates,[193:1]—being unable to prevail on him to make his peace with Jupiter, by throwing the cause of human redemption out of his hands,[193:2] forsook him and fled. None remained to be witness of his dying agonies but the chorus of ever-amiable and ever-faithful which also bewailed and lamented him,[193:3] but were unable to subdue his inflexible philanthropy.[193:4]

In the words of Justin Martyr: "Suffering was common to all the sons of Jove." They were called the "Slain Ones," "Saviours," "Redeemers," &c.

Bacchus, the offspring of Jupiter and Semele,[193:5] was called the "Saviour."[193:6] He was called the "Only Begotten Son,"[193:7] the "Slain One,"[193:8] the "Sin Bearer,"[193:9] the "Redeemer,"[193:10] &c. Evil having spread itself over the earth, through the inquisitiveness of Pandora, the Lord of the gods is begged to come to the relief of mankind. Jupiter lends a willing ear to the entreaties, "and wishes that his son should be the redeemer of the misfortunes of the world; The Bacchus Saviour. He promises to the earth a Liberator . . The universe shall worship him, and shall praise in songs his blessings." In order to execute his purpose, Jupiter overshadows the beautiful young maiden—the virgin Semele—who becomes the mother of the Redeemer.[193:11]

"It is I (says the lord Bacchus to mankind), who guides you; it is I who protects you, and who saves you; I who am Alpha and Omega."[193:12]

Hercules, the son of Zeus, was called "The Saviour."[193:13] The words "Hercules the Saviour" were engraven on ancient coins and monuments.[193:14] He was also called "The Only Begotten," and the "Universal Word." He was re-absorbed into God. He was said by Ovid to be the "Self-produced," the Generator and Ruler of all things, and the Father of time.[193:15]

Æsculapius was distinguished by the epithet "The Saviour."[194:1] The temple erected to his memory in the city of Athens was called: "The Temple of the Saviour."[194:2]

Apollo was distinguished by the epithet "The Saviour."[194:3] In a hymn to Apollo he is called: "The willing Saviour of distressed mankind."[194:4]

Serapis was called "The Saviour."[194:5] He was considered by Hadrian, the Roman emperor (117-138 A. D.), and the Gentiles, to be the peculiar god of the Christians.[194:6] A cross was found under the ruins of his temple in Alexandria in Egypt.[194:7] Fig. No. 11 is a representation of this Egyptian Saviour, taken from Murray's "Manual of Mythology." It certainly resembles the pictures of "the peculiar God of the Christians." It is very evident that the pictures of Christ Jesus, as we know them to-day, are simply the pictures of some of the Pagan gods, who were, for certain reasons which we shall speak of in a subsequent chapter, always represented with long yellow or red hair, and a florid complexion. If such a person as Jesus of Nazareth ever lived in the flesh, he was undoubtedly a Jew, and would therefore have Jewish features; this his pictures do not betray.[194:8]

Mithras, who was "Mediator between God and man,"[194:9] was called "The Saviour." He was the peculiar god of the Persians, who believed that he had, by his sufferings, worked their salvation, and on this account he was called their Saviour.[194:10] He was also called "The Logos."[194:11]

The Persians believed that they were tainted with original sin, owing to the fall of their first parents who were tempted by the evil one in the form of a serpent.[194:12]

They considered their law-giver Zoroaster to be also a Divine Messenger, sent to redeem men from their evil ways, and they always worshiped his memory. To this day his followers mention him with the greatest reverence, calling him "The Immortal Zoroaster," "The Blessed Zoroaster," "The First-Born of the Eternal One," &c.[195:1]

"In the life of Zoroaster the common mythos is apparent. He was born in innocence, of an immaculate conception, of a ray of the Divine Reason. As soon as he was born, the glory arising from his body enlightened the room, and he laughed at his mother. He was called a Splendid Light from the Tree of Knowledge, and, in fine, he or his soul was suspensus a lingo, hung upon a tree, and this was the Tree of Knowledge."[195:2]

How much this resembles "the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints."[195:3]

Hermes was called "The Saviour." On the altar of Pepi (B. C. 3500) are to be found prayers to Hermes—"He who is the good Saviour."[195:4] He was also called "The Logos." The church fathers, Hippolytus, Justin Martyr, and Plutarch (de Iside et Osir) assert that the Logos is Hermes.[195:5] The term "Logos" is Greek, and signifies literally "Word."[195:6] He was also "The Messenger of God."[195:7]

Dr. Inman says:

"There are few words which strike more strongly upon the senses of an inquirer into the nature of ancient faiths, than Salvation and Saviour. Both were used long before the birth of Christ, and they are still common among those who never heard of Jesus, or of that which is known among us as the Gospels."[195:8]

He also tells us that there is a very remarkable figure copied in Payne Knight's work, in which we see on a man's shoulders a cock's head, whilst on the pediment are placed the words: "The Saviour of the World."[195:9]

Besides the titles of "God's First-Born," "Only Begotten," the "Mediator," the "Shepherd," the "Advocate," the "Paraclete or Comforter," the "Son of God," the "Logos," &c.,[195:10] being applied to heathen virgin-born gods, before the time assigned for the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, we have also that of Christ and Jesus.

