CHAP. III.

CHAP. III.ON THE MEANING OF THE WORDRELIGION; HOW, AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE, SO MANY RELIGIONS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED INTO THE WORLD.§ 1.Before the termReligionwas introduced into the world, mankind followed the law of Nature, that is, they lived conformably to Reason. Instinct was the only bond by which men were united; and this bond, simple as it is, was so strong that divisions were rare. But after terror led them to suspect that there were Gods and invisible Powers, they built altars to the imaginary beings, and shaking off the yoke of reason and of Nature, they bended themselves by foolish ceremonies, and by a superstitious worship of the idle phantoms which themselves had imagined.Such was the origin of the wordReligion, which has made so much noise in the world. After having admitted the existence of these invisible Agencies, men worshipped them to depreciate their anger, and moreover they believed that nature was under the control of these Powers. Afterwards they came to regard themselves as inert matter, or as slaves who could only act under the commands of these imaginary beings. This false idea having obtained possession of their minds, they began to exhibit more contempt for nature, and more respect for those whom they called their Gods. Hence sprung that ignorance in which so many nations were immersed—an ignorance from which, however profound, the true philosophers might have freed them, ifthey had not been always thwarted by those who led the blind, and throve by their own impostures.Now, although there were little appearance of success in our undertaking, we must not forsake the cause of truth. A generous mind will speak of things as they really are, out of regard to those who exhibit symptoms of this malady. The truth, whatever its nature may be, can never be injurious; whereas error, although at the time apparently innocent and even useful, must finally terminate in the most disastrous results.§ 2.Terror having thus created the Gods, men wished to ascertain their nature, and conceiving that they must be of the same substance as the Soul, which they thought was like the appearances in a mirror, or the phantoms of sleep, they believed that their Gods were real substances, but so thin and subtle that to distinguish them fromBodiesthey named themSpirits; althoughBodiesandSpiritsare in truth one and the same thing, for it is impossible to imagine anincorporeal Spirit. Every spirit has its proper shape, which is inclosed in some body; that is, it has its limits, and consequently it is a body, however subtle its nature.1§ 3.The ignorant, that is the majority of mankind, having thus determined the nature and substance of their Gods, endeavoured next to discover the means by which these invisible agents acted; and unable to arrive at this because of their ignorance, they had recourse to their own conjectures, judging blindly of the future from the past. How is it possible to draw rational conclusions from any thing which has formerly happened in a certain way, as to what will happen hereafter, seeing that all the circumstances and all the causes which necessarily influence events and human actions, are so exceedingly different. They persisted however in contemplating the past, and they augured well or ill as to the future, according as any former similar undertaking had been successful or otherwise. On this principle, becausePhormis had defeated the Lacedemonians at the battle of Naupactus, the Athenians, after his death appointed another commander of the same name. Hannibal having been conquered by Scipio Africanus, the Romans, on account of his success, sent to the same province, Scipio Cæsar, who was unsuccessful both against the Greeks2and the native forces. Thus have many nations, after two or three experiments, only attributed their bad or good fortune to places, to objects, and to names. Others employed certain words which they denominatedspells, which they considered efficacious enough to make trees speak, to create a man or a God from a morsel of bread, and in short to metamorphose whatever appeared before their eyes.3§ 4.The empire of these invisible powers being now established, men at first did homage to them as their sovereigns, by marks of submission and respect; by gifts, prayers, &c. I say,at first, for nature does not enjoin bloody sacrifices for this purpose; these were only instituted for the subsistence of priests, and others set apart for the services of these imaginary Gods.§ 5.These originators of Religion, viz. Hope and Fear, aided by the different opinions and passions of men, have given rise to a vast number of phantastical creeds, which have been the cause of so much mischief and of so many revolutions among the nations.The honor and the revenues attached to the priesthood, or to the ministers of the Gods, have encouraged the ambition and avarice of cunning men who knew how to profit by the stupidity of the vulgar, whom they have gotso much entangled in their snares that they have led them insensibly into the habit of loving a lie and hating the truth.§ 6.A system of falsehood being established, ambitious men, intoxicated with the pleasure of being elevated above their fellow mortals, attempted to add to their reputation by feigning that they were the friends of those invisible Beings whom the common people so much feared. The better to succeed in this every one represented them after his fashion, and they all took the liberty of multiplying them to an extent almost incredible.§ 7.The rude unformed matter of the world was called the God Chaos. In the same way they deified the Heavens, the Earth, the Sea, Fire, the Winds and Planets. The same honor was conferred on men and women; birds, reptiles, the crocodile, the calf, the dog, the lamb, the serpent and the swine, in fact, all sorts of plants and animals were worshipped. Every river, every fountain, bore the name of some deity; every house had itslaresandpenates, and every man his genius—all was filled above and below the earth with Gods, Spirits, Shadows, and Demons. Neither was it enough to feign divinities in every imaginable place. They outrage in the same way, Time, the Day, the Night, Victory, Strife, Honor, Virtue, Health, and Sickness. They invented these Divinities that they might represent them as ready to take vengeance on those who would not be brought up in temples and at altars. Lastly, they took to worshipping their own Genii; some invokedtheirsunder the name of the Muses, while others, under that of Fortune, worshipped their own ignorance. Some sanctioned their licentiousness under the name of Cupid, their wrath under that of the Furies, their natural parts under thenameofPriapus; in one word there was nothing to which they did not give the name of a God or a Demon.§ 8.The founders of these Religions, knowing well that their impostures were based upon the ignorance of the people,took care to keep them in it by the adoration of images in which they feigned that the Divinities resided. This rained gold into the coffers of the priesthood, and their benefices were considered as sacred things because they belonged to holy ministers; no one having the rashness or audacity to aspire to them. The better to deceive mankind, the priests pretended to be divinely inspired Prophets, capable of penetrating the mysteries of futurity, boasting that they had intercourse with the Gods; and, as the desire is natural to learn one’s destiny, they by no means failed to take advantage of it. Some were established at Delos, others at Delphi, and in various places, where in ambiguous language they answered the questions put to them. Even women took a part in these impostures, and the Romans in their greatest difficulties consulted the Sybilline books. These knaves were really considered inspired. Those who feigned that they had familiar commerce with the dead were called Necromancers; others pretended to ascertain the future from the flight of birds or the entrails of beasts; in short they could draw a good or bad augury from almost every thing, the eyes, the hands, the countenance, or any extraordinary object. So true it is that ignorance will receive any impression, when men know how to take advantage of it.4§ 9.The ambitious, who have always been great masters in the art of deceiving, have followed this method in promulgating their laws; and to induce mankind to give a voluntary submission to them, they havepersuadedthem that they received them from some God or Goddess.However great the multitude of Divinities, amongst those who worshipped them, and who were denominatedPagans, there was never any generally established system of religion. Every republic, every kingdom, every city, and every individual had their own proper rites, and conceived of the Divinity after their own phantasy. But afterwards there arose legislatures more subtle than the former, and who employed more skilful and sure plans in giving forth the laws, the worship, and the ceremonies calculatedto nourish that fanaticism which it was their object to establish.Amongst a great number, Asia has producedTHREE, distinguished as much by their laws and the worship which they established, as by the ideas which they have given of the Divinity, and the methods which they employed to confirm these ideas, and to render their laws sacred.—Moses was the most ancient. After him Jesus Christ appeared, who wrought upon his plan and kept the fundamental portion of his laws, but abolished the remainder. Mahomet, who appeared the last upon the scene, borrowed from each of the Religions in order to compose his own, and thereafter declared himself the sworn enemy of both.—We shall consider the character of the three legislators, and examine their conduct, that afterwards we may be enabled to decide whose opinions are best grounded—those who reverence them as inspired men, or those who regard them as impostors.§ 10.MOSES.The celebrated Moses, a grandson of a distinguished Magician,5(according to Justin Martyr) possessed every advantage calculated to render him that which he finally became. It is well known that the Hebrews, of whom he became the chief, were a nation of shepherds whom Pharaoh Osiris I. admitted into his kingdom in gratitude for the services which one of them had rendered during a period of severe famine. He assigned them a territory in the East of Egypt, rich in pasturage, and admirably adapted for the rearing of cattle; where, during two centuries, they very much increased in numbers, either, that being regarded as strangers they were not liable to military service, or on account of the other privileges which Osiris had conferred upon them. Many natives of the country joinedthemselves to them, among others, bands of Arabs who regarded them as brethren and of the same origin. However this may be, they multiplied so exceedingly, that the land of Goshen being unable to contain them, they spread over all the land of Egypt; giving just occasion to Pharaoh to dread that they would undertake some dangerous enterprise if his kingdom were attacked by the Ethiopians, his inveterate enemies, as had frequently happened. Reasons of state, therefore, compelled this monarch to take away their privileges, and to devise some means of weakening them and keeping them in subjection.Pharaoh Orus, surnamed Busirus on account of his cruelty, succeeded Memnon, and followed up his plans with respect to the Hebrews; and wishing to eternalize his memory by building the Pyramids, and fortifying the walls of Thebes, condemned the Hebrews to the task of making bricks, for which purpose the earth of that country was well adapted. During their bondage the celebrated Moses was born, the same year in which the king commanded that all the male Hebrew children should be thrown into the Nile, as the surest method of ridding his country from this host of strangers. Moses was in this way exposed to perish in the waters, his mother having placed him in a wicker basket among the willows on the banks of the stream. It happened that Thesmutis, the daughter of the king, was walking by the river, when, hearing the cries of the infant, that compassion so natural to her sex, inspired her with a wish to save it. Orus being dead she succeeded him, and Moses having been presented to her she commanded that he should receive the highest instruction which could be procured, as a son of the Queen of a people at that time the most learned and civilized in the world. “He was learned in all the learning of the Egyptians.” This implies that he was the ablest Politician, the greatest philosopher, and the most distinguished Magician of his time; and besides, it is very evident that he had been initiated into the Egyptian Priesthood, which resembled those of the Druids among the Gauls. Those who are ignorant of the nature of the Egyptian government, must learn that the whole territory was subject to one sole sovereign, but that it was divided into many provinces of but limited extent. The governors of theseprovinces were designated Monarchs, and were generally of the powerful order of the Priesthood, which in fact possessed almost the third part of Egypt. The king nominated these Monarchs; and if we compare what others have written concerning Moses, and what he has written himself, we must conclude that he was Monarch of the Province of Goshen, and that he owed his appointment to Thesmutis, to whom also he owed his life. Such was thestatusof Moses amongst the Egyptians, where he had full time and every opportunity of studying their manners and those of his own nation, and of obtaining a knowledge oftheirdominant inclinations and passions; a knowledge, of which he failed not to avail himself in that revolution of which he was the originator.After the death of Thesmutis, her successor renewed the persecution against the Hebrews, and Moses having fallen from the honor in which he had been formerly held, was afraid that he would find it difficult to justify a homicide of which he had been guilty. He accordingly resolved on flight, and retired into Arabia Petrea. Chance led him to the house of the chief of some native tribe, to whom he rendered so many services, and by whom his talents were so highly appreciated that he gave him one of his daughters in marriage. It must here be remarked that Moses was so little of a Jew, and had so limited a conception of the Deity whom he afterwards imagined, that he married an idolatress, and did not even think of circumcising his children.It was in the Arabian deserts, when watching the flocks of his father-in-law, that he formed the design of taking vengeance upon the King of Egypt for the injuries he had met with. He flattered himself that he would easily succeed in this, as well on account of his own talents, as from the feeling which he knew was general amongst those of his own nation, irritated against the government on account of the cruel treatment which they had experienced.It appears from the history which he has left us of this revolution, or at all events, from the history which the author of the books attributed to Moses, has left us, that Jethro, his father-in-law, was in the plot, as were Aaron his brother,and sister Marion, who remained in Egypt, and with whom, no doubt, he maintained a correspondence.However that may be, we perceive from the result, that he had with the utmost policy schemed out a great design; and that he knew how to bring to bear against the Egyptians that learning which he had acquired amongst them. I allude to magic, in the exhibition of which he showed himself more subtle and expert than all those who attempted the same tricks at the court of Pharaoh.It was by these pretended prodigies that he gained over those of his nation whom he wished to carry off, and to whom disaffected and revolutionary Egyptians, Ethiopians and Arabs joined themselves. By boasting the power of his Divinity, and the frequent communions which he had with him; and by declaring that he had his sanction for all the steps which he took with the leaders of the revolution, he succeeded so well that there followed him 600,000 fighting men, besides women and children, across the Arabian deserts, of which he well knew the localities. After six days painful flight, he ordained to his followers that they should consecrate the seventh day to his God by a general and public rest, for the purpose of persuading them that the Deity favored him and approved of his authority; and to deter any one from having the audacity to dispute his statements.There never existed a more ignorant people than the Hebrews, nor consequently more credulous. To be assured of this we have only to look to their condition in Egypt when Moses caused them to revolt. They were detested by the Egyptians on account of their profession as shepherds, they were persecuted by the sovereign, and employed in the most degrading toil. Amongst a