  As the Old Testament possesses no order, no arrangement, and no distinct system of either morals or religion, and no regular connection in its history, we have to treat it in the same unsystematic order in which we find it, and to expose many foolish errors and stories which seem almost beneath the dignity of any respectable writer to notice. But, as they constitute a large portion of the Old Testament, we have got to deal with them or nothing. And, although trifling in themselves, they have done much mischief. Hence we deem it of greater importance to expose their evil influence than to trace them to their heathen origin, as we originally designed doing. 1. The first text in the Bible is evidently an error. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen. 1). No geologist and philosopher at the present day believes in either a creation or a creator. The assumption involves two impossibilities. First, a creation could not take place without something to create from: "Ex nihilo nihil fit,"—"Out of nothing nothing can come." Second, to account for the origin of the earth, sun, moon, and stars, by assuming the existence of a creator, is throwing no light on the subject. We have made no progress towards solving the problem; for we are equally puzzled to account for the origin of the creator himself. It is as easy to assume that matter always existed as to assume that the creator always existed. Hence there would be no creation possible, and none needed. This is now regarded as a settled scientific problem. 2. It is a scientific error to assert that matter had a beginning, as the Bible assumes. Many scientific facts have been developed to establish the conclusion that all beings and objects on earth were eliminated from its elements, and all the planets we can recognize were an outgrowth from some other worlds. The proposition is not only susceptible of much proof (which I have not space here to present), but is very beautiful and satisfactory. It "composes our reason to peace." All we lack of comprehending it is the capacity to grasp eternity and infinity, which finite mortals cannot do. 3. If God "created the heavens" (Gen. i. 1), and heaven is his "dwelling-place" (see 1 Kings viii. 30), then where did he dwell before the heavens were made? Here is a very puzzling question, and involves an absurdity equal to that of the Tonga-Islanders, who teach that the first goose was hatched from an egg, and that the same goose laid the egg. An idea equally ludicrous is involved in the assumption that God created the heavens and the earth about six thousand years ago; so that, previous to that era, there was nothing on which he could stand, sit, or lie, but must have been suspended in mid-air from all eternity. 4. If nothing existed prior to six thousand years ago, then there was nothing for God to do, and nothing for him to do it with. Hence he must have spent an eternity in idleness, a solitary monarch without a kingdom. 5. As we are told God created the light (Gen. i. 3), the conclusion is forced upon us, that, prior to that period, he had spent an eternity in darkness. And it has been discovered that all beings originating in a state of darkness, or living in that condition, were formed without eyes, as is proved by blind fishes being found in dark caves. Hence the thought is suggested, that God, prior to the era of creation (six thousand years ago), was perfectly blind. 6. "God saw the light that it was good" (Gen. i. 4). Hence we must infer that God had just got his eyes open, and that he had never before discovered that light is good. Of course it was good to be delivered from eternal darkness. 7. "And God divided the light from the darkness" (Gen. i. 4). Hence, previous to that period, they must have been mixed together. Philosophy teaches that light and darkness never can be separated, any more than heat and cold, as one is only a different degree of the other. 8. "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night" (Gen. i. 5). And to whom did he call them? as no living being was in existence until several days afterwards. Hence there was no need of calling them any thing, and, as we are told Adam named every thing, he could as easily have found names for these as for other things. 9. The Bible teaches us that day and night were created three days before the sun. Every school-boy now knows that it is the revolution of the earth upon its axis that causes day and night; and, but for the existence of the sun, there could be no day and night. If Moses' God was so ignorant, he had better never have wakened out of his eternity of darkness. 10. The Bible teaches that the earth came into existence three days before the sun; but science teaches us that the earth is a child or offshoot of the sun. Hence it could be equally true to say a son was born three days before his father. 11. "And the earth was without form, and void" (Gen. i. 2); but philosophy teaches that nothing can exist without form, or when void. The declaration brings to mind the Scotchman's definition of "nothing,"—"a footless stocking without a leg." We have an idea of a thing which does not exist. 