Cyrus, King of Persia, was called the "Christ," or the "Anointed of God."[196:1] As Dr. Giles says, "Christ" is "a name having no spiritual signification, and importing nothing more than an ordinary surname."[196:2] The worshipers of Serapis were called "Christians," and those devoted to Serapis were called "Bishops of Christ."[196:3] Eusebius, the ecclesiastical historian, says, that the names of "Jesus" and "Christ," were both known and honored among the ancients.[196:4]

Mithras was called the "Anointed" or the "Christ;"[196:5] and Horus, Mano, Mithras, Bel-Minor, Iao, Adoni, &c., were each of them "God of Light," "Light of the World," the "Anointed," or the "Christ."[196:6]

It is said that Peter called his Master the Christ, whereupon "he straightway charged them (the disciples), and commanded them to tell no man that thing."[196:7]

The title of "Christ" or "The Anointed," was held by the kings of Israel. "Touch not my Christ and do my prophets no harm," says the Psalmist.[196:8]

The term "Christ" was applied to religious teachers, leaders of factions, necromancers or wonder-workers, &c. This is seen by the passage in Matthew, where the writer says:

"There shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."[196:9]

The virgin-born Crishna and Buddha were incarnations of Vishnu, called Avatars. An Avatar is an Angel-Messiah, a God-man, a Christ; for the word Christ is from the Greek Christos, an Anointed One, a Messiah.

The name Jesus, which is pronounced in Hebrew Yezua, and is sometimes Grecized into Jason, was very common. After the Captivity it occurs quite frequently, and is interchanged with the name Joshua. Indeed Joshua, the successor of Moses, is called Jesus in the New Testament more than once,[196:10] though the meaning of the two names is not really quite the same. We know of a Jesus, son of Sirach, a writer of proverbs, whose collection is preserved among the apocryphal books of the Old Testament. The notorious Barabbas[197:1] or son of Abbas, was himself called Jesus. Among Paul's opponents we find a magician called Elymas, the Son of Jesus. Among the early Christians a certain Jesus, also called Justus, appears. Flavius Josephus mentions more than ten distinct persons—priests, robbers, peasants, and others—who bore the name of Jesus, all of whom lived during the last century of the Jewish state.[197:2]

To return now to our theme—crucified gods before the time of Jesus of Nazareth.

The holy Father Minucius Felix, in his Octavius, written as late as A. D. 211, indignantly resents the supposition that the sign of the cross should be considered exclusively as a Christian symbol, and represents his advocate of the Christian argument as retorting on an infidel opponent. His words are:

""As for the adoration of crosses which you (Pagans) object against us (Christians), I must tell you, that we neither adore crosses nor desire them; you it is, ye Pagans . . . who are the most likely people to adore wooden crosses . . . for what else are your ensigns, flags, and standards, but crosses gilt and beautiful. Your victorious trophies not only represent a simple cross, but a cross with a man upon it."[197:3]

The existence, in the writings of Minucius Felix, of this passage, is probably owing to an oversight of the destroyers of all evidences against the Christian religion that could be had. The practice of the Romans, here alluded to, of carrying a cross with a man on it, or, in other words, a crucifix, has evidently been concealed from us by the careful destruction of such of their works as alluded to it. The priests had everything their own way for centuries, and to destroy what was evidence against their claims was a very simple matter.

It is very evident that this celebrated Christian Father alludes to some Gentile mystery, of which the prudence of his successors has deprived us. When we compare this with the fact that for centuries after the time assigned for the birth of Christ Jesus, he was not represented as a man on a cross, and that the Christians did not have such a thing as a crucifix, we are inclined to think that the effigies of a black or dark-skinned crucified man, which were to be seen in many places in Italy even during the last century, may have had something to do with it.[197:4]

While speaking of "a cross with a man on it" as being carried by the Pagan Romans as a standard, we might mention the fact, related by Arrian the historian,[198:1] that the troops of Porus, in their war with Alexander the Great, carried on their standards the figure of a man.[198:2] Here is evidently the crucifix standard again.

"This must have been (says Mr. Higgins) a Staurobates or Salivahana, and looks very like the figure of a man carried on their standards by the Romans. This was similar to the dove carried on the standards of the Assyrians. This must have been the crucifix of Nepaul."[198:3]

Tertullian, a Christian Father of the second and third centuries, writing to the Pagans, says:

"The origin of your gods is derived from figures moulded on a cross. All those rows of images on your standards are the appendages of crosses; those hangings on your standards and banners are the robes of crosses."[198:4]

We have it then, on the authority of a Christian Father, as late as A. D. 211, that the Christians "neither adored crosses nor desired them," but that the Pagans "adored crosses," and not that alone, but "a cross with a man upon it." This we shall presently find to be the case. Jesus, in those days, nor for centuries after, was not represented as a man on a cross. He was represented as a lamb, and the adoration of the crucifix, by the Christians, was a later addition to their religion. But this we shall treat of in its place.