people thus situated it could not be very difficult for a man with the abilities of Moses to exercise a vast influence. He persuaded them that his God, (whom he sometimes merely styles an angel), the God of their fathers, had appeared to him—that it was at his command that he had taken them under his guidance—and that they would be a people highly favored of the Deity, provided they believed in him. The expert employment of deceit, and his knowledge of science, and of human nature, fortified his injunctions; and he strengthened hisposition byprodigies, which are always sure to make a deep impression on the minds of an imbecile populace.It must here be attended to with especial care, that he thought he had discovered a sure method of keeping the Hebrews in subjection to himself, by persuading them that God himself was their conductor—that he preceded them by night as a pillar of fire, and by day as a cloud. It can be proved that this is perhaps a more gross deceit on the part of this leader than any he had ever practised. During his sojourn in Arabia, he had learned that, as the country was of vast extent and uninhabited, it was the custom of those who travelled in caravans to take guides, who conducted them under night by means of a brasier filled with burning wood, the flame of which they followed; and the smoke of which by day equally prevented the parties of the caravan from straggling. Moses took advantage of this and proclaimed it miraculous, adducing it as an evidence of divine protection. No person is called upon to regard this as cheat, on my authority; let them believe Moses himself, who in the book of Numbers, chap, x, v. 31, is represented as beseeching his brother-in-law Habab to journey with the Israelites and show them the way, because he knew thecountry.6This is proof positive. If it were really God who went before the people of Israel by night and by day, as a pillar of cloud and of fire, could they have desired a better guide? Notwithstanding here is this leader entreating his brother-in-law in the most urgent manner to act as his guide; the pillar of cloud and fire, it would seem, being only a God for the people and not for Moses.The unfortunate dupes being delighted to find themselves adopted by the chief of the Gods on their escape from a cruel bondage, cheerfully put faith in Moses, and swore to obey him blindly. His authority being confirmed, he wished to render it perpetual; and under thespeciouspretext of establishing the worship of that God whoseViceregenthe said he was, he appointed at once his brotherand his sons to high authority in the Royal Palace, that is the place whence he thought proper to give forth his oracles; this place being altogether out of the view of the people. Lastly he practised that which is always done at the formation of new institutions; that is, he exhibited prodigies, miracles, whereby some were dazzled, and others confounded, but which only excited pity in those who could see through his impostures.However crafty Moses might have been, he would have had considerable difficulty in securing obedience, without the aid of his armed followers. An impostor without physical force rarely succeeds.But in spite of the great number of dupes who submitted themselves blindly to the will of this clever legislator, there were found people bold enough to reproach him for bad faith; declaring that, under false appearances of justice and equality, he had engrossed the whole—that the sovereign authority was confined to his own family, who had no more right to it than any other individuals—and that he was less the father than the tyrant of his people. But on these occasions Moses, with profound policy, put to death those daring spirits and spared no one who disputed his authority.It was by similar precautions, and by always declaring that his punishments were instances of divine vengeance, that he reigned an absolute despot; and to end as he had begun—that is to say, as a knave and an impostor—he was in the habit of retiring to a cave, which he had caused to be dug in the centre of a waste, under the pretext of having conferences with the Divinity, that he might secure in this way the respect and submission of his followers. His end was like that of other similar impostors. He cast himself from a precipice which he knew of in the remote wilderness, to the end that his body might not be discovered, and that it might be thought the Deity had carried him off. He was not ignorant that the memory of the patriarchs which had preceded him was held in great veneration, although they knew their sepulchres; but this was not enough for an ambition like his—it was necessary that he should be revered as a god, over whom death had no control. This is the explanation of what he said at the commencement of his reign, when he said that God had declared that he wasto be a God unto his brother.7Elijah in like manner, and Romulus,8and Zamolxis, and all those who have had the foolish vanity to wish toeternalizetheir names, have concealed the time and manner of their death, in order that they might be thought immortal.§ 11.But to return to the legislators. There have never been any who did not assert that their laws did not emanate from some divinities9, and who have not attempted to persuade their followers that they themselves were more than mortal. Numa Pompilius, after having tasted the sweets of retirement, was with difficulty persuaded to leave them, although it was to fill the throne of Romulus; but compelled by the acclamations of the people, he profited by the devotedness of the Romans, and insinuated to them that if they really wished him to be their king, they must be prepared to obey him without enquiry, and to observe religiously the laws and divine institutions which had been communicated to him by the goddess Egeria.10Alexander the Great had? no less vanity. Not content with seeing himself master of the world, he wished to persuade mankind that he was the son of Jupiter. Perseus pretended also to have derived his origin from the same god and the virgin Danae. Plato also insisted on a virgin nativity, regarding Apollo as his father. There have been many other personages who have been guilty of the same absurdity. No doubt all these great men believed in the opinion of the Egyptians, who maintained that the Spirit of God was capable of having intercourse with the female sex, and rendering them pregnant.§ 12.JESUS CHRIST.Jesus Christ, who was acquainted with the maxims and the science of the Egyptians, gave currency to the belief alluded to above, because he thought it suitable to his purposes. Reflecting how Moses had become renowned by his command of an ignorant people, he undertook to build on this foundation, and got some few imbecile people to follow him, whom he persuaded that the Holy Ghost was his father, and that his mother was a virgin. These simple folks, accustomed to give themselves over to dreams and reveries, adopted his opinions, and believed whatever he wished: indeed, something considerably beyond this miraculous birth would by no means have been too miraculous for them. A beautiful dove overshadowed a virgin: there is nothing surprising in that. It happened frequently in Lydia; and the swan of Leda is the counterpart of the dove of Mary.11That a man should be born of a virgin, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, is neither more extraordinary nor more miraculous that that Genghis Khan should be born of a virgin, as the Tartars assert; or that Foh, according to the Chinese belief, derived his origin from a virgin rendered pregnant by the rays of the sun.This prodigy appeared at a time when the Jews, wearied with their God as they had formerly been with their Judges,12were desirous to have some visible ruler among them, as was the case with other nations. As the number of fools is infinite, Jesus Christ in a short time had many followers; but as his extreme poverty was an invincible obstacle tohis elevation, the Pharisees—at one time his admirers, and at another time startled at his boldness—forwarded or thwarted his interests, according to the inconstant humour of the populace. The report of his divine origin was spread about; but without forces, as he was, it was impossible that he could succeed, although some cures which he performed, and some resurrections from the dead to which he pretended, brought him somewhat into repute. Without money or arms he could not fail to perish: if he had been in possession of these, he would have been no less successful than Moses or Mahomet, and all those who, with like advantages, have elevated themselves above their fellow-men. If he had been more unfortunate, he would not have been less adroit; and several traits in his history prove that the principal defect in his policy was his carelessness in not sufficiently providing for his own security. Otherwise, I do not find that his plans were less skilfully devised than those of the other two: at all events his law has become the rule of faith to people who flatter themselves that they are the wisest in the world.§ 13.On the Politics of Jesus Christ.Can anything be more subtle than the answer of Jesus concerning the woman taken in adultery? The Jews having demanded of him if they should stone her, instead of answering the question directly—a negative answer being directly contrary to the law, and an affirmative convicting him of severity and cruelty, which would have alienated their minds from him—instead, therefore, of replying as an ordinary individual would have done on the occasion—“Let him,” said he, “who is without sin amongst you cast the first stone at her.”13A shrewd reply, and one evincing great presence of mind. On another occasion, being shown a piece of money with the emperor’s image and superscription upon it, and asked if it were lawful to pay tribute money unto Cæsar, he eluded the difficulty of answering: “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s.”14Thefalse position in which they wished to place him was this: that if he denied that it was lawful, he was guilty of high treason; and if he said that it was, he went directly against the law of Moses, which he always protested that he never intended to do—knowing no doubt that he was too helpless to do so with impunity at that time. Afterwards, when he became more celebrated, he endeavoured to abrogate it almost totally: acting in this way not unlike those princes, who, until their power is thoroughly established, always promise to confirm the privileges of their subjects, but who, after that has been secured, care little for their promises.When the Pharisees asked him by what authority he taught the people and preached to them, he penetrated their intention—which was to convict him of falsehood; whether he answered that it was by human authority—he not being of the order of the priesthood, who alone were charged with the instruction of the people; or whether he preached by the express orders of God—his own doctrine being opposed to the law of Moses; he avoided their snare, and embarrassed themselves, by asking them in what name John baptised.15The Pharisees, who from political motives, rejected the baptism of John, would have condemned themselves if they had said that it was in the name of God; and if they hadnotsaid so, they would have exposed themselves to the rage of the populace, who maintained the opposite opinion. To get out of this dilemma, they answered that they could not tell: on which Jesus Christ replied, that neither was he obliged to tell them by what name or authority he taught the people.§ 14.Such was the character of the destroyer of the ancient law, and the founder of the new religion that was built upon its ruins; in which religion a disinterested mind can perceive nothing more divine than in any of those which preceded it. Its founder, who was not altogether ignorant, having witnessed extreme corruption in the Jewish republic, judged that its end was near, and thought it a favorable opportunity for forwarding his own designs.The fear of being anticipated by men more able than himself, made him hasten to secure his ground by means entirely opposite to those adopted by Moses. The former began by rendering himself terrible to other nations. Jesus Christ, on the contrary, attracted mankind to himself by the hope of blessings in a life beyond the grave, which he said they would obtain by believing in him. Whilst Moses only promised temporal benefits to the observers of his law, Jesus Christ led his followers to hope for those which would never end. The laws of the one only regarded exterior observances; those of the other looked into the heart, influenced the thoughts, and stood on opposite grounds to the law of Moses. Whence it follows, that Jesus Christ believed with Aristotle, that it is the same with religion and nations as with individuals who are born and who die; and as there is nothing which is not subject to dissolution, there is no law which must not in turn give place to another.16But as there is difficulty in passing from one law to another, and as the greater part of men are stubborn in religious matters, Jesus Christ, in imitation of other innovators, had recourse to miracles, which have at all times confounded the ignorant, and advanced the projects of ambitious and designing men.§ 15.Christianity having been founded in this way, Jesus Christ wisely imagined that he could profit by the errors in the politics of Moses, and render his new law eternal—an undertaking in which he finally succeeded a little perhaps beyond his expectation. The Hebrew prophets intended to do honour to Moses, by predicting a successor who should resemble him—a Messiah great in virtues, powerful in wealth, and terrible to his enemies. These prophecies, however, produced altogether a different effect from what they expected; a number of ambitious demagogues having embraced theopportunityof palming themselves off for the comingMessiah, which led to those insurrections and civil convulsions which lasted until the entire destruction of the ancient republic of the Hebrews. Jesus Christ, more subtle than the prophets who succeeded Moses, predicted that a man of this description would appear—the great enemy of God—the favorite of the demons—the aggregation of all the vices and the cause of all the desolation in the world. After such a splendid eulogy, one would think that nobody could resist the temptation of calling himselfAntichrist; and I do not believe that it is possible to discover a secret equal to it for eternalizing a law, although there can be nothing more fabulous than what we read of concerning this pretended Antichrist. St. Paul says that he was a ready born; whence it follows that he must have been on the watch for the coming of Jesus Christ: nevertheless, more than sixteen years rolled on after the prediction of the nativity of this formidable personage, without any one having heard of his appearance. I acknowledge that some have applied the terms to Ebion and Cerinthus, two great adversaries of Jesus Christ, whose pretended divinity they disputed. But if this interpretation be the meaning of the Apostle, which is far from being credible, the words referred to must point out a host of Antichrists in all ages—it being impossible that truly learned men should think of injuring the cause of truth, by declaring that the history of Jesus Christ was a contemptible fable,17and that his law was nothing but a series of dreams and reveries, which ignorance had brought in repute, which self-interest had encouraged, and which tyranny had taken under its especial protection.§ 16.They pretend, nevertheless, that a religion built upon so weak foundations is divine and supernatural, as if it werenot an ascertained fact that there is no class of people more fitted to give currency to the most absurd opinions than women and lunatics. It is not to be wondered at that Jesus Christ reckoned none of the learned amongst his followers. He well knew that his law was inconsistent with common sense; and therefore he always declaimed against the sages, excluding them from that kingdom into which he admitted the poor in spirit, the simple and the imbecile. Rational minds ought to be thankful that they have nothing to do with such insanities.