12. "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters" (Gen. i. 2). Here we are taught that the original state of the earth was that of water. But geology teaches its original constituents was fire or fusion; that water did not exist, and could not exist, in it, or on it, for millions of ages. Professor Agassiz says our earth was once in a state of igneous fusion, without water, without rain, and even without an atmosphere ("Geological Sketches," i. 2). And even the pious, God-fearing Hugh Miller says that "the solid earth was at one time, from center to circumference, a mass of molten matter" ("Lectures on Geology," 256). Here we have geology against theology. 13. God spent a day making a firmament, by which he "divided the waters from the waters." If it had then stated that he spent a day in making moonshine, or one day in making breath for Adam, it would have been as sensible; for the firmament is as truly a part of the earth (being eliminated from it) as our breath is a part of our bodies. 14. "Divided the waters from the waters." Here is disclosed a belief which prevailed in various Oriental and heathen nations, that the earth exists between two large lakes, or sheets of water; and that the firmament is a solid floor, which holds the water up, and prevents it from falling, and inundating the earth; and, being supplied with doors and windows, when God wants it to rain he opens the windows (the Bible says "the windows of heaven were opened," see Gen. vii. 11). He pours it down by opening the windows, and stops it by shutting them up. "The windows of heaven were stopped" (Gen. viii. 2). How fully is the heathen tradition disclosed here! 15. We are told that God gathered "the waters under heaven together unto one place" (Gen. i. 9). How ignorant he must have been of geography! He evidently had not studied the science, or had not traveled much, or he would have known the waters under heaven never have been "gathered together unto one place," but exist in many places, as the two hundred large lakes prove. 16. The Bible tells us, that, when God created the vegetable kingdom, he ordered each species of vegetation to "bring forth after its kind" (Gen. i. 11). Can we suppose that apple-trees would have borne buckeyes, or mullein-stalks produced pumpkins, or any thing foreign to their nature, if the command had not been given for each to bring forth after its kind? 17. According to the Bible, the vegetable kingdom was created before the animal; but the learned geologist Hitchcock, although a Christian by profession, in his "Elements of Geology" says, "An examination of the rocks shows us that animals were created as early as vegetables" (and he might have said much earlier). And yet the Bible says vegetables were created on the third day, and animals on the fifth (see Gen. i.). 18. The Bible represents vegetables as coming into existence before the sun, but philosophy teaches that they could neither germinate nor grow without the warming and vivifying influence of the sun. 19. The Bible tells us that "God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; and God set them in the firmament to give light to the earth" (Gen. i. 16, 17). That is, he made two round balls, and then stuck them into a hole scooped out of the firmament for the purpose. This seems to be the idea. Here is disclosed the most egregious ignorance of astronomy. Think of that stupendous solar luminary, as much larger than this pygmy planet as a man is larger than a mouse, being hung up or stuck up above us for our sole accommodation! How sublimely ridiculous! 20. The Bible represents the great world-builder, the almighty-, architect, as spending five days in plodding and toiling at this little mole-hill of ours before he got it finished up to his notion, and then made such a bad job of it that he repented for having undertaken it. 21. But when he came to make the countless worlds, the vast suns, and systems of suns, which roll their massive forms in every direction around the earth, these were all made in a few hours. "And he made the stars also." This text tells the whole story of the origin of the boundless planetary system, comprising millions of worlds larger than our planet. What superlative ignorance of astronomy Moses' God manifests! 22. Moses is awarded great credit by Bible believers for opposing polytheism, and teaching the existence of but one God: but it would have been more to his credit if he had stuck to a belief in a plurality of Gods; for it would take a million of such Gods as his imagination has created a thousand years to make such a universe as astronomers have brought to light since he wrote. 23. The language, "Let us make man in our own image" (Gen. 1. 