We may now ask the question, who was this crucified man whom the Pagans "adored" before and after the time of Jesus of Nazareth? Who did the crucifix represent? It was, undoubtedly, "the Saviour crucified for the salvation of mankind," long before the Christian Era, whose effigies were to be seen in many places all over Italy. These Pagan crucifixes were either destroyed, corrupted, or adopted; the latter was the case with many ancient paintings of the Bambino,[198:5] on which may be seen the words Deo Soli. Now, these two words can never apply to Christ Jesus. He was not Deus Solus, in any sense, according to the idiom of the Latin language, and the Romish faith. Whether we construe the words to "the only God," or "God alone," they are equally heretical. No priest, in any age of the Church, would have thought of putting them there, but finding them there, they tolerated them.

In the "Celtic Druids," Mr. Higgins describes a crucifix, a lamb, and an elephant, which was cut upon the "fire tower"—so-called—at Brechin, a town of Forfarshire, in Scotland. Although they appeared to be of very ancient date, he supposed, at that time, that they were modern, and belonged to Christianity, but some years afterwards, he wrote as follows:

"I now doubt (the modern date of the tower), for we have, over and over again, seen the crucified man before Christ. We have also found 'The Lamb that taketh away the sins of the world,' among the Carnutes of Gaul, before the time of Christ; and when I contemplate these, and the Elephant or Ganesa,[199:1] and the Ring[199:2] and its Cobra,[199:3] Linga,[199:4] Iona,[199:5] and Nandies, found not far from the tower, on the estate of Lord Castles, with the Colidei, the island of Iona, and Ii, . . . I am induced to doubt my former conclusions. The Elephant, the Ganesa of India, is a very stubborn fellow to be found here. The Ring, too, when joined with other matters, I cannot get over. All these superstitions must have come from India."[199:6]

On one of the Irish "round towers" is to be seen a crucifix of unmistakable Asiatic origin.[199:7]

If we turn to the New World, we shall find strange though it may appear, that the ancient Mexicans and Peruvians worshiped a crucified Saviour. This was the virgin-born Quetzalcoatle whose crucifixion is represented in the paintings of the "Codex Borgianus," and the "Codex Vaticanus."

These paintings illustrate the religious opinions of the ancient Mexicans, and were copied from the hieroglyphics found in Mexico. The Spaniards destroyed nearly all the books, ancient monuments and paintings which they could find; had it not been for this, much more regarding the religion of the ancient Mexicans would have been handed down to us. Many chapters were also taken—by the Spanish authorities—from the writings of the first historians who wrote on ancient Mexico. All manuscripts had to be inspected previous to being published. Anything found among these heathens resembling the religion of the Christians, was destroyed when possible.[199:8]

The first Spanish monks who went to Mexico were surprised to find the crucifix among the heathen inhabitants, and upon inquiring what it meant, were told that it was a representation of Bacob (Quetzalcoatle), the Son of God, who was put to death by Eopuco. They said that he was placed on a beam of wood, with his arms stretched out, and that he died there.[200:1]

Lord Kingsborough, from whose very learned and elaborate work we have taken the above, says:

"Being questioned as to the manner in which they became acquainted with these things, they replied that the lords instructed their sons in them, and that thus this doctrine descended from one to another."[200:2]

Sometimes Quetzalcoatle or Bacob is represented as tied to the cross—just as we have seen that Attys was represented by the Phrygians—and at other times he is represented "in the attitude of a person crucified, with impressions of nail-holes in his hands and feet, but not actually upon a cross"—just as we have found the Hindoo Crishna, and as he is represented in [Fig. No. 8]. Beneath this representation of Quetzalcoatle crucified, is an image of Death, which an angry serpent seems threatening to devour.[200:3]

On the 73d page of the Borgian MS., he is represented crucified on a cross of the Greek form. In this print there are also impressions of nails to be seen on the feet and hands, and his body is strangely covered with suns.[200:4]

In vol. ii. plate 75, the god is crucified in a circle of nineteen figures, and a serpent is depriving him of the organs of generation.

Lord Kingsborough, commenting on these paintings, says:

"It is remarkable that in these Mexican paintings the faces of many of the figures are black, and that the visage of Quetzalcoatle is frequently painted in a very deformed manner."[200:5]

His lordship further tells us that (according to the belief of the ancient Mexicans), "the death of Quetzalcoatle upon the cross" was "an atonement for the sins of mankind."[200:6]

Dr. Daniel Brinton, in his "Myths of the New World," tells us that the Aztecs had a feast which they celebrated "in the early spring," when "victims were nailed to a cross and shot with an arrow."[200:7]

Alexander Von Humboldt, in his "American Researches," also speaks of this feast, when the Mexicans crucified a man, and pierced him with an arrow.[200:8]

The author of Monumental Christianity, speaking of this, says:

"Here is the old story of the Prometheus crucified on the Caucasus, and of all other Pagan crucifixions of the young incarnate divinities of India, Persia, Asia Minor and Egypt."[201:1]

This we believe; but how did this myth get there? He does not say, but we shall attempt to show, in a future chapter, how this and other myths of Eastern origin became known in the New World.[201:2]

It must not be forgotten, in connection with what we have seen concerning the Mexican crucified god being sometimes represented as black, and the feast when the crucified man was shot with an arrow, that effigies of a black crucified man were found in Italy; that Crishna, the crucified, is very often represented black; and that Crishna was shot with an arrow.