§ 17.On the Morality of Jesus Christ.We find nothing more divine in the morality of Jesus Christ than what can be drawn from the works of ancient authors; for this reason, perhaps every text in his code of morals is either borrowed from their’s or is an imitation of it. St. Augustine18acknowledges that in one of the so-called heathen writers, he discovered the whole of the commencement of the gospel according to St. John. We must remark also, that this apostle was so much accustomed to plunder others, that he has not scrupled to pillage from the prophets their enigmas and visions, for the purpose of composing his Apocalypse. Again, whence arises that agreement between the doctrines of the Old and New Testament and those of Plato, unless the Rabbis and others who composed the Jewish Scriptures had stolen from that distinguished man. The account of the creation of the world given in hisTimaeus, is much more satisfactory than that recorded in the book of Genesis; and it will not do to say that Plato, in his tour through Egypt, had read the books of the Jews, since, by the confession of St. Augustine, king Ptolemy had not ordered them to be translated till long after the philosopher had left the country.The landscape which Socrates describes to Simias (Phæton,) possesses infinitely more beauty than the Paradise of Eden: and the fable of the Hermaphrodites19is beyondcomparison a better invention than that which we read of in Genesis, where we are told that one of Adam’s ribs was taken from him for the purpose of creating a female out of it.Can any more plausible account of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah be given, than that it was caused by Phaeton? Is there no resemblance between the fall of Lucifer and that of Vulcan, or of the giants struck down by the thunderbolts of Jove. How close the resemblance between Sampson and Hercules; Elijah and Phaeton; Joseph and Hypolitus; Nebuchadnezzar and Lycaon; Tantalus and the rich man in torment;20the manna in the wilderness and the ambrosia of the gods! St. Augustine,21St. Cyril, and Theophilactus, compare Jonah with Hercules, calledTrinoctius, because he had been three days and three nights in the belly of a whale.The river which Daniel speaks of inchap.vii, v. 10, of his Prophecies, is palpably drawn from that Pyriphlegethon to which Plato alludes in his dialogue on the immortality of the soul. The idea of “Original Sin” is taken from the account of Pandora’s box; and the interrupted sacrifices of Isaac and of Jephtha’s daughter are borrowed from that Iphigenia, in whose room a hind was offered up. What we read of concerning Lot and his wife, is nearly the same as that which fabulous history informs us occurred to Bancis and Philemon. The histories of Perseus and of Bellerophon are the foundation of Michael and the demon whom he vanquished. In short, it is abundantly manifest that the authors of the Scriptures have copied the works of Hesiod, Homer, and some other ancient writers, almost word for word.§ 18.With respect to Jesus Christ himself, Celsus, by appealing to his opponent Origen, shows that he had taken some of his most approved apothegms from Plato—Such as this: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,than a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”22It was owing to the sect of the Pharisees, to which he belonged, that his followers believed in the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, and the torments of hell; and also in the greater part of his morality,23the whole of which I find in Epictetus, Epicures, and a few others. This last mentioned philosopher was referred to by St. Jerome, as a man whose virtues ought to put the best Christians to the blush; and whose mode of life was so temperate that a morsel of cheese, with bread and waterconstitutedhis highest repast. Leading a life so frugal, this philosopher, heathen as he was, declared that it was far better to be unfortunate and gifted with reason, than to be rich and opulent without it; adding, that wealth and wisdom were rarelyfoundunited in the same individual, and that it was impossible to enjoy happiness or contentment unless our conduct were guided by prudence, justice and honesty, which are the qualities whence flow all true and lasting enjoyments.As to Epictetus, I do not believe that there ever existed a man, not even excepting Jesus Christ, more firm, more self-denying, more equable, or who at any time gave forth to the world a more sublime system of morality. Were it not that I should exceed the limits which I have prescribed to myself in this treatise, I could recount many beautifultraits in his character; but the reader must be contented with one example. When a slave to Epaphroditus, a captain of Nero’s guards, his master took the brutal fancy to writhe his limbs, Epictetus, perceiving that it gave the monster satisfaction, said with a smile, that he saw clearly that the joke would not end until he had broken one of them, which happened accordingly. The philosopher with the same equanimity and the same smile, merely said, “Did I not tell you that you would certainly break the limb?” Where is there on record another instance of like firmness? How would Jesus Christ have acted in the circumstances?—he who wept and trembled at the least alarm, and who in his last moments exhibited a pusillanimity altogether contemptible, and which was never shown by the martyrs for his faith.If the work which Arian wrote concerning the life and death of our philosopher had been preserved, I have no doubt that we would have been in possession of many more examples of his equanimity than we have at present. I know that the priests will speak of the example which I have instanced, as they speak of the virtues of philosophic minds in general, and assert that it is based on vanity, and that it is by no means what it appears to be; but I know also, that those people are accustomed to speakex cathedrawhatever suits their purpose and to think they sufficiently earn the money which is given them for instructing the people, by declaiming against every man who knows what sober reason and real virtue are. Nothing in the world can be less in congruity with the actions of these superstitious men who decry them, than the manner of the truly learned. The former, having studied for no other end than to obtain a place to give them bread, become vain, and congratulate themselves when they have obtained it, as if they had arrived at the state of perfection; whereas it is nothing else to them than a state of idleness, pride, voluptuousness, and licentiousness,—a condition in which the great majority of them hold in no respect whatever the maxims of that religion which they profess. But we will leave these men, who have not the remotest conception of real virtue, and examine the evidences for the divinity of their master.§ 19.Having considered the politics and the morality of Jesus Christ, wherein we find nothing so useful or so sublime as we find in the writings of the ancients, let us now consider if the reputation which he acquired after his death be a proof of his divinity.The generality of mankind are so much accustomed to what is irrational, that it is astonishing to find people endeavouring to draw a rational inference from their conduct. Experience teaches us that they are always running after shadows, and that they neither do nor say anything betokening common sense. These fanatical notions on which they found their belief will always be in vogue, in spite of the efforts of the learned who have invariably set themselves against them. So rooted are their follies that they had rather be crammed with them to repletion than make any effort to be rid of them.It was to no purpose that Moses boasted that he was the interpreter of God, and attempted to prove his mission and his authority by extraordinary signs. If he absented himself for a short time (as he did occasionally, to hold conference with the Divinity, by his account, and as in like manner did Numa Pompilius and many other legislators), it was only to find on his return strong traces of the worship of the gods whom the Hebrew people had seen in Egypt. It was in vain that he had led them for forty years through the desert, that they might lose recollection of thedivinitieswhich they had left behind. They had not forgot them, and they always wished for some visible symbol to precede them, which, if they had got, they would have worshipped obstinately, at the risk of being exposed to extreme cruelty.The pride-inspired contempt alone which led them to the hatred of other nations, made them insensibly forget the gods of Egypt, and attach themselves to that of Moses. They worshipped him for some time with all the outward observance of the law; but with that inconstancy which leads the vulgar to run after novelty, they deserted him at last to follow the God of Jesus Christ.§ 20.The most ignorant alone of the Hebrews followed Moses—such also were they who ran after Jesus Christ; and their name being legion, and as they mutually supported each other, it is not to be wondered at if this new system of error was widely circulated. The teaching of these novelties was not without danger to those who undertook the task, but the enthusiasm which they excited extinguished every fear. Thus, the disciples of Christ, miserable as they were in his train, and even dying of hunger—(as we learn from the necessity under which they were, together with their leader, of plucking the ears of corn in the fields to sustain their lives)—these disciples never despaired till they saw their master in the hands of his executioners, and totally incapable of gifting them with that wealth, and power, and grandeur, which he had led them to expect.After his death, his disciples being frustrated in their fondest hopes, made a virtue of necessity. Banished as they were from every place, and persecuted by the Jews, who were eager to treat them as they had treated their master, they wandered into the neighboring countries; in which, on the evidence of some women, they set forth the resurrection of Christ, his divinity, and the other fables wherewith the gospels are filled.It was their want of success among the Jewish people which led to the resolution of seeking their fortune among the Gentiles; but as a little more knowledge than they possessed was necessary for the accomplishment of their design—the Gentiles being philosophically trained, and consequently too much the friends of truth and reason to be duped by trifles—the sectaries of Jesus gained over to their cause a young man24of ardent temperament and active habits, somewhat better instructed than the illiterate fishermen of Galilee, and more capable of drawing audiences to listen to his talk. He being warned from heaven (miraculously of course), leagued himself with them, and drew over some partizans by the threat of “fabled hell,” (a plagiarism from the ancient poets), and by the hope of the joys of paradise,into which blessed abode he was impudent enough to assert that he had at one time been introduced.These disciples then, by strength of delusion and lying, procured for their master the honor of passing for a god—an honor at which, in his life-time, Jesus could never have arrived. His destiny was no better than that of Homer, nor even so good; inasmuch as seven cities which had despised and starved the latter in his lifetime, struggled and fought with each other, in order to ascertain to which was due the merit of having given him birth.§ 21.It may be judged now, from what has been advanced, that Christianity, like every other religion, is only a complicated imposture—the success and progress of which would astonish the inventors themselves, could they revisit this world. Without bewildering ourselves, however, in a labyrinth of error and contradiction, such as we have alluded to, we go to Mahomet, who founded his law on maxims entirely opposite to those of Jesus Christ.§ 22.MAHOMET.Scarcely had the disciples of Jesus Christ torn down the Mosaic fabric for the purpose of establishing Christianity, when men, led by force of circumstances, and influenced by their usual inconstancy, followed the new legislator, who had elevated himself by means similar, as far as possible, to those which Moses employed. Like the Jewish lawgiver, Christ usurped the title of prophet, and ambassador of God; like him he pretended to perform miracles, and took advantage of the passions of the multitude. He soon found himself escorted by an ignorant populace, to whom he explained the new oracles of heaven. These miserably misled people, from the promises and fables of this new impostor, spread his renown far and wide, as having eclipsed all his predecessors.Mahomet, on the contrary, was a man who did not appear at all competent to lay the foundation of an empire. He was distinguished neither as a politician nor a philosopher: hecould neither read nor write.25At first he exhibited so little firmness, that he was frequently upon the point of abandoning his enterprise; and he would have done so, had it not been for the address of one his followers. When he was rising into celebrity, Corais, a powerful Arab chief, being irritated that a man of yesterday should have the boldness to mislead the people, declared himself his enemy, and attempted to thwart his designs; but the people, believing that Mahomet had continued intercourse with God and his angels, supported him till he had an opportunity of being avenged upon his adversary. The tribe of Corais was worsted; and Mahomet seeing himself surrounded by a host of fanatics, thought that he stood in no need of a coadjutor. However, lest Corais should expose his impostures, he took the initiative; and to make sure, he loaded him with promises, and swore that he only wished to become great in order to share with him that power, to the establishment of which he might so much contribute. “We can agree,” said he, “when we reach our proper elevation; we can depend, in the meantime, on that great multitude whom we have gained over, and it only remains that we make sure of them by the employment of that artifice which you have so happily invented.” At the same time he persuaded him to descend into the Cave of Oracles.This was a dried-up sunk well, from the bottom of which Corais spoke, in order that the people might believe that it was the voice of God declaring himself in favour of Mahomet who was in the midst of his proselytes. Deceived by the blandishments of the leader, his associate regularly descended into the well, to counterfeit the oracle. Whilst Mahomet was passing one day at the head of an infatuated multitude, they heard a voice, which said—“I am your God, and I declare that Mahomet is the prophet whom I have appointed for all nations; he will instruct you in my law of truth, which the Jews and Christians have altered.” For a long time the accomplice played this game; but at last he met with the blackest ingratitude. The voice being heard, as usual, proclaiming him an inspired personage, Mahomet turned to the people, and commanded them, in the name of that God who had recognised him as his prophet, to fill up the well with stones, that it might be an enduring witness in his favour, like that pillar which Jacob set up to mark the place where God had appeared to him.26Thus perished, miserably, the chief who had most contributed to the elevation of Mahomet. It was upon this heap of stones that the last of the three most celebrated impostors established his religion, and so solid and stable is its foundation, that after the lapse of twelve hundred years there is little appearance at present of its being overthrown.§ 23.In this way was the power of Mahomet established; and he was more fortunate than Jesus, inasmuch as he lived to see the wide diffusion of his doctrines, which Christ on account of his want of resources, was unable to do. He was even more fortunate in this respect than Moses, who from excess of ambition brought himself to a premature end.—Mahomet died in peace, and loaded with blessings. He had, moreover, a well-grounded hope that his religion would last, because it was accommodated to the nature of a people born and brought up in ignorance; an adaptation in which men more learned than himself, but less accustomed to associate with the lower orders, might have entirely failed.The reader is now in possession of the most remarkable facts concerning the three most celebrated legislators, whose religions have brought into subjection a great part of the human race. They were such as we have represented them; and it is for you to consider if they are worthy of your respect, and if you are justified in allowing yourselves to be led by those whom ambition alone conducted to power, and whose dreams have been perpetuated by ignorance. The following observations, if read with a free and unprejudiced mind, may lead to the discovery of truth, by clearing away those mists wherewith you have been blinded and beguiled.1Consult Hobbes’ Leviathan “De Homine,” chap. xli, pages 56, 57 and 58.↑2Philip of Macedon had sent auxiliaries and money to Hannibal in Africa. “Infensos Philippo, ob auxilia cum pecunia nuper in Africam missu Annibale.” Levy, Book xxxi. chap. 1.—Translator’s Note.↑3Hobbe’s Leviathan, “De Homine,” chap. xii, pp. 56 and 57.↑4Hobbes, ubi supra “De Homine,” chap. xii. pages 58 and 59.↑5This word must not be taken in its usual acceptation. What rational men understand by the term is a dexterous man, an able cheat, and a master of jugglery, which requires great readiness and address; and not by any means a person in compact with the Devil as the vulgar suppose.