26), seems to imply that there was an association of gods,—a company of almighty mechanics, who had formed a copartnership to do up a big job. 24. If man was made in the image of God, why was he cursed for eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge in order to be like God? 25. According to the Bible, God became so tired in the business of world-making that he had to take a rest of a whole day (and perhaps took a nap also) when the job was completed; but geology and philosophy both teach that creation never was begun, and never will be finished, but is going on all the time. Hence new species of animals and vegetables are constantly coming into existence. 26. The Bible represents the entire universe as being created less than six thousand years ago; but science teaches us that it has been in existence for millions of years. 27. A large volume of scientific facts has been accumulated by scientists, showing that even our earth, one of the youngest of the planets, is at least several hundred thousand years old. Look at a few of the facts which go to prove it. The coral reefs of Florida are estimated by Professor Agassiz to be one hundred and thirty-five thousand years old. Charles Lyell estimates the delta of the Mississippi Valley to be at least one hundred thousand years old. Four growths of cypress-trees far below the surface of the ground, and situated one above another, have been discovered near New Orleans, whose successive growths must have occupied a period of at least one hundred and fifty thousand years. So much for the agreement of geology and Bible chronology. 28. But we are told that a day in the Bible means a thousand years. Then, as the sabbath day constitutes one of the days spoken of in the Bible, and was provided as a day of rest, Christians and Bible believers should rest a thousand years at a time; and, as God rested a whole day (a thousand years), he must have been as tired of resting as he was of world-making. Why do the figures "4004 B.C." stand at the top of the first page of the Bible, if a thousand years mean one day? 29. The Bible teaches that whales, fishes, and birds were made on the same day; but geology assures us that fishes came into existence long before fowls. 30. The Bible teaches that beasts and creeping, things were all made on the fifth day of creation; but geology tells us that reptiles and creeping things crawled upon the earth millions of years before beasts came into existence. 31. The Bible represents man as coming into existence about six thousand years ago; but human bones have recently been discovered in the vicinity of New Orleans which Dr. Dowler estimates to be at least fifty thousand years old. 32. A deity who becomes so tired and physically exhausted with six days' labor as to be compelled to stop and rest, physiology teaches would be liable to physical disease; and, if physically diseased, it might terminate in death, and thus leave the world without a God (Godless). 33. The Bible tells us "the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground" (Gen. ii. 7); but philosophy teaches that dust possesses no vital properties, and that it would have been less difficult to make man of a stone or a stump, owing to their possessing more adhesive properties. One writer suggests that the negro must have been made of coal-dust. 34. According to the Bible, a serious blunder was made by Jehovah in the work of creation, by exhausting all the materials in the process of world-making and man-making, so that nothing was left to make a "helpmeet" for Adam; and this blunder caused the necessity of robbing Adam of one of his ribs. 35. But common sense teaches us that a small crooked bone but a few ounces in weight could not furnish half the material necessary to constitute a woman. The Parsees, with a little more show of sense, tell us that the rib was used merely as a back-bone, around which the woman was constructed; which revives in memory Erin's mode of making cannon, which consisted in "taking a round hole, and pouring melted metal around it." The Tonga-Islanders have a tradition about as sensible as that of Moses with respect to the origin of the first woman. Their God made the first man with three legs, and amputated one of them to make a "helpmeet for him?" This is an improvement, as a leg can be better spared when there are three than a rib: it also possesses more material than a rib. 36. The Bible teaches that man was created upright, but fell. If it means physically, it can be easily accounted for, and must be ascribed to his creator; for depriving him of one of his ribs would leave him in an unbalanced condition, so that he would be liable to fall. 37. The Bible imparts to us the strange intelligence that "the Lord God brought all the beasts and birds to Adam to see what he would call them" (Gen. ii. 19). What an idea for Omniscience or Infinite Wisdom to engage in the business of chasing bears, lions, tigers, elephants, and hyenas, and all manner of beasts great and small, and all manner of birds, also hissing, crawling, biting reptiles, and every living thing which he had created, and taking them to Adam "to see what he would call them"! Not having sufficient intelligence to find names for them himself (pardon the thought), his curiosity was no doubt aroused to see what an ignorant being of his own creation, who had not sufficient intelligence to clothe himself, would call the innumerable host of beasts, birds, &c., before any language was known, or even a single letter was invented to spell names with. (We are very far from desiring to wound the feelings or encroach upon the reverence that any man or woman may cherish for "a God of infinite love, wisdom, and goodness;" but let it be kept constantly in mind we are not presenting the history of such a being here, but the mere imaginary God of Moses and the Bible.) 