صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

lieved it, but have always been as anxious for riches, and as eager to enjoy them as the children of this world. If Jesus really uttered these expressions himself, and gave such directions as are ascribed to him, he has been a morose and unfeeling ascetic, and very inconsistent, for we soon find that he made ample promises of wordly rewards to his followers.

We are expressly told,* that he said to his disciples, that no man who had left house or lands, brethren or sisters, father or mother, wife or children, for his sake, and the gospel's, but he should receive an hundred fold; houses and lands, brethren and sisters, mothers and children, with persecutions: and in the world to come eternal life. What value are we to set upon his condemnation of riches after this ample promise of wordly rewards? It has always been urged as a strong proof of the divine origin of Christianity, that its founder had repressed, and his disciples had renounced, all desire of earthly grandeur and enjoyment; but this promise proves that argument to be very incorrect. This splendid promise to ignorant men, was sufficient to make many converts, and as many enthusiasts; but to the unbeliever, it will suggest several important questions: was the man who left one house, to receive an hundred houses? Was he who left his father and mother, to receive an hundred fathers and mothers? Was he who left his wife and children to receive an hundred wives and children. This promise was sufficient temptation to induce many men to leave their wives and families; for we find, that Peter had left his wife and family, and was strolling about with him, although his mother in-law was lying in the house sick of a fever, and was only cured by a miracle; if it was a proof of holiness to give such an advice, it was no proof of morality in any man to follow it; to leave his property, wife and family, and to stroll about the country. But this promise was not fulfilled to his immediate followers, it was a complete deception to them.

If it is argued in opposition to his own words, that his followers were to receive these hundred fold rewards in a future life, the objections and difficulties are still greater; an hundred houses, an hundred fathers and mothers, and an hundred wives, in the kingdom of heaven! This would surpass the paradise of Mahomed in sensual enjoyments; is it our duty to believe these promises without examination.

Besides these hundred fold rewards in this life, Jesus endeavoured to fill the minds of his followers with notions of greatness and splendour in heaven, sufficiently powerful to make them renounce present pleasure and enjoyment for the hope of it hereafter. He promised to his disciples,‡ that in heaven they should sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel! These magnificent promises were sufficient to make

*

Mark, ch. 10, v. 29, 30.—† Mott. ch. 8, v. 14.- Matt. ch. 19, v. 28.

weak minded ignorant men, complete enthusiasts, they were sufficient to support them through many trials, and great sufferings, to obtain these rewards; but it is a singular account of heaven, that judges are necessary in it. Judges are appointed to decide matters in dispute, and pass sentence on criminals; to punish crime, and relieve oppressed virtue. If Judges are necessary in heaven, the inhabitants are not so happy nor are things so harmonious in it as we have been taught to expect. As Judas was among the disciples when this promise was made he will no doubt insist upon its being fulfilled, when no excep tions were made; which tribe will he judge? And which one will be assigned to Simon the Canaanite?

Jesus made this promise of twelve thrones to his apostles, without hesitation; but when asked for two seats, one on his right hand, and another on his left, in his kingdom, for Zebedee's sons, who where of the twelve, he said, they were not his to give! Why did they ask for seats, when he had promised them thrones ? and how had he power to bestow twelve thrones, when he could not give two seats? This request for Zebedee's sons, involves us in another difficulty, Matthew relates, that it was their mother who came and requested that favour for them; but according to Mark, it was themselves who asked it; this is very unlike truth. Luke and John seem to have known nothing about it.

We no sooner leave one difficulty than we get entangled in another. Matthew relates, that Jesus restored two blind men to sight, near Jericho; but according to Mark|| and Luke,¶it was only one, Mark even gives his name, (Bartimeus, son of Timeus) Matthew and Mark tell us, that he performed this cure as he went away from Jericho, but Luke informs us thathe did it as he came into that city; which of these accounts shall we believe? There is a great difference between healing one man and two, between coming into a city and going away from it.

When Jesus came unto Bethphage, near to Jerusalem,** he sent out two of his disciples to bring him an ass and her colt, on which to ride in procession into the city; they found them tied by a door at the way side, and brought them away in a manner that would now-a-days be thought stealing; and we are not told that they ever returned them. Matthew says, that it was an ass and her colt; but according to Mark‡‡ and Luke,§§ it was only a colt, whereon man never sat. Matthew informs us, that Jesus rode upon them in triumph into Jerusalem! It is strange how he could ride upon an ass and her colt at the same time! Can any man ride upon two asses at once? This was a triumph indeed!

* Matt. ch. 20, v. 23.—† ch. 20, v. 20.-‡ ch. 10, v. 35.—§ ch. 20, v. 34.ch. 10, v. 46.-¶ ch. 18, v. 35.-** Matt. ch. 21. v. 1.—tt ch. 21, v. 7.1 ch. 11. v. 2.-§§ ch. 19, v. 30.

Matthew and John assert, that all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, "Tell ye the daughter of Zion; behold thy king cometh unto thee, meek and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass ;" but both of them have completely disfigured the passage alluded to, and John's quotation from it, is quite different from Matthew's ; neither of them are accurate; and if they had been correct, was this paltry procession fulfilling a prophecy! It was rather acting in imitation of a poetical flourish of Zechariah,* who was predicting happier times for his countrymen. But this event did not fulfil what was predicted; Christ's coming did not them peace and bring protection to the Jews, nor yet procure

happiness.