↑6“And he said, Leave us not, I pray thee; for as much as thouknowesthow we are to encamp in the wilderness,and thou mayest be to us instead of eyes.”—Num. chap. x, v. 31.↑7Exodus iv. 16.↑8When Romulus was reviewing his forces in the plain of Caprae, here suddenly arose a thunder-storm, during which he was enveloped in so thick a cloud that he was lost to the view of his army; nor thereafter on this earth was Romulus seen.—Liv.1. I. c. 16.—Translator’s note.↑9Hobbes’ Leviathan; de homine, chap. xii. pp. 59 and 60.↑10It is recorded by Livy, that “there is a grove, through which flowed aperennialstream, taking its origin in a dark cave, in which Numa was accustomed to meet the goddess, and receive instructions as to his political and religions institutions.”—Liv.1. I. c. 21.↑11Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aileVienne obom brer une Purcelle,Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;L’on en vit autant en Lydie.Et le beau Cygne de LedaVaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.↑12I. Samuel, chap. viii. vs. 5 and 6.↑13The Gospel according toJohn, chap. viii. v. 7.↑14Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxii. v. 21.↑15Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxi. v. 27.↑16Saint Paul,Hebrews, chap. viii. v. 13speaks in these terms: “In that he saith anewcovenant, he hath made thefirstold. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”—Translator’s note.↑17This was the opinion of Pope Leo X. as appears from an expression of his, which, considering that it was made use of at a time when the philosophical spirit of inquiry had made little progress, was remarkably bold. “It has been well known in all ages,” he observed to Cardinal Beinbo, “how much this fable of Jesus Christ has been profitable to us and ours.”Quantum nobis nostrisque sa de Christo fabula profuerit, satis est omnibus saeculis notum.↑18Confessions, 1. VII. c. ix. v. 28.↑19See the discourse of Aristophanes, in the “Banquet of Plato.”↑20Luke’s Gospel, chap. xvi. v. 24.↑21“The City of God,” book I. chap. xiv.↑22Orig. adv. Cels. 1. VIII. chap. iv. Compare with,Matthew, chap. xix. v. 24.↑23Op. adv. Jorin. 1. II. chap.viii.—“In indication of their refusal to take an oath, the Society of Friends quote the words of Christ, “Swear not at all;” unaware, or overlooking, that this expression is descriptive of a state of social perfection, when the word of a man will be as good as his oath. Many others of Christ’s precepts besides this are unobserved by Christians, such as ‘Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth,’ ‘Give to every one that asketh, and from him that would borrow of you turn not thou away.’The morality of Christ is a beau ideal so far from being realized, that there is not even a similitude of it in the Christian world.The Quakers who vauntingly obey this precept regarding oaths, has no hesitation in breaking the other precepts respecting the hoarding of money, and refusing to give it away.”—Translator’s Note.↑24St. Paul.↑25“I can believe,” observes the Count de Boulainvilliers, “that Mahomet was ignorant of the common elements of education. But assuredly he wasnotignorant in respect to that vast knowledge which a far travelled man of great natural powers may acquire. He wasnotignorant of his native tongue, although he could not read it, being master of all its subtleness and all its beauties. He was thoroughly qualified to render hateful whatever was truly blameworthy, and to paint truth in colours so simple and vivid, that it was impossible to misunderstand it.All that he has said is true, as regards the essential dogmas of Religion; buthe has not said all that is true, and in this respect alone does our religion differ from his.” Farther on he adds, that “Mahomet was neither ignorant nor a barbarian; he conducted his enterprise with all the skill, delicacy, perseverance, and intrepidity, which was necessary to ensure its success. His views were as lofty as any which Alexander the Great, or Julius Cæsar, were capable of entertaining, had they been in his position.”—Life of Mahomet by Count de Boulainvilliers, book II. pp. 266–8. Amsterdam edit. 1731.↑26Genesis chap. xxviii. v. 18.↑

CHAP. III.ON THE MEANING OF THE WORDRELIGION; HOW, AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE, SO MANY RELIGIONS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED INTO THE WORLD.§ 1.Before the termReligionwas introduced into the world, mankind followed the law of Nature, that is, they lived conformably to Reason. Instinct was the only bond by which men were united; and this bond, simple as it is, was so strong that divisions were rare. But after terror led them to suspect that there were Gods and invisible Powers, they built altars to the imaginary beings, and shaking off the yoke of reason and of Nature, they bended themselves by foolish ceremonies, and by a superstitious worship of the idle phantoms which themselves had imagined.Such was the origin of the wordReligion, which has made so much noise in the world. After having admitted the existence of these invisible Agencies, men worshipped them to depreciate their anger, and moreover they believed that nature was under the control of these Powers. Afterwards they came to regard themselves as inert matter, or as slaves who could only act under the commands of these imaginary beings. This false idea having obtained possession of their minds, they began to exhibit more contempt for nature, and more respect for those whom they called their Gods. Hence sprung that ignorance in which so many nations were immersed—an ignorance from which, however profound, the true philosophers might have freed them, ifthey had not been always thwarted by those who led the blind, and throve by their own impostures.Now, although there were little appearance of success in our undertaking, we must not forsake the cause of truth. A generous mind will speak of things as they really are, out of regard to those who exhibit symptoms of this malady. The truth, whatever its nature may be, can never be injurious; whereas error, although at the time apparently innocent and even useful, must finally terminate in the most disastrous results.§ 2.Terror having thus created the Gods, men wished to ascertain their nature, and conceiving that they must be of the same substance as the Soul, which they thought was like the appearances in a mirror, or the phantoms of sleep, they believed that their Gods were real substances, but so thin and subtle that to distinguish them fromBodiesthey named themSpirits; althoughBodiesandSpiritsare in truth one and the same thing, for it is impossible to imagine anincorporeal Spirit. Every spirit has its proper shape, which is inclosed in some body; that is, it has its limits, and consequently it is a body, however subtle its nature.1§ 3.The ignorant, that is the majority of mankind, having thus determined the nature and substance of their Gods, endeavoured next to discover the means by which these invisible agents acted; and unable to arrive at this because of their ignorance, they had recourse to their own conjectures, judging blindly of the future from the past. How is it possible to draw rational conclusions from any thing which has formerly happened in a certain way, as to what will happen hereafter, seeing that all the circumstances and all the causes which necessarily influence events and human actions, are so exceedingly different. They persisted however in contemplating the past, and they augured well or ill as to the future, according as any former similar undertaking had been successful or otherwise. On this principle, becausePhormis had defeated the Lacedemonians at the battle of Naupactus, the Athenians, after his death appointed another commander of the same name. Hannibal having been conquered by Scipio Africanus, the Romans, on account of his success, sent to the same province, Scipio Cæsar, who was unsuccessful both against the Greeks2and the native forces. Thus have many nations, after two or three experiments, only attributed their bad or good fortune to places, to objects, and to names. Others employed certain words which they denominatedspells, which they considered efficacious enough to make trees speak, to create a man or a God from a morsel of bread, and in short to metamorphose whatever appeared before their eyes.3§ 4.The empire of these invisible powers being now established, men at first did homage to them as their sovereigns, by marks of submission and respect; by gifts, prayers, &c. I say,at first, for nature does not enjoin bloody sacrifices for this purpose; these were only instituted for the subsistence of priests, and others set apart for the services of these imaginary Gods.§ 5.These originators of Religion, viz. Hope and Fear, aided by the different opinions and passions of men, have given rise to a vast number of phantastical creeds, which have been the cause of so much mischief and of so many revolutions among the nations.The honor and the revenues attached to the priesthood, or to the ministers of the Gods, have encouraged the ambition and avarice of cunning men who knew how to profit by the stupidity of the vulgar, whom they have gotso much entangled in their snares that they have led them insensibly into the habit of loving a lie and hating the truth.§ 6.A system of falsehood being established, ambitious men, intoxicated with the pleasure of being elevated above their fellow mortals, attempted to add to their reputation by feigning that they were the friends of those invisible Beings whom the common people so much feared. The better to succeed in this every one represented them after his fashion, and they all took the liberty of multiplying them to an extent almost incredible.§ 7.The rude unformed matter of the world was called the God Chaos. In the same way they deified the Heavens, the Earth, the Sea, Fire, the Winds and Planets. The same honor was conferred on men and women; birds, reptiles, the crocodile, the calf, the dog, the lamb, the serpent and the swine, in fact, all sorts of plants and animals were worshipped. Every river, every fountain, bore the name of some deity; every house had itslaresandpenates, and every man his genius—all was filled above and below the earth with Gods, Spirits, Shadows, and Demons. Neither was it enough to feign divinities in every imaginable place. They outrage in the same way, Time, the Day, the Night, Victory, Strife, Honor, Virtue, Health, and Sickness. They invented these Divinities that they might represent them as ready to take vengeance on those who would not be brought up in temples and at altars. Lastly, they took to worshipping their own Genii; some invokedtheirsunder the name of the Muses, while others, under that of Fortune, worshipped their own ignorance. Some sanctioned their licentiousness under the name of Cupid, their wrath under that of the Furies, their natural parts under thenameofPriapus; in one word there was nothing to which they did not give the name of a God or a Demon.§ 8.The founders of these Religions, knowing well that their impostures were based upon the ignorance of the people,took care to keep them in it by the adoration of images in which they feigned that the Divinities resided. This rained gold into the coffers of the priesthood, and their benefices were considered as sacred things because they belonged to holy ministers; no one having the rashness or audacity to aspire to them. The better to deceive mankind, the priests pretended to be divinely inspired Prophets, capable of penetrating the mysteries of futurity, boasting that they had intercourse with the Gods; and, as the desire is natural to learn one’s destiny, they by no means failed to take advantage of it. Some were established at Delos, others at Delphi, and in various places, where in ambiguous language they answered the questions put to them. Even women took a part in these impostures, and the Romans in their greatest difficulties consulted the Sybilline books. These knaves were really considered inspired. Those who feigned that they had familiar commerce with the dead were called Necromancers; others pretended to ascertain the future from the flight of birds or the entrails of beasts; in short they could draw a good or bad augury from almost every thing, the eyes, the hands, the countenance, or any extraordinary object. So true it is that ignorance will receive any impression, when men know how to take advantage of it.4§ 9.The ambitious, who have always been great masters in the art of deceiving, have followed this method in promulgating their laws; and to induce mankind to give a voluntary submission to them, they havepersuadedthem that they received them from some God or Goddess.However great the multitude of Divinities, amongst those who worshipped them, and who were denominatedPagans, there was never any generally established system of religion. Every republic, every kingdom, every city, and every individual had their own proper rites, and conceived of the Divinity after their own phantasy. But afterwards there arose legislatures more subtle than the former, and who employed more skilful and sure plans in giving forth the laws, the worship, and the ceremonies calculatedto nourish that fanaticism which it was their object to establish.Amongst a great number, Asia has producedTHREE, distinguished as much by their laws and the worship which they established, as by the ideas which they have given of the Divinity, and the methods which they employed to confirm these ideas, and to render their laws sacred.—Moses was the most ancient. After him Jesus Christ appeared, who wrought upon his plan and kept the fundamental portion of his laws, but abolished the remainder. Mahomet, who appeared the last upon the scene, borrowed from each of the Religions in order to compose his own, and thereafter declared himself the sworn enemy of both.—We shall consider the character of the three legislators, and examine their conduct, that afterwards we may be enabled to decide whose opinions are best grounded—those who reverence them as inspired men, or those who regard them as impostors.§ 10.MOSES.The celebrated Moses, a grandson of a distinguished Magician,5(according to Justin Martyr) possessed every advantage calculated to render him that which he finally became. It is well known that the Hebrews, of whom he became the chief, were a nation of shepherds whom Pharaoh Osiris I. admitted into his kingdom in gratitude for the services which one of them had rendered during a period of severe famine. He assigned them a territory in the East of Egypt, rich in pasturage, and admirably adapted for the rearing of cattle; where, during two centuries, they very much increased in numbers, either, that being regarded as strangers they were not liable to military service, or on account of the other privileges which Osiris had conferred upon them. Many natives of the country joinedthemselves to them, among others, bands of Arabs who regarded them as brethren and of the same origin. However this may be, they multiplied so exceedingly, that the land of Goshen being unable to contain them, they spread over all the land of Egypt; giving just occasion to Pharaoh to dread that they would undertake some dangerous enterprise if his kingdom were attacked by the Ethiopians, his inveterate enemies, as had frequently happened. Reasons of state, therefore, compelled this monarch to take away their privileges, and to devise some means of weakening them and keeping them in subjection.Pharaoh Orus, surnamed Busirus on account of his cruelty, succeeded Memnon, and followed up his plans with respect to the Hebrews; and wishing to eternalize his memory by building the Pyramids, and fortifying the walls of Thebes, condemned the Hebrews to the task of making bricks, for which purpose the earth of that country was well adapted. During their bondage the celebrated Moses was born, the same year in which the king commanded that all the male Hebrew children should be thrown into the Nile, as the surest method of ridding his country from this host of strangers. Moses was in this way exposed to perish in the waters, his mother having placed him in a wicker basket among the willows on the banks of the stream. It happened that Thesmutis, the daughter of the king, was walking by the river, when, hearing the cries of the infant, that compassion so natural to her sex, inspired her with a wish to save it. Orus being dead she succeeded him, and Moses having been presented to her she commanded that he should receive the highest instruction which could be procured, as a son of the Queen of a people at that time the most learned and civilized in the world. “He was learned in all the learning of the Egyptians.” This implies that he was the ablest Politician, the greatest philosopher, and the most distinguished Magician of his time; and besides, it