38. As the Bible teaches that Adam named all the beasts, animals, and birds, it must have occupied a great number of years for the Lord God of Moses to have caught and taken the several hundred thousand species to Adam to receive names in all the three thousand languages, and then convey them back to their respective climates. 39. The question naturally arises, Why should Adam give them names by saying, "This is a horse, that is an ass, the animal yonder shall be called a hippopotamus," &c., when there was nobody present to hear it and be benefited by it? And nobody could have remembered half the names had they been present. Here we wish to call the attention of the reader specially to the fact that all the thoughts and language we have so far cited as being either that of God or Moses sounds like the utterance of ignorant children, and unworthy the dignity of an intelligent and sensible man much less that of a God. 40. The Bible teaches that "God made man in his own image." The reverse statement would have been true, "Man made God in his own image;" for this is true of all nations who believe in a God. 41. Here let it be noted the Bible contains two contradictory accounts of creation; one found in the first chapter of Genesis, the other in the second. In the first, animals are created before man; in the second, after man. 42. The first chapter of Genesis says, "Let the earth bring forth plants" (Gen. i. 11): the second says, "God created every plant... before it was in the earth" (Gen. ii. 9). A contradiction; and neither statement is true, there being no creation. 43. The first chapter has the earth created several days before the firmament, or heaven: the second chapter has it created on the same day (Gen. ii. 4). 44. The first represents fowls as originating in the water (Gen. i. 20): the second has them created out of the water. 45. After the first chapter says "God created man in his own image" (Gen. i. 27), the second says "there was not a man to till the ground" (Gen. ii. 4). 46. The first chapter represents man and woman as being created at the same time (Gen. i. 27): the second represents the woman as being created after the man. 47. The first implies that man has dominion over the whole earth: the second restricts his dominion to a garden. Which is the inspired story of creation? 48. The Mexicans claim that the first man and woman were created in their country. The Hindoos aver that the original progenitors of the race (Adimo and Iva) first made their appearance amongst them. The Chinese claim a similar honor. The Persians contend that God landed the first human pair in the land of Iran. And, finally, the Jews affirm that Jehovah created the first pair in Eden. THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE AND THE TREE OF LIFE.Moses tells us God planted two trees in Eden, one of which he called "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." This tree bore fruit which nobody was allowed to taste (Gen. ii. 9). 49. Why the tree was planted, or why its fruit was forbidden to be used, are problems which the Bible does not solve, and which set reason at defiance. 50. And then it looks like a senseless act to create a tree for the purpose of bearing fruit (as we can conceive of no other purpose for which it could have been created), and then decree that it should all go to waste. 51. It was worse still to create human beings with an appetite for this fruit, and place it in their sight, and then forbid them to taste it on penalty of death. Nothing could be more opposed to our ideas of reason and justice. 52. Did God create beings in his own image, and then treat them as if he wished to tantalize them and render them unhappy? 53. It would seem that he created man for no other purpose than to tease and torment him, and quarrel with him. 54. Common sense would suggest it to be the act of an ignoramus or a tyrant to implant in man the desire to eat fruit which he did not allow him to eat. 55. And would it not be unjust to punish Adam and Eve for doing what he himself had implanted in them the desire to do? 56. God must have known they would eat the fruit, if he were omniscient. 57. If he were not omniscient, he was not a God in a supreme or divine sense. 58. God must have had the power without the will to prevent the act of disobedience, which would make him an unjust and unmerciful tyrant. 59. Or else the will without the power, which would make him a weak and frail being, and not a God. (For a full elucidation of these points, see chapter sixty-nine.) We will notice a few other points. 