After Jesus had ridden into the city in triumph, we are told by Matthew and Luke, that he went into the temple and cast the buyers and sellers out of it; but Mark relates,† that he did not cast them out until the next day: according to John's narrative, this transaction was at a different time altogether, when he visited Jerusalem long before. But these authors pay no attention to chronology in their narratives; there is much confusion among them in the order in which they relate events to have taken place; what one relates as transacted at a certain time and place, another inserts in his narrative at a time and place completely different, events which some of them place near the beginning of Christ's ministry, others place near the end of it. This clearing of the temple, and the washing of his head or feet, are instances.

The accounts which they give of his journies, are as discordant as either his words or actions; when one of them has him going to any particular place, another has him at the same time going to one quité different, and engaged in another business.

CHAPTER IV.

Remarks on the testimony concerning Christ's life and sayings, from his arrival at Jerusalem until he was betrayed.

In the evening after his entry into Jerusalem, Jesus went out to Bethany and lodged; and on his way back into the city in the morning, he saw a fig tree afar off, and went to see if there was fruit on it, although it was not the season of fruit;—and he cursed the tree because it had only leaves, at a time when it should have had nothing else! This was very inconsiderate, to go and look for fruit on a tree when it was not the season of fruit; and very tyrannical to curse it for having only leaves,

* Ch. 9, v. 9.-t ch. 11, v. 11, 15.—‡ ch, 2, v. 14.—§ Mark, ch 11, v. 13.

when fruit could not be expected. Are mankind to be dealt with in the same capricious manner?

After Jesus was come again into the temple, and was teaching in it, he delivered a parable to the chief priests and elders, concerning a certain man who planted a vineyard, and put husbandmen in it to keep and dress it, and he sent his servants at the proper season. to receive the fruits of it; but the husbandmen beat some of his servants, and killed others, and likewise his son, meaning to keep possession of the vineyard for themselves. Jesus then put the question to them, what the Lord of the vineyard would do to these husbandmen, Matthew reports, that they answered, he would miserably destroy these wicked men, and let out the vineyard to others. But Mark and Luke both say, that it was Jesus himself who made that answer, and not them; according to Luke, they disapproved of that sentence entirely, and when Jesus pronounced it, they said, God forbid! Which of these accounts is correct? Whether was it Jesus or them who pronounced that sentence? They shift it from one to another as if they were ashamed of it.

After some discourses which Jesus had with the Pharisees and Saducees, we are told that he put them to silence; and both Matthew and Luke say, from that day forth none durst ask him any more questions! But notwithstanding this assertion, we find afterwards, that the High Priest and Council asked him many questions; and so did Pilate and Herod, most of which he did not think it convenient to answer.

Matthew has recorded, that Jesus threatened to bring upon Jerusalem, punishment for all the righteous blood shed upon earth; from the blood of righteor, Abel, unto that of Zacharias, the son of Barachias, whom they slew between the temple and the altar!! The inhabitants of Jerusalem were no doubt cruel and wicked, but they should have got justice; they had good reason to protest against this sentence, as barbarous and unjust; and to urge that it was reckless cruelty to punish them for blood which they never shed, that they ought only to be accountable for their own actions, and punished for their own crimes; that it was injustice to punish them for what their forefathers had done, and horrid injustice to punish them for all the murders which had been committed on the earth. But if this was a part of the just and benevolent plan of visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children, they were condemned already, and it was their duty to submit in silence! Was it the same man who wept over the city with sorrow and affection, that threatened it with these severe punishments? It would have been a stronger proof of love and affection to have

• The story that the tree immediately withered away, deserves neither belief nor attention.

Ch. 21, v. 41.- ch. 22, v. 46.-8 ch. 20, v. 40.-|| ch. 23, v. 35.

reformed the people at once, and kept them from evil, than to let them go on in wickedness and punish them after. If he came to seek and save the lost sheep of the house of Israel, he did not execute his commission.

The gross and absurd comparisons to which Jesus likens the kingdom of heaven,* will be examined afterwards, when considering what himself and his followers have taught, concerning the rewards and punishments in a future state; but we may observe, that if these parables are correct likenesses of heaven, it is filled and governed in a very capricious manner. The punishments of hell, as described by him, are also cruel and tyrannical; they form the ground work of these horrible descriptions, which vitiated the temper and disposition of Christians for many centuries, and made them completely savage.As the rewards of heaven, and the punishments of hell, cannot be exhibited to view, nor demonstrated for truth, the descriptions of them have varied in different ages, according to the spirit of the times; but they have always been represented as extravagant and cruel, consequently, instead of deterring men from wickedness, they have been the fertile source of cruelty and crime.

We have some remarkable prophecies related at this time, which deserve our most serious consideration: Jesus having foretold the destruction of the temple,† his disciples asked him to tell them when these things should be, and what the sign of his coming, and of the end of the world? He then proceeds to foretel of wars and rumours of wars; of nation rising against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and of famines, pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

This prediction could scarcely fail to be accomplished in any age of the world; but though there has always been enough of wars, famine, and pestilence, yet eighteen centuries after the time of this prophecy, there is no sign of his coming, nor yet of the end of the world, although he said it was then at the doors. But if Jesus had all power both in heaven and on earth, why did he not prevent these wars, famines, pestilences, and earthquakes, in which the innocent often suffer more than the guilty, the just more than the unjust? If these are the signs of his coming, few will have reason to wish for it, and if he was so anxious for peace as his worshippers represent, why did he not during the course of his ministry, forbid wars and fighting, and convince mankind of the wickedness and cruelty of butchering one another for the caprice of tyrants? He did not give an exhortation on the subject to either rulers or people. Why did he spend so much of his time on trifles, and pay no attention to this very important matter? There is no part of men's conduct that ever stood more in need of correction and reformation

*ch. 20, 22.- Matt. ch. 24, v. 2.

« السابقةمتابعة »