is very evident that he had been initiated into the Egyptian Priesthood, which resembled those of the Druids among the Gauls. Those who are ignorant of the nature of the Egyptian government, must learn that the whole territory was subject to one sole sovereign, but that it was divided into many provinces of but limited extent. The governors of theseprovinces were designated Monarchs, and were generally of the powerful order of the Priesthood, which in fact possessed almost the third part of Egypt. The king nominated these Monarchs; and if we compare what others have written concerning Moses, and what he has written himself, we must conclude that he was Monarch of the Province of Goshen, and that he owed his appointment to Thesmutis, to whom also he owed his life. Such was thestatusof Moses amongst the Egyptians, where he had full time and every opportunity of studying their manners and those of his own nation, and of obtaining a knowledge oftheirdominant inclinations and passions; a knowledge, of which he failed not to avail himself in that revolution of which he was the originator.After the death of Thesmutis, her successor renewed the persecution against the Hebrews, and Moses having fallen from the honor in which he had been formerly held, was afraid that he would find it difficult to justify a homicide of which he had been guilty. He accordingly resolved on flight, and retired into Arabia Petrea. Chance led him to the house of the chief of some native tribe, to whom he rendered so many services, and by whom his talents were so highly appreciated that he gave him one of his daughters in marriage. It must here be remarked that Moses was so little of a Jew, and had so limited a conception of the Deity whom he afterwards imagined, that he married an idolatress, and did not even think of circumcising his children.It was in the Arabian deserts, when watching the flocks of his father-in-law, that he formed the design of taking vengeance upon the King of Egypt for the injuries he had met with. He flattered himself that he would easily succeed in this, as well on account of his own talents, as from the feeling which he knew was general amongst those of his own nation, irritated against the government on account of the cruel treatment which they had experienced.It appears from the history which he has left us of this revolution, or at all events, from the history which the author of the books attributed to Moses, has left us, that Jethro, his father-in-law, was in the plot, as were Aaron his brother,and sister Marion, who remained in Egypt, and with whom, no doubt, he maintained a correspondence.However that may be, we perceive from the result, that he had with the utmost policy schemed out a great design; and that he knew how to bring to bear against the Egyptians that learning which he had acquired amongst them. I allude to magic, in the exhibition of which he showed himself more subtle and expert than all those who attempted the same tricks at the court of Pharaoh.It was by these pretended prodigies that he gained over those of his nation whom he wished to carry off, and to whom disaffected and revolutionary Egyptians, Ethiopians and Arabs joined themselves. By boasting the power of his Divinity, and the frequent communions which he had with him; and by declaring that he had his sanction for all the steps which he took with the leaders of the revolution, he succeeded so well that there followed him 600,000 fighting men, besides women and children, across the Arabian deserts, of which he well knew the localities. After six days painful flight, he ordained to his followers that they should consecrate the seventh day to his God by a general and public rest, for the purpose of persuading them that the Deity favored him and approved of his authority; and to deter any one from having the audacity to dispute his statements.There never existed a more ignorant people than the Hebrews, nor consequently more credulous. To be assured of this we have only to look to their condition in Egypt when Moses caused them to revolt. They were detested by the Egyptians on account of their profession as shepherds, they were persecuted by the sovereign, and employed in the most degrading toil. Amongst a people thus situated it could not be very difficult for a man with the abilities of Moses to exercise a vast influence. He persuaded them that his God, (whom he sometimes merely styles an angel), the God of their fathers, had appeared to him—that it was at his command that he had taken them under his guidance—and that they would be a people highly favored of the Deity, provided they believed in him. The expert employment of deceit, and his knowledge of science, and of human nature, fortified his injunctions; and he strengthened hisposition byprodigies, which are always sure to make a deep impression on the minds of an imbecile populace.It must here be attended to with especial care, that he thought he had discovered a sure method of keeping the Hebrews in subjection to himself, by persuading them that God himself was their conductor—that he preceded them by night as a pillar of fire, and by day as a cloud. It can be proved that this is perhaps a more gross deceit on the part of this leader than any he had ever practised. During his sojourn in Arabia, he had learned that, as the country was of vast extent and uninhabited, it was the custom of those who travelled in caravans to take guides, who conducted them under night by means of a brasier filled with burning wood, the flame of which they followed; and the smoke of which by day equally prevented the parties of the caravan from straggling. Moses took advantage of this and proclaimed it miraculous, adducing it as an evidence of divine protection. No person is called upon to regard this as cheat, on my authority; let them believe Moses himself, who in the book of Numbers, chap, x, v. 31, is represented as beseeching his brother-in-law Habab to journey with the Israelites and show them the way, because he knew thecountry.6This is proof positive. If it were really God who went before the people of Israel by night and by day, as a pillar of cloud and of fire, could they have desired a better guide? Notwithstanding here is this leader entreating his brother-in-law in the most urgent manner to act as his guide; the pillar of cloud and fire, it would seem, being only a God for the people and not for Moses.The unfortunate dupes being delighted to find themselves adopted by the chief of the Gods on their escape from a cruel bondage, cheerfully put faith in Moses, and swore to obey him blindly. His authority being confirmed, he wished to render it perpetual; and under thespeciouspretext of establishing the worship of that God whoseViceregenthe said he was, he appointed at once his brotherand his sons to high authority in the Royal Palace, that is the place whence he thought proper to give forth his oracles; this place being altogether out of the view of the people. Lastly he practised that which is always done at the formation of new institutions; that is, he exhibited prodigies, miracles, whereby some were dazzled, and others confounded, but which only excited pity in those who could see through his impostures.However crafty Moses might have been, he would have had considerable difficulty in securing obedience, without the aid of his armed followers. An impostor without physical force rarely succeeds.But in spite of the great number of dupes who submitted themselves blindly to the will of this clever legislator, there were found people bold enough to reproach him for bad faith; declaring that, under false appearances of justice and equality, he had engrossed the whole—that the sovereign authority was confined to his own family, who had no more right to it than any other individuals—and that he was less the father than the tyrant of his people. But on these occasions Moses, with profound policy, put to death those daring spirits and spared no one who disputed his authority.It was by similar precautions, and by always declaring that his punishments were instances of divine vengeance, that he reigned an absolute despot; and to end as he had begun—that is to say, as a knave and an impostor—he was in the habit of retiring to a cave, which he had caused to be dug in the centre of a waste, under the pretext of having conferences with the Divinity, that he might secure in this way the respect and submission of his followers. His end was like that of other similar impostors. He cast himself from a precipice which he knew of in the remote wilderness, to the end that his body might not be discovered, and that it might be thought the Deity had carried him off. He was not ignorant that the memory of the patriarchs which had preceded him was held in great veneration, although they knew their sepulchres; but this was not enough for an ambition like his—it was necessary that he should be revered as a god, over whom death had no control. This is the explanation of what he said at the commencement of his reign, when he said that God had declared that he wasto be a God unto his brother.7Elijah in like manner, and Romulus,8and Zamolxis, and all those who have had the foolish vanity to wish toeternalizetheir names, have concealed the time and manner of their death, in order that they might be thought immortal.§ 11.But to return to the legislators. There have never been any who did not assert that their laws did not emanate from some divinities9, and who have not attempted to persuade their followers that they themselves were more than mortal. Numa Pompilius, after having tasted the sweets of retirement, was with difficulty persuaded to leave them, although it was to fill the throne of Romulus; but compelled by the acclamations of the people, he profited by the devotedness of the Romans, and insinuated to them that if they really wished him to be their king, they must be prepared to obey him without enquiry, and to observe religiously the laws and divine institutions which had been communicated to him by the goddess Egeria.10Alexander the Great had? no less vanity. Not content with seeing himself master of the world, he wished to persuade mankind that he was the son of Jupiter. Perseus pretended also to have derived his origin from the same god and the virgin Danae. Plato also insisted on a virgin nativity, regarding Apollo as his father. There have been many other personages who have been guilty of the same absurdity. No doubt all these great men believed in the opinion of the Egyptians, who maintained that the Spirit of God was capable of having intercourse with the female sex, and rendering them pregnant.§ 12.JESUS CHRIST.Jesus Christ, who was acquainted with the maxims and the science of the Egyptians, gave currency to the belief alluded to above, because he thought it suitable to his purposes. Reflecting how Moses had become renowned by his command of an ignorant people, he undertook to build on this foundation, and got some few imbecile people to follow him, whom he persuaded that the Holy Ghost was his father, and that his mother was a virgin. These simple folks, accustomed to give themselves over to dreams and reveries, adopted his opinions, and believed whatever he wished: indeed, something considerably beyond this miraculous birth would by no means have been too miraculous for them. A beautiful dove overshadowed a virgin: there is nothing surprising in that. It happened frequently in Lydia; and the swan of Leda is the counterpart of the dove of Mary.11That a man should be born of a virgin, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, is neither more extraordinary nor more miraculous that that Genghis Khan should be born of a virgin, as the Tartars assert; or that Foh, according to the Chinese belief, derived his origin from a virgin rendered pregnant by the rays of the sun.This prodigy appeared at a time when the Jews, wearied with their God as they had formerly been with their Judges,12were desirous to have some visible ruler among them, as was the case with other nations. As the number of fools is infinite, Jesus Christ in a short time had many followers; but as his extreme poverty was an invincible obstacle tohis elevation, the Pharisees—at one time his admirers, and at another time startled at his boldness—forwarded or thwarted his interests, according to the inconstant humour of the populace. The report of his divine origin was spread about; but without forces, as he was, it was impossible that he could succeed, although some cures which he performed, and some resurrections from the dead to which he pretended, brought him somewhat into repute. Without money or arms he could not fail to perish: if he had been in possession of these, he would have been no less successful than Moses or Mahomet, and all those who, with like advantages, have elevated themselves above their fellow-men. If he had been more unfortunate, he would not have been less adroit; and several traits in his history prove that the principal defect in his policy was his carelessness in not sufficiently providing for his own security. Otherwise, I do not find that his plans were less skilfully devised than those of the other two: at all events his law has become the rule of faith to people who flatter themselves that they are the wisest in the world.§ 13.On the Politics of Jesus Christ.Can anything be more subtle than the answer of Jesus concerning the woman taken in adultery? The Jews having demanded of him if they should stone her, instead of answering the question directly—a negative answer being directly contrary to the law, and an affirmative convicting him of severity and cruelty, which would have alienated their minds from him—instead, therefore, of replying as an ordinary individual would have done on the occasion—“Let him,” said he, “who is without sin amongst you cast the first stone at her.”13A shrewd reply, and one evincing great presence of mind. On another occasion, being shown a piece of money with the emperor’s image and superscription upon it, and asked if it were lawful to pay tribute money unto Cæsar, he eluded the difficulty of answering: “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s.”14Thefalse position in which they wished to place him was this: that if he denied that it was lawful, he was guilty of high treason; and if he said that it was, he went directly against the law of Moses, which he always protested that he never intended to do—knowing no doubt that he was too helpless to do so with impunity at that time. Afterwards, when he became more celebrated, he endeavoured to abrogate it almost totally: acting in this way not unlike those princes, who, until their power is thoroughly established, always promise to confirm the privileges of their subjects, but who, after that has been secured, care little for their promises.When the Pharisees asked him by what authority he taught the people and preached to them, he penetrated their intention—which was to convict him of falsehood; whether he answered that it was by human authority—he not being of the order of the priesthood, who alone were charged with the instruction of the people; or whether he preached by the express orders of God—his own doctrine being opposed to the law of Moses; he avoided their snare, and embarrassed themselves, by asking them in what name John baptised.15The Pharisees, who from political motives, rejected the baptism of John, would have condemned themselves if they had said that it was in the name of God; and if they hadnotsaid so, they would have exposed themselves to the rage of the populace, who maintained the opposite opinion. To get out of this dilemma, they answered that they could not tell: on which Jesus Christ replied, that neither was he obliged to tell them by what name or authority he taught the people.§ 14.Such was the character of the destroyer of the ancient law, and the founder of the new religion that was built upon its ruins; in which religion a disinterested mind can perceive nothing more divine than in any of those which preceded it. Its founder, who was not altogether ignorant, having witnessed extreme corruption in the Jewish republic, judged that its end was near, and thought it a favorable opportunity for forwarding his own designs.The fear of being anticipated by men more able than himself, made him hasten to secure his ground by means entirely opposite to those adopted by Moses. The former began by rendering himself terrible to other nations. Jesus Christ, on the contrary, attracted mankind to himself by the hope of blessings in a life beyond the grave, which he said they would obtain by believing in him. Whilst Moses only promised temporal benefits to the observers of his law, Jesus Christ led his followers to hope for those which would never end. The laws of the one only regarded exterior observances; those of the other looked into the heart, influenced the thoughts, and stood on opposite grounds to the law of Moses. Whence it follows, that Jesus Christ believed with Aristotle, that it is the same with religion and nations as with individuals who are born and who die; and as there is nothing which is not subject to dissolution, there is no law which must not in turn give place to another.16But as there is difficulty in passing from one law to another, and as the greater part of men are stubborn in religious matters, Jesus Christ, in imitation of other innovators, had recourse to miracles, which have at all times confounded the ignorant, and advanced the projects of ambitious and designing men.