60. As God declared eating the fruit would make Adam "like one of us," that is, Godlike (and all men are enjoined to become Godlike), was not Adam, therefore, justified in eating the fruit in order to become Godlike? 61. In chapter sixty-nine it is shown, that, as Adam and Eve got their eyes open by eating the inhibited fruit, the act of disobedience turned out to be a great blessing, inasmuch as it saved the earth from being filled with a race of blind human beings. 62. And, as this blessing was obtained through the agency of the serpent-devil, we must admit "the father of lies" was a great benefactor of the human race, as shown in chapter sixty-nine. 63. As Adam could not very well exercise "dominion over every living thing that moveth upon the earth" (Gen. i. 26) while shut up in a little eight-by-ten garden, we can observe here another practical benefit of the act of disobedience which drove him from the garden. 64. Is it not a strange piece of moral incongruity to set Adam to tilling the soil in the garden as a blessing, and then doom him to till it outside as a curse? (Gen. iii. 23.) He first embarked in the business as a blessing, and then as a curse. How the same act could be both a blessing and a curse is a "mystery of godliness" which swamps us. 65. The Jews tell us the original tempter was a serpent (Gen. iii. 1); The Mexicans say it was a demon; the Hindoos call him a snake; the Greeks declare it was a dragon; Josephus supposes it was an ape; some of the East-India sects speak of him as a fish; but the Persian revelations make it a lizard. Which is right? 66. The Mosaic or Hebrew cosmogony represents the serpent as dealing out the fruit to the genus homo; while the Mexicans, the Egyptians, and the Persians set the serpent or "evil genius" to guarding the tree to protect the fruit. Which is right? 67. When God Jehovah announced to the trinity of Gods, "Behold, the man has become as one of us to know good and evil" (Gen. iii. 22), exactly as the serpent had predicted, instead of dying as Jehovah had predicted, does it not prove that the serpent was the best and most reliable prophet? 68. As Adam and Eve could know nothing of the nature of right and wrong until they attained that knowledge by eating the fruit, does not this fact prove it to be a justifiable if not a righteous act? 69. How could Adam and Eve know that any act was sinful before an act of any kind had been committed by which they could learn the character or consequences of human conduct? 69. Is it not a logical conclusion, that, if God created every thing, he can control every thing, and hence, strictly speaking, is alone responsible for the right performance of every thing? 70. The Christian Bible tells us the first pair of human beings sewed fig-leaves together for clothing; but the Chinese revelation say palm-leaves. Which is right? Who can tell? 71. As it is declared the voice of God was heard "walking in the garden" (Gen. iii. 8), we beg leave to ask, what kind of a thing is a "walking voice"? 72. We also beg leave to ask, who took charge of "the house of many mansions" while Jehovah was down among the bushes hunting and hallooing for Adam? 72. And who took charge of creation, and kept the machinery of the universe running during the thousand years' rest of God Almighty, if the one day he rested means a thousand years? 73. Was it necessary for an omnipresent God to come down from heaven to find Adam when he hid among the bushes? And what would have been the result if he had not been found? 74. Must we not conclude that the command to "multiply and replenish the earth" was rather superfluous, inasmuch as nations who never heard of the command perform the duty faithfully? 75. If the River Gihon, one of the four rivers of Paradise, "encompassed the whole land of Ethiopia" (Gen. ii. 13), which is in Africa, how did it manage to cross the Red Sea, so as to get into Eden, which is in Asia? 111. As Bishop Colenso shows the territory lying between the four rivers in Eden, as mentioned in Gen. ii. comprised an area of several hundred miles, we would suggest that father Adam, while in Eden, had rather a large garden to cultivate. 112. How could fig-leaves be sewed together for clothing before needles were invented? (see Gen. iii. 7.) 113. How did Eve see the tree as stated in Genesis ("she saw the tree") before she ate the fruit which caused her eyes to be opened? 114. Is it not calculated to destroy all ideas of justice in the minds of man and woman to believe that God cursed and ruined the happiness of the whole human race merely for one simple act prompted by a being destitute of moral perception or moral accountability? 115. And what should we think of a being who would suffer a grand scheme, on which is predicated the happiness of his innumerable family for untold ages, to be defeated by the wily machinations of a brainless creature of his own creation? 116. Why should Adam hide from God because he was naked, when, if God made him, he must have become accustomed to seeing him in that condition? 117. If God in the morning pronounced every thing good, and in the evening every thing bad, does it not imply not only a serious blunder in the job, but a serious mistake in his views either in the morning or in the evening? 