Crosses were also found in Yucatan, as well as Mexico, with a man upon them.[201:3] Cogolludo, in his "History of Yucatan," speaking of a crucifix found there, says:

"Don Eugenio de Alcantara (one of the true teachers of the Gospel), told me, not only once, that I might safely write that the Indians of Cozumel possessed this holy cross in the time of their paganism; and that some years had elapsed since it was brought to Medira; for having heard from many persons what was reported of it, he had made particular inquiries of some very old Indians who resided there, who assured him that it was the fact."

He then speaks of the difficulty in accounting for this crucifix being found among the Indians of Cozumel, and ends by saying:

"But if it be considered that these Indians believed that the Son of God, whom they called Bacob, had died upon a cross, with his arms stretched out upon it, it cannot appear so difficult a matter to comprehend that they should have formed his image according to the religious creed which they possessed."[201:4]

We shall find, in another chapter, that these virgin-born "Saviours" and "Slain Ones;" Crishna, Osiris, Horus, Attys, Adonis, Bacchus, &c.—whether torn in pieces, killed by a boar, or crucified—will all melt into ONE.

We now come to a very important fact not generally known, namely: There are no early representations of Christ Jesus suffering on the cross.

Rev. J. P. Lundy, speaking of this, says:

"Why should a fact so well known to the heathen as the crucifixion be concealed? And yet its actual realistic representation never once occurs in the monuments of Christianity, for more than six or seven centuries."[202:1]

Mrs. Jameson, in her "History of Our Lord in Art," says:

"The crucifixion is not one of the subjects of early Christianity. The death of our Lord was represented by various types, but never in its actual form.

"The earliest instances of the crucifixion are found in illustrated manuscripts of various countries, and in those ivory and enameled forms which are described in the Introduction. Some of these are ascertained, by historical or by internal evidence, to have been executed in the ninth century, there is one also, of an extraordinary rude and fantastic character, in a MS. in the ancient library of St. Galle, which is ascertained to be of the eighth century. At all events, there seems no just grounds at present for assigning an earlier date."[202:2]

"Early Christian art, such as it appears in the bas-reliefs on sarcophagi, gave but one solitary incident from the story of Our Lord's Passion, and that utterly divested of all circumstances of suffering. Our Lord is represented as young and beautiful, free from bonds, with no 'accursed tree' on his shoulders."[202:3]

The oldest representation of Christ Jesus was a figure of a lamb,[202:4] to which sometimes a vase was added, into which his blood flowed, and at other times couched at the foot of a cross. This custom subsisted up to the year 680, and until the pontificate of Agathon, during the reign of Constantine Pogonat. By the sixth synod of Constantinople (canon 82) it was ordained that instead of the ancient symbol, which had been the Lamb, the figure of a man fastened to a cross (such as the Pagans had adored), should be represented. All this was confirmed by Pope Adrian I.[202:5]

A simple cross, which was the symbol of eternal life, or of salvation, among the ancients, was sometimes, as we have seen, placed alongside of the Lamb. In the course of time, the Lamb was put on the cross, as the ancient Israelites had put the paschal lamb centuries before,[202:6] and then, as we have seen, they put a man upon it.

Christ Jesus is also represented in early art as the "Good Shepherd," that is, as a young man with a lamb on his shoulders.[202:7]

This is just the manner in which the Pagan Apollo, Mercury and others were represented centuries before.[203:1]

Mrs. Jameson says:

"Mercury attired as a shepherd, with a ram on his shoulders, borne in the same manner as in many of the Christian representations, was no unfrequent object (in ancient art) and in some instances led to a difficulty in distinguishing between the two,"[203:2] that is, between Mercury and Christ Jesus.