§ 15.Christianity having been founded in this way, Jesus Christ wisely imagined that he could profit by the errors in the politics of Moses, and render his new law eternal—an undertaking in which he finally succeeded a little perhaps beyond his expectation. The Hebrew prophets intended to do honour to Moses, by predicting a successor who should resemble him—a Messiah great in virtues, powerful in wealth, and terrible to his enemies. These prophecies, however, produced altogether a different effect from what they expected; a number of ambitious demagogues having embraced theopportunityof palming themselves off for the comingMessiah, which led to those insurrections and civil convulsions which lasted until the entire destruction of the ancient republic of the Hebrews. Jesus Christ, more subtle than the prophets who succeeded Moses, predicted that a man of this description would appear—the great enemy of God—the favorite of the demons—the aggregation of all the vices and the cause of all the desolation in the world. After such a splendid eulogy, one would think that nobody could resist the temptation of calling himselfAntichrist; and I do not believe that it is possible to discover a secret equal to it for eternalizing a law, although there can be nothing more fabulous than what we read of concerning this pretended Antichrist. St. Paul says that he was a ready born; whence it follows that he must have been on the watch for the coming of Jesus Christ: nevertheless, more than sixteen years rolled on after the prediction of the nativity of this formidable personage, without any one having heard of his appearance. I acknowledge that some have applied the terms to Ebion and Cerinthus, two great adversaries of Jesus Christ, whose pretended divinity they disputed. But if this interpretation be the meaning of the Apostle, which is far from being credible, the words referred to must point out a host of Antichrists in all ages—it being impossible that truly learned men should think of injuring the cause of truth, by declaring that the history of Jesus Christ was a contemptible fable,17and that his law was nothing but a series of dreams and reveries, which ignorance had brought in repute, which self-interest had encouraged, and which tyranny had taken under its especial protection.§ 16.They pretend, nevertheless, that a religion built upon so weak foundations is divine and supernatural, as if it werenot an ascertained fact that there is no class of people more fitted to give currency to the most absurd opinions than women and lunatics. It is not to be wondered at that Jesus Christ reckoned none of the learned amongst his followers. He well knew that his law was inconsistent with common sense; and therefore he always declaimed against the sages, excluding them from that kingdom into which he admitted the poor in spirit, the simple and the imbecile. Rational minds ought to be thankful that they have nothing to do with such insanities.§ 17.On the Morality of Jesus Christ.We find nothing more divine in the morality of Jesus Christ than what can be drawn from the works of ancient authors; for this reason, perhaps every text in his code of morals is either borrowed from their’s or is an imitation of it. St. Augustine18acknowledges that in one of the so-called heathen writers, he discovered the whole of the commencement of the gospel according to St. John. We must remark also, that this apostle was so much accustomed to plunder others, that he has not scrupled to pillage from the prophets their enigmas and visions, for the purpose of composing his Apocalypse. Again, whence arises that agreement between the doctrines of the Old and New Testament and those of Plato, unless the Rabbis and others who composed the Jewish Scriptures had stolen from that distinguished man. The account of the creation of the world given in hisTimaeus, is much more satisfactory than that recorded in the book of Genesis; and it will not do to say that Plato, in his tour through Egypt, had read the books of the Jews, since, by the confession of St. Augustine, king Ptolemy had not ordered them to be translated till long after the philosopher had left the country.The landscape which Socrates describes to Simias (Phæton,) possesses infinitely more beauty than the Paradise of Eden: and the fable of the Hermaphrodites19is beyondcomparison a better invention than that which we read of in Genesis, where we are told that one of Adam’s ribs was taken from him for the purpose of creating a female out of it.Can any more plausible account of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah be given, than that it was caused by Phaeton? Is there no resemblance between the fall of Lucifer and that of Vulcan, or of the giants struck down by the thunderbolts of Jove. How close the resemblance between Sampson and Hercules; Elijah and Phaeton; Joseph and Hypolitus; Nebuchadnezzar and Lycaon; Tantalus and the rich man in torment;20the manna in the wilderness and the ambrosia of the gods! St. Augustine,21St. Cyril, and Theophilactus, compare Jonah with Hercules, calledTrinoctius, because he had been three days and three nights in the belly of a whale.The river which Daniel speaks of inchap.vii, v. 10, of his Prophecies, is palpably drawn from that Pyriphlegethon to which Plato alludes in his dialogue on the immortality of the soul. The idea of “Original Sin” is taken from the account of Pandora’s box; and the interrupted sacrifices of Isaac and of Jephtha’s daughter are borrowed from that Iphigenia, in whose room a hind was offered up. What we read of concerning Lot and his wife, is nearly the same as that which fabulous history informs us occurred to Bancis and Philemon. The histories of Perseus and of Bellerophon are the foundation of Michael and the demon whom he vanquished. In short, it is abundantly manifest that the authors of the Scriptures have copied the works of Hesiod, Homer, and some other ancient writers, almost word for word.§ 18.With respect to Jesus Christ himself, Celsus, by appealing to his opponent Origen, shows that he had taken some of his most approved apothegms from Plato—Such as this: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,than a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”22It was owing to the sect of the Pharisees, to which he belonged, that his followers believed in the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, and the torments of hell; and also in the greater part of his morality,23the whole of which I find in Epictetus, Epicures, and a few others. This last mentioned philosopher was referred to by St. Jerome, as a man whose virtues ought to put the best Christians to the blush; and whose mode of life was so temperate that a morsel of cheese, with bread and waterconstitutedhis highest repast. Leading a life so frugal, this philosopher, heathen as he was, declared that it was far better to be unfortunate and gifted with reason, than to be rich and opulent without it; adding, that wealth and wisdom were rarelyfoundunited in the same individual, and that it was impossible to enjoy happiness or contentment unless our conduct were guided by prudence, justice and honesty, which are the qualities whence flow all true and lasting enjoyments.As to Epictetus, I do not believe that there ever existed a man, not even excepting Jesus Christ, more firm, more self-denying, more equable, or who at any time gave forth to the world a more sublime system of morality. Were it not that I should exceed the limits which I have prescribed to myself in this treatise, I could recount many beautifultraits in his character; but the reader must be contented with one example. When a slave to Epaphroditus, a captain of Nero’s guards, his master took the brutal fancy to writhe his limbs, Epictetus, perceiving that it gave the monster satisfaction, said with a smile, that he saw clearly that the joke would not end until he had broken one of them, which happened accordingly. The philosopher with the same equanimity and the same smile, merely said, “Did I not tell you that you would certainly break the limb?” Where is there on record another instance of like firmness? How would Jesus Christ have acted in the circumstances?—he who wept and trembled at the least alarm, and who in his last moments exhibited a pusillanimity altogether contemptible, and which was never shown by the martyrs for his faith.If the work which Arian wrote concerning the life and death of our philosopher had been preserved, I have no doubt that we would have been in possession of many more examples of his equanimity than we have at present. I know that the priests will speak of the example which I have instanced, as they speak of the virtues of philosophic minds in general, and assert that it is based on vanity, and that it is by no means what it appears to be; but I know also, that those people are accustomed to speakex cathedrawhatever suits their purpose and to think they sufficiently earn the money which is given them for instructing the people, by declaiming against every man who knows what sober reason and real virtue are. Nothing in the world can be less in congruity with the actions of these superstitious men who decry them, than the manner of the truly learned. The former, having studied for no other end than to obtain a place to give them bread, become vain, and congratulate themselves when they have obtained it, as if they had arrived at the state of perfection; whereas it is nothing else to them than a state of idleness, pride, voluptuousness, and licentiousness,—a condition in which the great majority of them hold in no respect whatever the maxims of that religion which they profess. But we will leave these men, who have not the remotest conception of real virtue, and examine the evidences for the divinity of their master.§ 19.Having considered the politics and the morality of Jesus Christ, wherein we find nothing so useful or so sublime as we find in the writings of the ancients, let us now consider if the reputation which he acquired after his death be a proof of his divinity.The generality of mankind are so much accustomed to what is irrational, that it is astonishing to find people endeavouring to draw a rational inference from their conduct. Experience teaches us that they are always running after shadows, and that they neither do nor say anything betokening common sense. These fanatical notions on which they found their belief will always be in vogue, in spite of the efforts of the learned who have invariably set themselves against them. So rooted are their follies that they had rather be crammed with them to repletion than make any effort to be rid of them.It was to no purpose that Moses boasted that he was the interpreter of God, and attempted to prove his mission and his authority by extraordinary signs. If he absented himself for a short time (as he did occasionally, to hold conference with the Divinity, by his account, and as in like manner did Numa Pompilius and many other legislators), it was only to find on his return strong traces of the worship of the gods whom the Hebrew people had seen in Egypt. It was in vain that he had led them for forty years through the desert, that they might lose recollection of thedivinitieswhich they had left behind. They had not forgot them, and they always wished for some visible symbol to precede them, which, if they had got, they would have worshipped obstinately, at the risk of being exposed to extreme cruelty.The pride-inspired contempt alone which led them to the hatred of other nations, made them insensibly forget the gods of Egypt, and attach themselves to that of Moses. They worshipped him for some time with all the outward observance of the law; but with that inconstancy which leads the vulgar to run after novelty, they deserted him at last to follow the God of Jesus Christ.§ 20.The most ignorant alone of the Hebrews followed Moses—such also were they who ran after Jesus Christ; and their name being legion, and as they mutually supported each other, it is not to be wondered at if this new system of error was widely circulated. The teaching of these novelties was not without danger to those who undertook the task, but the enthusiasm which they excited extinguished every fear. Thus, the disciples of Christ, miserable as they were in his train, and even dying of hunger—(as we learn from the necessity under which they were, together with their leader, of plucking the ears of corn in the fields to sustain their lives)—these disciples never despaired till they saw their master in the hands of his executioners, and totally incapable of gifting them with that wealth, and power, and grandeur, which he had led them to expect.After his death, his disciples being frustrated in their fondest hopes, made a virtue of necessity. Banished as they were from every place, and persecuted by the Jews, who were eager to treat them as they had treated their master, they wandered into the neighboring countries; in which, on the evidence of some women, they set forth the resurrection of Christ, his divinity, and the other fables wherewith the gospels are filled.It was their want of success among the Jewish people which led to the resolution of seeking their fortune among the Gentiles; but as a little more knowledge than they possessed was necessary for the accomplishment of their design—the Gentiles being philosophically trained, and consequently too much the friends of truth and reason to be duped by trifles—the sectaries of Jesus gained over to their cause a young man24of ardent temperament and active habits, somewhat better instructed than the illiterate fishermen of Galilee, and more capable of drawing audiences to listen to his talk. He being warned from heaven (miraculously of course), leagued himself with them, and drew over some partizans by the threat of “fabled hell,” (a plagiarism from the ancient poets), and by the hope of the joys of paradise,into which blessed abode he was impudent enough to assert that he had at one time been introduced.These disciples then, by strength of delusion and lying, procured for their master the honor of passing for a god—an honor at which, in his life-time, Jesus could never have arrived. His destiny was no better than that of Homer, nor even so good; inasmuch as seven cities which had despised and starved the latter in his lifetime, struggled and fought with each other, in order to ascertain to which was due the merit of having given him birth.§ 21.It may be judged now, from what has been advanced, that Christianity, like every other religion, is only a complicated imposture—the success and progress of which would astonish the inventors themselves, could they revisit this world. Without bewildering ourselves, however, in a labyrinth of error and contradiction, such as we have alluded to, we go to Mahomet, who founded his law on maxims entirely opposite to those of Jesus Christ.