CHAPTER SECOND.

AN INVESTIGATION CONCERNING CERTAIN PARTICULARS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO BE MADE PREVIOUS TO MAKING A FAIR ISSUE, UPON WHICH THE QUESTION OF THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE REVELATIONS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTURES CAN ONLY BE DETERMINED.

WE commenced the subject of the investigation of the credibility of the Scriptures in the preceding chapter, with the remark, that it was virtually an undertaking to appreciate the purposes and proceedings of the Creator of the Universe, for which we have no other data or foundation than the deductions we may make from his visible works.

As we there shewed, it was impossible for mankind as intelligent creatures, not to come to some conclusion on this subject; it was also shewn to be essential that they should comprehend the imperfection or limitations of their intellectual faculties, to the end that they should not undertake to determine upon any subject that transcends their actual capacities. I also pointed out the most prominent causes of erroneous modes of human reasoning, and the most effectual means that we could take in order to avoid making either presumptuous or false conclusions.

Having said all that was deemed necessary on those particulars, we must now make an enquiry as to what mankind have been able to conclude hitherto on the subject of the nature, attributes and purposes of the Creator of all things, as deducible from an examination of His works; for such is the only means by which we can possibly institute a comparison between the scheme of Scripture revelations and any other scheme or hypothesis with which it may be contrasted.

All the attempts of mankind during the last two or three thousand years to determine on the nature, attributes, proceedings and purposes of the Creator of all things, have essentially led to but three conclusions: that of theists, the atheists, and the sceptics.

It would be unnecessary to specify the various arguments and inferences by which the advocates of these different conclusions sustain them. All that is requisite will be to give a summary of their results, as systematic expositions, in order to compare them with each other, or with the scheme on which the revelations contained in Scripture has been promulgated. Or to still more simplify the principle by which such comparison may be made, we shall consider the subject now before us as a problem which requires for its solution that the three subjects of GOD, the EARTH, and MANKIND,* shall be brought into harmonious consistency with each other.

By this means it will be distinctly seen how far any philosophic or theological system is able to establish the essentially necessary harmony of these three subjects with each other, which is the only test by which we can determine the greater probability of one scheme or hypothesis than another.

We may reasonably assume that atheism, in its systematic form, must have originated posterior to some form or other of theism. Mankind may have been originally without any ideas whatever of God, or of religious obligation; but such a condition is simply one of mere ignorance. A formal denial of the existence of a Creator and his superintendence of mundane things, such as is made by atheists, could only have ensued to some form of theism.

As to how theism may have originated among mankind, we shall assume nothing; for any conjecture as to its origin would virtually be a begging of the question. The Bible purports to give us such information as an asserted revelation from the Creator of all things. But the very object of our investigation is to ascertain whether the statements of the Scriptures are to be received or rejected.

Therefore, since we have no common admission among men as

• As these words in their abstract signification may not be clearly appreciated, we think it proper to make the following remarks:

GOD, comprehends all ideas of his eternal existence, omnipotence, omniscience, and his other infinite attributes, as also his purposes and providence.

MAN, comprehends all the phenomena implicated in human existence. Our origin, our physical and intellectual organization, the foundations for religious belief, the phenomena of our moral and intellectual developments, and the ultimate conditions of our being.

The EARTH, comprehends the phenomena pertaining to it in all its various conditions and productions.

to how religious belief originated, we have no alternative but to take up the theory of theism as it has been elaborated by its defenders, and impartially estimate the true value of the arguments adduced in its favor, as contrasted with the value of the objections urged against it.

It would be wholly unnecessary to our purpose to make any specifications of the modifications of the different schemes of theism that have prevailed at various periods of human history. It will be sufficient to comprehend them all under an abstract view of certain fundamental dogmas or assumptions, which, according to the estimation of philosophers or theologians, enter into the. construction of all schemes of religious belief. For notwithstanding the many capricious and inconsistent details involved in the various forms of heathenism, they all distinctly recognize certain fundamental principles, which are common to them all. In other words, all schemes of Theism assert there is a God or Gods, the creators or organizers of the universe in all its parts and productions. The supreme or superior Gods are ordinarily assumed to be characterized by omniscience, omnipotence, wisdom, and other excellent attributes, and that they either directly or indirectly superintend all mundane affairs, both by a special and general providence. It is also commonly recognized that there are other deities or spirits, whether of a superior or subordinate character, who delight in evil and mischief.* Theism also infers that the human soul is immortal, and that it shall hereafter be either rewarded or punished, according to its works during the present life. Hence the necessary belief of the future localities of heaven and hell, where the righteous shall enjoy either a temporary or everlasting happiness, while the wicked shall suffer punishment or misery, either under certain limitations of time or else forever.