M. Renan says:

"The Good Shepherd of the catacombs in Rome is a copy from the Aristeus, or from the Apollo Nomius, which figured in the same posture on the Pagan sarcophagi; and still carries the flute of Pan, in the midst of the four half-naked seasons."[203:3]

The Egyptian Saviour Horus was called the "Shepherd of the People."[203:4]

The Hindoo Saviour Crishna was called the "Royal Good Shepherd."[203:5]

We have seen, then, on the authority of a Christian writer who has made the subject a special study, that, "there seems no just grounds at present for assigning an earlier date," for the "earliest instances of the crucifixion" of Christ Jesus, represented in art, than the eighth or ninth century. Now, a few words in regard to what these crucifixes looked like. If the reader imagines that the crucifixes which are familiar to us at the present day are similar to those early ones, we would inform him that such is not the case. The earliest artists of the crucifixion represent the Christian Saviour as young and beardless, always without the crown of thorns, alive, and erect, apparently elate; no signs of bodily suffering are there.[203:6]

On page 151, plate 181, of Jameson's "History of Our Lord in Art" (vol. ii.), he is represented standing on a foot-rest on the cross, alive, and eyes open. Again, on page 330, plate 253, he is represented standing "with body upright and arms extended straight, with no nails, no wounds, no crown of thorns—frequently clothed, and with a regal crown—a God, young and beautiful, hanging, as it were, without compulsion or pain."

On page 167, plate 188, are to be seen "the thieves bound to their cross (which is simply an upright beam, without cross-bars), with the figure of the Lord standing between them." He is not bound nor nailed to a cross; no cross is there. He is simply standing erect in the form of a cross. This is a representation of what is styled, "Early crucifixion with thieves." On page 173, plate 190, we have a representation of the crucifixion, in which Jesus and the thieves are represented crucified on the Egyptian tau (see [Fig. No. 12]). The thieves are tied, but the man-god is nailed to the cross. A similar representation may be seen on page 189, plate 198.

On page 155, plate 183, there is a representation of what is called "Virgin and St. John at foot of cross," but this cross is simply an upright beam (as [Fig. No. 13]). There are no cross-bars attached. On page 167, plate 188, the thieves are tied to an upright beam (as [Fig. 13]), and Jesus stands between them, with arms extended in the form of a cross, as the Hindoo Crishna is to be seen in [Fig. No. 8]. On page 157, plate 185, Jesus is represented crucified on the Egyptian cross (as [No. 12]).

Some ancient crucifixes represent the Christian Saviour crucified on a cross similar in form to the Roman figure which stands for the number ten (see [Fig. No. 14]). Thus we see that there was no uniformity in representing the "cross of Christ," among the early Christians; even the cross which Constantine put on his "Labarum," or sacred banner, was nothing more than the monogram of the Pagan god Osiris ([Fig. No. 15]),[204:1] as we shall see in a subsequent chapter.

The dogma of the vicarious atonement has met with no success whatever among the Jews. The reason for this is very evident. The idea of vicarious atonement, in any form, is contrary to Jewish ethics, but it is in full accord with the Gentile. The law ordains that[205:1] "every man shall be put to death for his own sin," and not for the sin or crime committed by any other person. No ransom should protect the murderer against the arm of justice.[205:2] The principle of equal rights and equal responsibilities is fundamental in the law. If the law of God—for as such it is received—denounces the vicarious atonement, viz., to slaughter an innocent person to atone for the crimes of others, then God must abhor it. What is more, Jesus is said to have sanctioned this law, for is he not made to say: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law."[205:3]

"Salvation is and can be nothing else than learning the laws of life and keeping them. There is, in the modern world, neither place nor need for any of the theological 'schemes of salvation' or theological 'Saviours.' No wrath of either God or devil stands in man's way; and therefore no 'sacrifice' is needed to get them out of the way. Jesus saves only as he helps men know and keep God's laws. Thousands of other men, in their degree, are Saviours in precisely the same way. As there has been no 'fall of man,' all the hundreds of theological devices for obviating its supposed effects are only imaginary cures for imaginary ills. What man does need is to be taught the necessary laws of life, and have brought to bear upon him adequate motives for obeying them. To know and keep God's laws is being reconciled to him. This is health; and out of health—that is, the perfect condition of the whole man, called holiness or wholeness—comes happiness, in this world and in all worlds."

---

FOOTNOTES:

[181:1] Monier Williams: Hinduism, pp. 36-40.

[182:1] Monier Williams: Hinduism, p. 36.

[182:2] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 303.

[182:3] Kenrick's Egypt, vol. i. p. 443.

[183:1] Herodotus: bk. ii. ch. 39.

[183:2] In the trial of Dr. Thomas (at Chicago) for "doctrinal heresy," one of the charges made against him (Sept. 8, 1881) was that he had said "the Blood of the Lamb had nothing to do with salvation." And in a sermon preached in Boston, Sept. 2, 1881, at the Columbus Avenue Presbyterian Church, by the Rev. Andrew A. Bonar. D. D., the preacher said: "No sinner dares to meet the holy God until his sin has been forgiven, or until he has received remission. The penalty of sin is death, and this penalty is not remitted by anything the sinner can do for himself, but only through the Blood of Jesus. If you have accepted Jesus as your Saviour, you can take the blood of Jesus, and with boldness present it to the Father as payment in full of the penalties of all your sins. Sinful man has no right to the benefits and the beauties and glories of nature. These were all lost to him through Adam's sin, but to the blood of Christ's sacrifice he has a right; it was shed for him. It is Christ's death that does the blessed work of salvation for us. It was not his life nor his Incarnation. His Incarnation could not pay a farthing of our debt, but his blood shed in redeeming love, pays it all." (See Boston Advertiser, Sept. 3, 1881.)