§ 22.MAHOMET.Scarcely had the disciples of Jesus Christ torn down the Mosaic fabric for the purpose of establishing Christianity, when men, led by force of circumstances, and influenced by their usual inconstancy, followed the new legislator, who had elevated himself by means similar, as far as possible, to those which Moses employed. Like the Jewish lawgiver, Christ usurped the title of prophet, and ambassador of God; like him he pretended to perform miracles, and took advantage of the passions of the multitude. He soon found himself escorted by an ignorant populace, to whom he explained the new oracles of heaven. These miserably misled people, from the promises and fables of this new impostor, spread his renown far and wide, as having eclipsed all his predecessors.Mahomet, on the contrary, was a man who did not appear at all competent to lay the foundation of an empire. He was distinguished neither as a politician nor a philosopher: hecould neither read nor write.25At first he exhibited so little firmness, that he was frequently upon the point of abandoning his enterprise; and he would have done so, had it not been for the address of one his followers. When he was rising into celebrity, Corais, a powerful Arab chief, being irritated that a man of yesterday should have the boldness to mislead the people, declared himself his enemy, and attempted to thwart his designs; but the people, believing that Mahomet had continued intercourse with God and his angels, supported him till he had an opportunity of being avenged upon his adversary. The tribe of Corais was worsted; and Mahomet seeing himself surrounded by a host of fanatics, thought that he stood in no need of a coadjutor. However, lest Corais should expose his impostures, he took the initiative; and to make sure, he loaded him with promises, and swore that he only wished to become great in order to share with him that power, to the establishment of which he might so much contribute. “We can agree,” said he, “when we reach our proper elevation; we can depend, in the meantime, on that great multitude whom we have gained over, and it only remains that we make sure of them by the employment of that artifice which you have so happily invented.” At the same time he persuaded him to descend into the Cave of Oracles.This was a dried-up sunk well, from the bottom of which Corais spoke, in order that the people might believe that it was the voice of God declaring himself in favour of Mahomet who was in the midst of his proselytes. Deceived by the blandishments of the leader, his associate regularly descended into the well, to counterfeit the oracle. Whilst Mahomet was passing one day at the head of an infatuated multitude, they heard a voice, which said—“I am your God, and I declare that Mahomet is the prophet whom I have appointed for all nations; he will instruct you in my law of truth, which the Jews and Christians have altered.” For a long time the accomplice played this game; but at last he met with the blackest ingratitude. The voice being heard, as usual, proclaiming him an inspired personage, Mahomet turned to the people, and commanded them, in the name of that God who had recognised him as his prophet, to fill up the well with stones, that it might be an enduring witness in his favour, like that pillar which Jacob set up to mark the place where God had appeared to him.26Thus perished, miserably, the chief who had most contributed to the elevation of Mahomet. It was upon this heap of stones that the last of the three most celebrated impostors established his religion, and so solid and stable is its foundation, that after the lapse of twelve hundred years there is little appearance at present of its being overthrown.§ 23.In this way was the power of Mahomet established; and he was more fortunate than Jesus, inasmuch as he lived to see the wide diffusion of his doctrines, which Christ on account of his want of resources, was unable to do. He was even more fortunate in this respect than Moses, who from excess of ambition brought himself to a premature end.—Mahomet died in peace, and loaded with blessings. He had, moreover, a well-grounded hope that his religion would last, because it was accommodated to the nature of a people born and brought up in ignorance; an adaptation in which men more learned than himself, but less accustomed to associate with the lower orders, might have entirely failed.The reader is now in possession of the most remarkable facts concerning the three most celebrated legislators, whose religions have brought into subjection a great part of the human race. They were such as we have represented them; and it is for you to consider if they are worthy of your respect, and if you are justified in allowing yourselves to be led by those whom ambition alone conducted to power, and whose dreams have been perpetuated by ignorance. The following observations, if read with a free and unprejudiced mind, may lead to the discovery of truth, by clearing away those mists wherewith you have been blinded and beguiled.1Consult Hobbes’ Leviathan “De Homine,” chap. xli, pages 56, 57 and 58.↑2Philip of Macedon had sent auxiliaries and money to Hannibal in Africa. “Infensos Philippo, ob auxilia cum pecunia nuper in Africam missu Annibale.” Levy, Book xxxi. chap. 1.—Translator’s Note.↑3Hobbe’s Leviathan, “De Homine,” chap. xii, pp. 56 and 57.↑4Hobbes, ubi supra “De Homine,” chap. xii. pages 58 and 59.↑5This word must not be taken in its usual acceptation. What rational men understand by the term is a dexterous man, an able cheat, and a master of jugglery, which requires great readiness and address; and not by any means a person in compact with the Devil as the vulgar suppose.↑6“And he said, Leave us not, I pray thee; for as much as thouknowesthow we are to encamp in the wilderness,and thou mayest be to us instead of eyes.”—Num. chap. x, v. 31.↑7Exodus iv. 16.↑8When Romulus was reviewing his forces in the plain of Caprae, here suddenly arose a thunder-storm, during which he was enveloped in so thick a cloud that he was lost to the view of his army; nor thereafter on this earth was Romulus seen.—Liv.1. I. c. 16.—Translator’s note.↑9Hobbes’ Leviathan; de homine, chap. xii. pp. 59 and 60.↑10It is recorded by Livy, that “there is a grove, through which flowed aperennialstream, taking its origin in a dark cave, in which Numa was accustomed to meet the goddess, and receive instructions as to his political and religions institutions.”—Liv.1. I. c. 21.↑11Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aileVienne obom brer une Purcelle,Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;L’on en vit autant en Lydie.Et le beau Cygne de LedaVaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.↑12I. Samuel, chap. viii. vs. 5 and 6.↑13The Gospel according toJohn, chap. viii. v. 7.↑14Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxii. v. 21.↑15Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxi. v. 27.↑16Saint Paul,Hebrews, chap. viii. v. 13speaks in these terms: “In that he saith anewcovenant, he hath made thefirstold. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”—Translator’s note.↑17This was the opinion of Pope Leo X. as appears from an expression of his, which, considering that it was made use of at a time when the philosophical spirit of inquiry had made little progress, was remarkably bold. “It has been well known in all ages,” he observed to Cardinal Beinbo, “how much this fable of Jesus Christ has been profitable to us and ours.”Quantum nobis nostrisque sa de Christo fabula profuerit, satis est omnibus saeculis notum.↑18Confessions, 1. VII. c. ix. v. 28.↑19See the discourse of Aristophanes, in the “Banquet of Plato.”↑20Luke’s Gospel, chap. xvi. v. 24.↑21“The City of God,” book I. chap. xiv.↑22Orig. adv. Cels. 1. VIII. chap. iv. Compare with,Matthew, chap. xix. v. 24.↑23Op. adv. Jorin. 1. II. chap.viii.—“In indication of their refusal to take an oath, the Society of Friends quote the words of Christ, “Swear not at all;” unaware, or overlooking, that this expression is descriptive of a state of social perfection, when the word of a man will be as good as his oath. Many others of Christ’s precepts besides this are unobserved by Christians, such as ‘Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth,’ ‘Give to every one that asketh, and from him that would borrow of you turn not thou away.’The morality of Christ is a beau ideal so far from being realized, that there is not even a similitude of it in the Christian world.The Quakers who vauntingly obey this precept regarding oaths, has no hesitation in breaking the other precepts respecting the hoarding of money, and refusing to give it away.”—Translator’s Note.↑24St. Paul.↑25“I can believe,” observes the Count de Boulainvilliers, “that Mahomet was ignorant of the common elements of education. But assuredly he wasnotignorant in respect to that vast knowledge which a far travelled man of great natural powers may acquire. He wasnotignorant of his native tongue, although he could not read it, being master of all its subtleness and all its beauties. He was thoroughly qualified to render hateful whatever was truly blameworthy, and to paint truth in colours so simple and vivid, that it was impossible to misunderstand it.All that he has said is true, as regards the essential dogmas of Religion; buthe has not said all that is true, and in this respect alone does our religion differ from his.” Farther on he adds, that “Mahomet was neither ignorant nor a barbarian; he conducted his enterprise with all the skill, delicacy, perseverance, and intrepidity, which was necessary to ensure its success. His views were as lofty as any which Alexander the Great, or Julius Cæsar, were capable of entertaining, had they been in his position.”—Life of Mahomet by Count de Boulainvilliers, book II. pp. 266–8. Amsterdam edit. 1731.↑26Genesis chap. xxviii. v. 18.↑

CHAP. III.ON THE MEANING OF THE WORDRELIGION; HOW, AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE, SO MANY RELIGIONS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED INTO THE WORLD.§ 1.Before the termReligionwas introduced into the world, mankind followed the law of Nature, that is, they lived conformably to Reason. Instinct was the only bond by which men were united; and this bond, simple as it is, was so strong that divisions were rare. But after terror led them to suspect that there were Gods and invisible Powers, they built altars to the imaginary beings, and shaking off the yoke of reason and of Nature, they bended themselves by foolish ceremonies, and by a superstitious worship of the idle phantoms which themselves had imagined.Such was the origin of the wordReligion, which has made so much noise in the world. After having admitted the existence of these invisible Agencies, men worshipped them to depreciate their anger, and moreover they believed that nature was under the control of these Powers. Afterwards they came to regard themselves as inert matter, or as slaves who could only act under the commands of these imaginary beings. This false idea having obtained possession of their minds, they began to exhibit more contempt for nature, and more respect for those whom they called their Gods. Hence sprung that ignorance in which so many nations were immersed—an ignorance from which, however profound, the true philosophers might have freed them, ifthey had not been always thwarted by those who led the blind, and throve by their own impostures.Now, although there were little appearance of success in our undertaking, we must not forsake the cause of truth. A generous mind will speak of things as they really are, out of regard to those who exhibit symptoms of this malady. The truth, whatever its nature may be, can never be injurious; whereas error, although at the time apparently innocent and even useful, must finally terminate in the most disastrous results.§ 2.Terror having thus created the Gods, men wished to ascertain their nature, and conceiving that they must be of the same substance as the Soul, which they thought was like the appearances in a mirror, or the phantoms of sleep, they believed that their Gods were real substances, but so thin and subtle that to distinguish them fromBodiesthey named themSpirits; althoughBodiesandSpiritsare in truth one and the same thing, for it is impossible to imagine anincorporeal Spirit. Every spirit has its proper shape, which is inclosed in some body; that is, it has its limits, and consequently it is a body, however subtle its nature.1§ 3.The ignorant, that is the majority of mankind, having thus determined the nature and substance of their Gods, endeavoured next to discover the means by which these invisible agents acted; and unable to arrive at this because of their ignorance, they had recourse to their own conjectures, judging blindly of the future from the past. How is it possible to draw rational conclusions from any thing which has formerly happened in a certain way, as to what will happen hereafter, seeing that all the circumstances and all the causes which necessarily influence events and human actions, are so exceedingly different. They persisted however in contemplating the past, and they augured well or ill as to the future, according as any former similar undertaking had been successful or otherwise. On this principle, becausePhormis had defeated the Lacedemonians at the battle of Naupactus, the Athenians, after his death appointed another commander of the same name. Hannibal having been conquered by Scipio Africanus, the Romans, on account of his success, sent to the same province, Scipio Cæsar, who was unsuccessful both against the Greeks2and the native forces. Thus have many nations, after two or three experiments, only attributed their bad or good fortune to places, to objects, and to names. Others employed certain words which they denominatedspells, which they considered efficacious enough to make trees speak, to create a man or a God from a morsel of bread, and in short to metamorphose whatever appeared before their eyes.3§ 4.The empire of these invisible powers being now established, men at first did homage to them as their sovereigns, by marks of submission and respect; by gifts, prayers, &c. I say,at first, for nature does not enjoin bloody sacrifices for this purpose; these were only instituted for the subsistence of priests, and others set apart for the services of these imaginary Gods.§ 5.These originators of Religion, viz. Hope and Fear, aided by the different opinions and passions of men, have given rise to a vast number of phantastical creeds, which have been the cause of so much mischief and of so many revolutions among the nations.The honor and the revenues attached to the priesthood, or to the ministers of the Gods, have encouraged the ambition and avarice of cunning men who knew how to profit by the stupidity of the vulgar, whom they have gotso much entangled in their snares that they have led them insensibly into the habit of loving a lie and hating the truth.§ 6.A system of falsehood being established, ambitious men, intoxicated with the pleasure of being elevated above their fellow mortals, attempted to add to their reputation by feigning that they were the friends of those invisible Beings whom the common people so much feared. The better to succeed in this every one represented them after his fashion, and they all took the liberty of multiplying them to an extent almost incredible.§ 7.The rude unformed matter of the world was called the God Chaos. In the same way they deified the Heavens, the Earth, the Sea, Fire, the Winds and Planets. The same honor was conferred on men and women; birds, reptiles, the crocodile, the calf, the dog, the lamb, the serpent and the swine, in fact, all sorts of plants and animals were worshipped. Every river, every fountain, bore the name of some deity; every house had itslaresandpenates, and every man his genius—all was filled above and below the earth with Gods, Spirits, Shadows, and Demons. Neither was it enough to feign divinities in every imaginable place. They outrage in the same way, Time, the Day, the Night, Victory, Strife, Honor, Virtue, Health, and Sickness. They invented these Divinities that they might represent them as ready to take vengeance on those who would not be brought up in temples and at altars. Lastly, they took to worshipping their own Genii; some invokedtheirsunder the name of the Muses, while others, under that of Fortune, worshipped their own ignorance. Some sanctioned their licentiousness under the name of Cupid, their wrath under that of the Furies, their natural parts under thenameofPriapus; in one word there was nothing to which they did not give the name of a God or a Demon.§ 8.The founders of these Religions, knowing well that their impostures were based upon the ignorance of the people,took care to keep them in it by the adoration of images in which they feigned that the Divinities resided. This rained gold into the coffers of the priesthood, and their benefices were considered as sacred things because they belonged to holy ministers; no one having the rashness or audacity to aspire to them. The better to deceive mankind, the priests pretended to be divinely inspired Prophets, capable of penetrating the mysteries of futurity, boasting that they had intercourse with the Gods; and, as the desire is natural to learn one’s destiny, they by no means failed to take advantage of it. Some were established at Delos, others at Delphi, and in various places, where in ambiguous language they answered the questions put to them. Even women took a part in these impostures, and the Romans in their greatest difficulties consulted the Sybilline books. These knaves were really considered inspired. Those who feigned that they had familiar commerce with the dead were called Necromancers; others pretended to ascertain the future from the flight of birds or the entrails of beasts; in short they could draw a good or bad augury from almost every thing, the eyes, the hands, the countenance, or any extraordinary object. So true it is that ignorance will receive any impression, when men know how to take advantage of it.4§ 9.The ambitious, who have always been great masters in the art of deceiving, have followed this method in promulgating their laws; and to induce mankind to give a voluntary submission to them, they havepersuadedthem that they received them from some God or Goddess.However great the multitude of Divinities, amongst those who worshipped them, and who were denominatedPagans, there was never any generally established system of religion. Every republic, every kingdom, every city, and every individual had their own proper rites, and conceived of the Divinity after their own phantasy. But afterwards there arose legislatures more subtle than the former, and who employed more skilful and sure plans in giving forth the laws, the worship, and the ceremonies calculatedto nourish that fanaticism which it was their object to establish.Amongst a great number, Asia has producedTHREE, distinguished as much by their laws and the worship which they established, as by the ideas which they have given of the Divinity, and the methods which they employed to confirm these ideas, and to render their laws sacred.