118. As we are told "the Lord God made clothing for Adam out of goat-skins," the question naturally arises, Who caught and killed the animals, and dressed the skins? Does it not imply that God was both a butcher and a tanner? Rather plebeian employment for a God. 119. And the statement that "the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden" (Gen. ii. 8) seems to imply that he was a horticulturist also. 120. It is pretty hard to believe that Adam could sleep while God Almighty (Moses' God) was digging amongst his ribs, as stated in Gen. ii. 21. 121. How could Adam know what the word "die" meant before there had been any deaths in the world, when the Lord told him he should die if he ate the forbidden fruit? 122. As Eve was pronounced "the mother of all living" when there were no human beings in existence but she and Adam, the inference seems to be that she was the mother of herself, her husband, and all the animal tribes. 123. "In the image of God created he them" (Adam and Eve, see Gen. i. 27). If Adam and Eve were both created in the image of God, it would seem to follow that he was constituted of two genders, male and female. In concluding this section, we ask the reader to think of an infinitely wise God being defeated in his grand scheme of creation or salvation by a crawling serpent, and a frightful hell and all its horrors originating from this act. How sublimely ridiculous is the thought! II. THE SCIENTISTS ACCOUNT OF CREATION.1. Millions of years ago the sun in its revolution threw off, as it had done on previous occasions, a sort of fire-mist, or nebulous scintillations, which floated and rolled through space for countless ages, gradually accumulating from the atmosphere in its revolution, thus swelling in size until it became a conglomeration of gas; and, continuing to grow and progress, it ripened into a fiery, liquid mass possessing the most intense heat. 2. After innumerable ages this fiery liquid mass began to cool, and finally formed a crust upon its surface. 3. As its interior elements began to evolve or emanate from its bosom, it formed a dense, heavy, murky atmosphere, almost as heavy as water, in which no living thing could have breathed or lived for a moment. 4. This atmosphere contained moisture, which in the course of time became condensed into globules forming drops, which descended to the earth in the shape of rain. 5. This rain, descending to the earth, cooled its surface, and eventually filled its vast cavities with water, and thus formed lakes, seas, and oceans. The boiling, heaving mass in the bowels of the earth made it very irregular in shape. 6. As soon as the surface of the earth became sufficiently cool, small swellings began to appear upon its surface, presenting the appearance of blisters, or boils. These outgrowths finally began to exhibit vegetable life; but for a long period of time they presented the appearance of rocks or stones. 7. In the mean time the washings from the surface of the earth were deposited in the seas and oceans, and, sinking to the bottom, in the course of time formed rocks. 8. These rocks, as they hardened, gave off an element of life, which in the course of time supplied the waters with various forms of animal or finny life, and thus originated mollusks, fishes, &c. 9. As the surface of the earth cooled and grew thicker, the elements of life diffused through the liquid mass finally made their appearance on the surface in the character of the lowest forms of vegetable life? such as mosses, lichens, ferns, &c. 10. As the surface of the earth thickened, and consequently accumulated the elements of vitality gave forth higher and still higher forms of vegetable life, finally the most matured forms of matter began to exhibit animal life. 11. The first species was the zoophite, a compound of vegetable and animal life, but possessing scarcely any of the functions of animal life except those of absorption and respiration, and these functions were but slightly manifested. 12. Succeeding the zoophite came the mollusks and various hard-shelled animal forms, which at first clung to the rocks, then fed on seaweeds and other vegetable substances, absorbing also from the atmosphere. 13. In this way various species of animals and birds and reptiles sprang up, ran their course, and then perished, to give place to higher forms. 14. And finally, when all the elements of life became sufficiently matured, they formed a combination, and turned loose upon the earth the animal man, who at first was nearly as ugly, clumsy, and awkward as a baboon, possessed of but little more sense or intelligence. 15. Each one of these changes and outgrowths of the new forms of vegetable and animal life constituted an epoch of innumerable ages, thus showing the age of our planet to be beyond computation. We submit to the reader whether this is not a more rational, beautiful, and satisfactory solution of the great problem of mineral, vegetable, animal, and human existence, than the jumbled-up medley presented by Moses.
|
|