[183:3] Habet ergo Diabolus Christos suos.

[183:4] Huc's Travels, vol. i. pp. 326 and 327.

[184:1] Hinduism, p. 214.

[184:2] Ibid. p. 115.

[184:3] Vishnu Purana, p. 440.

[184:4] Ibid.

[184:5] Ibid.

[184:6] Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 132.

[184:7] Pages 274 and 612.

[184:8] "On reconte fort diversement la mort de Crishna. Une tradition remarquable et avérée le fait périr sur un bois fatal (un arbre), ou il fut cloué d'un coup de flèche." (Quoted by Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 144.)

[185:1] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 499, and Mrs. Jameson's "History of Our Lord in Art," ii. 317, where the cross is called the "accursed tree."

[185:2] Chap. xxi. 22, 23: "If a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance."

[185:3] Galatians, iii. 13.

[185:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 146, and Inman's Ancient Faiths, vol. i. p. 402.

"The crucified god Wittoba is also called Balü. He is worshiped in a marked manner at Pander-poor or Bunder-poor, near Poonah." (Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 750, note 1.)

"A form of Vishnu (Crishna), called Viththal or Vithobā, is the popular god at Pandharpur in Mahā-ráshtrá, the favorite of the celebrated Marāthi poet Tukārāma." (Prof. Monier Williams: Indian Wisdom, p. xlviii.)

[185:5] See Lundy: Monumental Christianity, p. 160.

[185:6] This can be seen by referring to Calmet, Sonnerat, or Higgins, vol. ii., which contain plates representing Crishna.

[186:1] Monumental Christianity, p. 128.

[186:2] Ancient Faiths, vol. i. p. 411.

[186:3] Luke, xxiii. 39-43.

[186:4] Vasudeva means God. See Vishnu Purana, p. 274.

[186:5] Vishnu Purana, p. 612.

[187:1] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 72.

[187:2] "Si ita se res habet, ut existimat Beausobrius, Indi, et Budistæ quorum religio, eadem est ac Tibetana, nonnisi a Manichæis nova hæc deliriorum portenta acceperunt. Hænamque gentes præsertim in urbe Nepal, Luna XII. Badr seu Bhadon Augusti mensis, dies festos auspicaturæ Dei Indræ, erigunt ad illius memoriam ubique locorum cruces amictas Abrotono. Earum figuram descriptam habes ad lit. B, Tabula pone sequenti. Nam A effigies est ipsius Indræ crucifixi signa Telech in fronte manibus pedibusque gerentis." (Alph Tibet, p. 203. Quoted in Higgins' Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 130.)

[188:1] "Ils conviennent qu'il a répandu son sang pour le salut du genre humain, ayant été percé de clous par tout son corps. Quoiqu'ils ne disent pas qu'il a souffert le supplice de la croix, ou en trouve pourtant la figure dans leurs livres." (Quoted in Higgins' Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 118.)

[188:2] "Although the nations of Europe have changed their religions during the past eighteen centuries, the Hindoo has not done so, except very partially. . . . The religious creeds, rites, customs, and habits of thought of the Hindoos generally, have altered little since the days of Manu, 500 years B. C." (Prof. Monier Williams: Indian Wisdom, p. iv.)

[188:3] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. pp. 147, 572, 667 and 750; vol. ii. p. 122, and [note 4], p. 185, this chapter.

[188:4] See Max Müller's Science of Religion, p. 224.

[188:5] Quoted in Lillie's Buddhism, p. 93.

[188:6] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 20.

[188:7] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 20, 25, 85. Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 247. Huc's Travels, vol. i. pp. 326, 327, and almost any work on Buddhism.

[188:8] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 20.

[188:9] Ibid. Johnson's Oriental Religions, p. 604. See also Asiatic Researches, vol. iii., or chapter xii. of this work.

[188:10] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 18.

[188:11] Ibid.

[188:12] Ibid.

[188:13] Vol. i. p. 118.

[189:1] Quoted in Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 118.

[189:2] Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 20.

[189:3] Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 33.

[189:4] Huc's Travels, vol. i. pp. 326, 337.

[189:5] Müller: Hist. Sanscrit Literature, p. 80.

[189:6] See Maurice: Indian Antiquities, vol. v. p. 95, and Williams: Hinduism, p. 214.

[189:7] "He in mercy left paradise, and came down to earth, because he was filled with compassion for the sins and miseries of mankind. He sought to lead them into better paths, and took their sufferings upon himself, that he might expiate their crimes, and mitigate the punishment they must otherwise inevitably undergo." (Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. ii. p. 86.)

"The object of his mission on earth was to instruct those who were straying from the right path, expiate the sins of mortals by his own sufferings, and produce for them a happy entrance into another existence by obedience to his precepts and prayers in his name. They always speak of him as one with God from all eternity. His most common title is 'The Saviour of the World.'" (Ibid. vol. i. p. 247.)