Such being the abstract theory of all forms of theism, let us now ascertain what are the evidences to justify its belief, independent of the authority of any asserted revelation from God on the subject.

The grand argument of theism is the apparently admirable organization with which all discernable things are constructed,

All heathen religious systems but those of the Greeks and Romans recognize the existence of some deity or deities as being inherently evil or malicious. This remarkable exception, I apprehend, arose from the circumstance that the Greeks and Romans regarded their Gods as being influenced by all the caprice and perverseness of human nature, and hence there was no necessity to refer evil and misfortune to an independent malignant principle.

exhibiting an exquisite adaptation of contrivances of every kind suitable to the conditions of the various creatures that exist on the surface of our globe. From these facts, and from the permanency of the laws by which the visible universe has been sustained from age to age, the theists assert we have abundant evidence to infer that the material universe and all that it contains has been created and is continually superintended by a being or beings of infinite intelligence and power, who they denominate God, or Gods.

This fundamental position of theism its advocates have sustained with such an amount of forcible illustrations and judicious reasoning, that the large majority of intellectual men, in every age, have professed themselves to be so entirely convinced of its correctness, that they ordinarily assume any other conclusion on the subject to be irrational.

But that the Gods exercise a superintending providence over mundane things, the theists have never been able to establish on any reasonable grounds. To assume that the harmony and permanency of those laws by which the universe is apparently regulated, constitutes proof also of a divine superintendence or providence, is a direct begging of the question. For even if it were admitted that the material universe has been made by the Gods, such admission will not determine whether they also superintend it by an immediate providence, or whether the existing phenomena of things are not the necessary results of laws impressed on the world from its beginning, and which the Gods ever since have abandoned to its own phenominal operations.

As to the question of special providences, i. e., a divine superintendence over individual persons or things, the doctrine of the theists is still more deficient as to the value of the evidence they offer. The ordinary assertion that virtue and piety are rewarded and that vice and immorality are punished in this life, cannot be maintained. For it has been the universal remark, in every age of the world, that the most unprincipled and irreligious of men often attain to the possession of every object of ambition, wealth, and external gratification, that human life affords, and who, after a long life of prosperity, sink quietly into the grave without having experienced any marks of the displeasure of the Gods. At the same time it is equally undeniable that the virtuous and excellent have often endured the greatest privations and afflictions, and sometimes they have been grievously oppressed and persecuted. In every age of human history this has not only been the case

with individuals, but the welfare and happiness of mankind in general has been continually destroyed in the conflicts of unprincipled kings or states, in the tumults and rebellions of ambitious chieftains, and by the cruel acts of individuals towards their fellows in every class or condition of men, from the highest to the lowest.

As regards the subject of a state of being after death, which is also a fundamental dogma of theism, it is unsustained by any evidence whatever either as to the separate existence of a soul, or that it survives the dissolution of the body,* and consequently the remaining doctrine of theism of future reward or punishment, necessarily falls to the ground for want of this supporting principle.

If we now review what has been said upon the various dogmas pertaining to the abstract theory of theism, we shall find that the only one that is sustained by a reasonable amount of argumentative deduction, is the apparent admirable design and contrivance which seemingly characterises all forms of matter, or of organized beings, and the harmonious operation of those laws by which the phenomena of things have been maintained in permanency of condition during all past ages of recorded history.

Allowing the full force to which the above conclusion of abstract theism is entitled, we must admit at the same time, that its other dogmas are not only unsustainable for want of evidence, but that the history of our world exhibits such an amount of unpunished crime, unrewarded virtue, and universal unhappiness, that it is seemingly impossible for the theists to meet the objection of the atheists. These forcibly urge the question, how can there possibly be Gods possessing infinite wisdom, goodness, and power, who over-rule the affairs of this world, according to the assumptions of the theists, when no mere wise or good man, in all his imperfections, would allow a condition of things to exist such as the history of our world has exhibited in every age and country of which we possess any account.

"As to the great question what becomes of man after death," Macauley (Miscel. iii. 322) says, "we do not see that a highly educated European left to his unassisted reason, is more likely to be in the right than a Blackfoot Indian. Not a single one of the many sciences in which we surpass the Blackfoot Indians, throws the smallest light on the state of the soul after animal life is extinct. In truth all the philosophers, ancient and modern, who have attempted without the help of revelation to prove the immortality of man, from Plato down to Franklin, appear to us to have failed deplorably."'