[190:1] Quoted in Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 211.

[190:2] Ibid.

[190:3] See Renouf: Religions of Ancient Egypt, p. 178.

[190:4] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 155.

[190:5] Murray: Manual of Mythology, p. 848.

[190:6] In Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. ii. p. 171. Quoted in Knight's Art and Mythology, p. 71.

[190:7] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 185.

[190:8] See Mysteries of Adoni, p. 88.

[190:9] See Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, p. xxii. note.

[191:1] Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 255.

[191:2] Vol. ii.

[191:3] Lactant. Inst., div. iv. chap. xiii. In Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 544.

[191:4] See [chapter xxxix.] this work.

[191:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 114, and Taylor's Diegesis, p. 163.

[191:6] See the chapter on "[The Resurrection of Jesus]."

[192:1] Chambers's Encyclo., art. "Prometheus."

[192:2] "Prometheus has been a favorite subject with the poets. He is represented as the friend of mankind, who interposed in their behalf when Jove was incensed against them." (Bulfinch: The Age of Fable, p. 32.)

"In the mythos relating to Prometheus, he always appears as the friend of the human race, suffering in its behalf the most fearful tortures." (John Fiske: Myths and Myth-makers, pp. 64, 65.) "Prometheus was nailed to the rocks on Mount Caucasus, with arms extended." (Alexander Murray: Manual of Mythology, p. 82.) "Prometheus is said to have been nailed up with arms extended, near the Caspian Straits, on Mount Caucasus. The history of Prometheus on the Cathedral at Bordeaux (France) here receives its explanation." (Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 113.)

[192:3] See Æschylus' "Prometheus Chained." Translated by the Rev. R. Potter: Harper & Bros., N. Y.

[192:4] Ibid. p. 82.

[193:1] Petræus was an interchangeable synonym of the name Oceanus.

[193:2] "Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying: Be it far from thee, Lord; this shall not be unto thee." (Matt. xvi. 22.)

[193:3] "And there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him." (Luke, xxiii. 27.)

[193:4] See Taylor's Diegesis, pp. 193, 194, or Potter's Æschylus.

[193:5] "They say that the god (Bacchus), the offspring of Zeus and Demeter, was torn to pieces." (Diodorus Siculus, in Knight, p. 156, note.)

[193:6] See Knight: Anct. Art and Mythology, p. 98, note. Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, 258. Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 102.

[193:7] Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, p. xxii. note.

[193:8] Ibid.

[193:9] Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 169.

[193:10] Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 135.

[193:11] Ibid.

[193:12] Beausobre quotes the inscription on a monument of Bacchus, thus: "C'est moi, dit il, qui vous conduis, C'est moi, qui vous conserve, ou qui vous sauve; Je sui Alpha et Omega, &c." (See [chap. xxxix] this work.)

[193:13] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 322. Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 195. Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 152. Dunlap: Mysteries of Adoni, p. 94.

[193:14] See Celtic Druids, Taylor's Diegesis, p. 153, and Montfaucon, vol. i.

[193:15] See Mysteries of Adoni, p. 91, and Higgins: Anac., vol. i. p. 322.

[194:1] See Taylor's Diegesis, p. 153.

[194:2] See the chapter on "[Miracles of Jesus]."

[194:3] See Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 254.

[194:4] See Monumental Christianity, p. 186.

[194:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 15.

[194:6] See Giles: Hebrew and Christian Records, vol. ii. p. 86.

[194:7] See Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 15, and our chapter on [Christian Symbols].

[194:8] This subject will be referred to again in [chapter xxxix].

[194:9] See Dunlap's Spirit Hist., pp. 237, 241, 242, and Mysteries of Adoni, p. 123, note.

[194:10] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 99.

[194:11] See Dunlap's Son of the Man, p. 20.

"According to the most ancient tradition of the East-Iranians recorded in the Zend-Avesta, the God of Light (Ormuzd) communicated his mysteries to some men through his Word." (Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 75.)

[194:12] Wake: Phallism, &c., p. 47.

[195:1] Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. pp. 258, 259.

[195:2] Malcolm: Hist. Persia, vol. i. Ap. p. 494; Nimrod, vol. ii. p. 31. Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 649.

[195:3] Col. i. 26.

[195:4] See Bonwick: Egyptian Belief, p. 102.

[195:5] See Dunlap's Son of the Man, p. 89, marginal note.

[195:6] "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John, i. 1.)

[195:7] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. 69 and 71.

[195:8] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 652.

[195:9] Ibid. vol. i. p. 537.

[195:10] See Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, p. 119. Knight's Ancient Art and Mythology, pp. xxii. and 98. Dunlap's Son of the Man, p. 71, and Spirit History, pp. 183, 205, 206, 249. Bible for Learners, vol. ii. p. 25. Isis Unveiled, vol. ii. pp. 195, 237, 516, besides the authorities already cited.

[196:1] See Bunsen's Bible Chronology, p. 5. Keys of St. Peter, 135. Volney's Ruins, p. 168.

[196:2] Giles: Hebrew and Christian Records, p. 64, vol. ii.

[196:3] Ibid. p. 86, and Taylor's Diegesis, pp. 202, 206, 407. Dupuis: p. 267.

[196:4] Eusebius: Eccl. Hist., lib. 1, ch. iv.

[196:5] See Dunlap's Son of the Man, p. 78.

[196:6] See Ibid. p. 39.

[196:7] Luke, iv. 21.

[196:8] Psalm, cv. 15. The term "an Anointed One," which we use in English, is Christos in Greek, and Messiah in Hebrew. (See Bible for Learners, and Religion of Israel, p. 147.)

[196:9] Matthew, xxiv. 24.

[196:10] Acts, vii. 45; Hebrews, iv. 8; compare Nehemiah, viii. 17.

[197:1] He who, it is said, was liberated at the time of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth.

[197:2] See Bible for Learners, vol. iii. p. 60.

[197:3] Octavius, c. xxix.

[197:4] See Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 116.

[198:1] In his History of the Campaigns of Alexander.

[198:2] See Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 118.

[198:3] Ibid.

[198:4] Apol. c. 16; Ad Nationes, c. xii.

[198:5] See the chapter on "[The Worship of the Virgin]."

[199:1] Ganesa is the Indian God of Wisdom. (See Asiatic Researches, vol. i.)

[199:2] The Ring and circle was an emblem of god, or eternity, among the Hindoos. (See Lundy: Monumental Christianity, p. 87.)

[199:3] The Cobra, or hooded snake, is a native of the East Indies, where it is held as sacred. (See Knight: Anct. Art and Mytho., p. 16, and Fergusson's Tree and Serpent Worship.)

[199:4] Linga denotes, in the sectarian worship of the Hindoos, the Phallus, an emblem of the male or generative power of nature.

[199:5] Iona, or Yoni, is the counterpart of Linga, i. e., an emblem of the female generative power. We have seen that these were attached to the effigies of the Hindoo crucified Saviour, Crishna.

[199:6] Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 130.

[199:7] See Lundy: Monumental Christianity, pp. 253, 254, 255.

[199:8] See Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. pp. 165 and 179.

[200:1] See Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 166.

[200:2] Ibid. p. 162.

[200:3] Ibid. p. 161.

[200:4] Ibid. p. 167.

[200:5] Ibid. p. 167.

[200:6] Ibid. p. 166.

[200:7] Brinton: Myths of the New World, p. 95.

[200:8] See, also, Monumental Christianity, p. 393.

"Once a year the ancient Mexicans made an image of one of their gods, which was pierced by an arrow, shot by a priest of Quetzalcoatle." (Dunlap's Spirit Hist., 207.)

[201:1] Monumental Christianity, p. 393.

[201:2] See [Appendix A].

[201:3] See Monumental Christianity, p. 390, and Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 169.

[201:4] Quoted by Lord Kingsborough: Mexican Antiquities, vol. vi. p. 172.

[202:1] Monumental Christianity, p. 246.

[202:2] History of Our Lord in Art, vol. ii. p. 137.

[202:3] Ibid. p. 317.

[202:4] See Illustrations in Ibid. vol. i.

[202:5] See Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 252. Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. 111, and Monumental Christianity, p. 246, et seq.

[202:6] The paschal lamb was roasted on a cross, by ancient Israel, and is still so done by the Samaritans at Nablous. (See Lundy's Monumental Christianity, pp. 19 and 247.)

"The lamb slain (at the feast of the passover) was roasted whole, with two spits thrust through it—one lengthwise, and one transversely—crossing each other near the fore legs; so that the animal was, in a manner, crucified. Not a bone of it might be broken—a circumstance strongly representing the sufferings of our Lord Jesus, the passover slain for us." (Barnes's Notes, vol. i. p. 292.)

[202:7] See King: The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 138. Also, Monumental Christianity, and Jameson's History of Our Lord in Art, for illustrations.

[203:1] See King's Gnostics, p. 178. Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, p. xxii., and Jameson's History of Our Lord in Art, ii. 340.

[203:2] Jameson: Hist. of Our Lord in Art, p. 340, vol. ii.

[203:3] Quoted in Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, p. xxii. note.

[203:4] Dunlap: Spirit Hist., p. 185.

[203:5] See chapter xvii. and vol. ii. Hist. Hindostan.

[203:6] See Jameson's Hist. of Our Lord in Art, vol. ii. p. 142.

[204:1] "It would be difficult to prove that the cross of Constantine was of the simple construction as now understood. . . . As regards the Labarum, the coins of the time, in which it is especially set forth, prove that the so-called cross upon it was nothing else than the same ever-recurring monogram of Christ" (that is, the XP). (History of Our Lord in Art, vol. ii. p. 310. See also, Smith's Bible Dictionary, art. "Labarum.")

[205:1] Deut. xxiv. 16.

[205:2] Num. xxv. 31-34.

[205:3] Matt. v. 17, 18.

---