—Moses was the most ancient. After him Jesus Christ appeared, who wrought upon his plan and kept the fundamental portion of his laws, but abolished the remainder. Mahomet, who appeared the last upon the scene, borrowed from each of the Religions in order to compose his own, and thereafter declared himself the sworn enemy of both.—We shall consider the character of the three legislators, and examine their conduct, that afterwards we may be enabled to decide whose opinions are best grounded—those who reverence them as inspired men, or those who regard them as impostors.§ 10.MOSES.The celebrated Moses, a grandson of a distinguished Magician,5(according to Justin Martyr) possessed every advantage calculated to render him that which he finally became. It is well known that the Hebrews, of whom he became the chief, were a nation of shepherds whom Pharaoh Osiris I. admitted into his kingdom in gratitude for the services which one of them had rendered during a period of severe famine. He assigned them a territory in the East of Egypt, rich in pasturage, and admirably adapted for the rearing of cattle; where, during two centuries, they very much increased in numbers, either, that being regarded as strangers they were not liable to military service, or on account of the other privileges which Osiris had conferred upon them. Many natives of the country joinedthemselves to them, among others, bands of Arabs who regarded them as brethren and of the same origin. However this may be, they multiplied so exceedingly, that the land of Goshen being unable to contain them, they spread over all the land of Egypt; giving just occasion to Pharaoh to dread that they would undertake some dangerous enterprise if his kingdom were attacked by the Ethiopians, his inveterate enemies, as had frequently happened. Reasons of state, therefore, compelled this monarch to take away their privileges, and to devise some means of weakening them and keeping them in subjection.Pharaoh Orus, surnamed Busirus on account of his cruelty, succeeded Memnon, and followed up his plans with respect to the Hebrews; and wishing to eternalize his memory by building the Pyramids, and fortifying the walls of Thebes, condemned the Hebrews to the task of making bricks, for which purpose the earth of that country was well adapted. During their bondage the celebrated Moses was born, the same year in which the king commanded that all the male Hebrew children should be thrown into the Nile, as the surest method of ridding his country from this host of strangers. Moses was in this way exposed to perish in the waters, his mother having placed him in a wicker basket among the willows on the banks of the stream. It happened that Thesmutis, the daughter of the king, was walking by the river, when, hearing the cries of the infant, that compassion so natural to her sex, inspired her with a wish to save it. Orus being dead she succeeded him, and Moses having been presented to her she commanded that he should receive the highest instruction which could be procured, as a son of the Queen of a people at that time the most learned and civilized in the world. “He was learned in all the learning of the Egyptians.” This implies that he was the ablest Politician, the greatest philosopher, and the most distinguished Magician of his time; and besides, it is very evident that he had been initiated into the Egyptian Priesthood, which resembled those of the Druids among the Gauls. Those who are ignorant of the nature of the Egyptian government, must learn that the whole territory was subject to one sole sovereign, but that it was divided into many provinces of but limited extent. The governors of theseprovinces were designated Monarchs, and were generally of the powerful order of the Priesthood, which in fact possessed almost the third part of Egypt. The king nominated these Monarchs; and if we compare what others have written concerning Moses, and what he has written himself, we must conclude that he was Monarch of the Province of Goshen, and that he owed his appointment to Thesmutis, to whom also he owed his life. Such was thestatusof Moses amongst the Egyptians, where he had full time and every opportunity of studying their manners and those of his own nation, and of obtaining a knowledge oftheirdominant inclinations and passions; a knowledge, of which he failed not to avail himself in that revolution of which he was the originator.After the death of Thesmutis, her successor renewed the persecution against the Hebrews, and Moses having fallen from the honor in which he had been formerly held, was afraid that he would find it difficult to justify a homicide of which he had been guilty. He accordingly resolved on flight, and retired into Arabia Petrea. Chance led him to the house of the chief of some native tribe, to whom he rendered so many services, and by whom his talents were so highly appreciated that he gave him one of his daughters in marriage. It must here be remarked that Moses was so little of a Jew, and had so limited a conception of the Deity whom he afterwards imagined, that he married an idolatress, and did not even think of circumcising his children.It was in the Arabian deserts, when watching the flocks of his father-in-law, that he formed the design of taking vengeance upon the King of Egypt for the injuries he had met with. He flattered himself that he would easily succeed in this, as well on account of his own talents, as from the feeling which he knew was general amongst those of his own nation, irritated against the government on account of the cruel treatment which they had experienced.It appears from the history which he has left us of this revolution, or at all events, from the history which the author of the books attributed to Moses, has left us, that Jethro, his father-in-law, was in the plot, as were Aaron his brother,and sister Marion, who remained in Egypt, and with whom, no doubt, he maintained a correspondence.However that may be, we perceive from the result, that he had with the utmost policy schemed out a great design; and that he knew how to bring to bear against the Egyptians that learning which he had acquired amongst them. I allude to magic, in the exhibition of which he showed himself more subtle and expert than all those who attempted the same tricks at the court of Pharaoh.It was by these pretended prodigies that he gained over those of his nation whom he wished to carry off, and to whom disaffected and revolutionary Egyptians, Ethiopians and Arabs joined themselves. By boasting the power of his Divinity, and the frequent communions which he had with him; and by declaring that he had his sanction for all the steps which he took with the leaders of the revolution, he succeeded so well that there followed him 600,000 fighting men, besides women and children, across the Arabian deserts, of which he well knew the localities. After six days painful flight, he ordained to his followers that they should consecrate the seventh day to his God by a general and public rest, for the purpose of persuading them that the Deity favored him and approved of his authority; and to deter any one from having the audacity to dispute his statements.There never existed a more ignorant people than the Hebrews, nor consequently more credulous. To be assured of this we have only to look to their condition in Egypt when Moses caused them to revolt. They were detested by the Egyptians on account of their profession as shepherds, they were persecuted by the sovereign, and employed in the most degrading toil. Amongst a people thus situated it could not be very difficult for a man with the abilities of Moses to exercise a vast influence. He persuaded them that his God, (whom he sometimes merely styles an angel), the God of their fathers, had appeared to him—that it was at his command that he had taken them under his guidance—and that they would be a people highly favored of the Deity, provided they believed in him. The expert employment of deceit, and his knowledge of science, and of human nature, fortified his injunctions; and he strengthened hisposition byprodigies, which are always sure to make a deep impression on the minds of an imbecile populace.It must here be attended to with especial care, that he thought he had discovered a sure method of keeping the Hebrews in subjection to himself, by persuading them that God himself was their conductor—that he preceded them by night as a pillar of fire, and by day as a cloud. It can be proved that this is perhaps a more gross deceit on the part of this leader than any he had ever practised. During his sojourn in Arabia, he had learned that, as the country was of vast extent and uninhabited, it was the custom of those who travelled in caravans to take guides, who conducted them under night by means of a brasier filled with burning wood, the flame of which they followed; and the smoke of which by day equally prevented the parties of the caravan from straggling. Moses took advantage of this and proclaimed it miraculous, adducing it as an evidence of divine protection. No person is called upon to regard this as cheat, on my authority; let them believe Moses himself, who in the book of Numbers, chap, x, v. 31, is represented as beseeching his brother-in-law Habab to journey with the Israelites and show them the way, because he knew thecountry.6This is proof positive. If it were really God who went before the people of Israel by night and by day, as a pillar of cloud and of fire, could they have desired a better guide? Notwithstanding here is this leader entreating his brother-in-law in the most urgent manner to act as his guide; the pillar of cloud and fire, it would seem, being only a God for the people and not for Moses.The unfortunate dupes being delighted to find themselves adopted by the chief of the Gods on their escape from a cruel bondage, cheerfully put faith in Moses, and swore to obey him blindly. His authority being confirmed, he wished to render it perpetual; and under thespeciouspretext of establishing the worship of that God whoseViceregenthe said he was, he appointed at once his brotherand his sons to high authority in the Royal Palace, that is the place whence he thought proper to give forth his oracles; this place being altogether out of the view of the people. Lastly he practised that which is always done at the formation of new institutions; that is, he exhibited prodigies, miracles, whereby some were dazzled, and others confounded, but which only excited pity in those who could see through his impostures.However crafty Moses might have been, he would have had considerable difficulty in securing obedience, without the aid of his armed followers. An impostor without physical force rarely succeeds.But in spite of the great number of dupes who submitted themselves blindly to the will of this clever legislator, there were found people bold enough to reproach him for bad faith; declaring that, under false appearances of justice and equality, he had engrossed the whole—that the sovereign authority was confined to his own family, who had no more right to it than any other individuals—and that he was less the father than the tyrant of his people. But on these occasions Moses, with profound policy, put to death those daring spirits and spared no one who disputed his authority.It was by similar precautions, and by always declaring that his punishments were instances of divine vengeance, that he reigned an absolute despot; and to end as he had begun—that is to say, as a knave and an impostor—he was in the habit of retiring to a cave, which he had caused to be dug in the centre of a waste, under the pretext of having conferences with the Divinity, that he might secure in this way the respect and submission of his followers. His end was like that of other similar impostors. He cast himself from a precipice which he knew of in the remote wilderness, to the end that his body might not be discovered, and that it might be thought the Deity had carried him off. He was not ignorant that the memory of the patriarchs which had preceded him was held in great veneration, although they knew their sepulchres; but this was not enough for an ambition like his—it was necessary that he should be revered as a god, over whom death had no control. This is the explanation of what he said at the commencement of his reign, when he said that God had declared that he wasto be a God unto his brother.7Elijah in like manner, and Romulus,8and Zamolxis, and all those who have had the foolish vanity to wish toeternalizetheir names, have concealed the time and manner of their death, in order that they might be thought immortal.§ 11.But to return to the legislators. There have never been any who did not assert that their laws did not emanate from some divinities9, and who have not attempted to persuade their followers that they themselves were more than mortal. Numa Pompilius, after having tasted the sweets of retirement, was with difficulty persuaded to leave them, although it was to fill the throne of Romulus; but compelled by the acclamations of the people, he profited by the devotedness of the Romans, and insinuated to them that if they really wished him to be their king, they must be prepared to obey him without enquiry, and to observe religiously the laws and divine institutions which had been communicated to him by the goddess Egeria.10Alexander the Great had? no less vanity. Not content with seeing himself master of the world, he wished to persuade mankind that he was the son of Jupiter. Perseus pretended also to have derived his origin from the same god and the virgin Danae. Plato also insisted on a virgin nativity, regarding Apollo as his father. There have been many other personages who have been guilty of the same absurdity. No doubt all these great men believed in the opinion of the Egyptians, who maintained that the Spirit of God was capable of having intercourse with the female sex, and rendering them pregnant.§ 12.JESUS CHRIST.Jesus Christ, who was acquainted with the maxims and the science of the Egyptians, gave currency to the belief alluded to above, because he thought it suitable to his purposes. Reflecting how Moses had become renowned by his command of an ignorant people, he undertook to build on this foundation, and got some few imbecile people to follow him, whom he persuaded that the Holy Ghost was his father, and that his mother was a virgin. These simple folks, accustomed to give themselves over to dreams and reveries, adopted his opinions, and believed whatever he wished: indeed, something considerably beyond this miraculous birth would by no means have been too miraculous for them. A beautiful dove overshadowed a virgin: there is nothing surprising in that. It happened frequently in Lydia; and the swan of Leda is the counterpart of the dove of Mary.11That a man should be born of a virgin, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, is neither more extraordinary nor more miraculous that that Genghis Khan should be born of a virgin, as the Tartars assert; or that Foh, according to the Chinese belief, derived his origin from a virgin rendered pregnant by the rays of the sun.This prodigy appeared at a time when the Jews, wearied with their God as they had formerly been with their Judges,12were desirous to have some visible ruler among them, as was the case with other nations. As the number of fools is infinite, Jesus Christ in a short time had many followers; but as his extreme poverty was an invincible obstacle tohis elevation, the Pharisees—at one time his admirers, and at another time startled at his boldness—forwarded or thwarted his interests, according to the inconstant humour of the populace. The report of his divine origin was spread about; but without forces, as he was, it was impossible that he could succeed, although some cures which he performed, and some resurrections from the dead to which he pretended, brought him somewhat into repute. Without money or arms he could not fail to perish: if he had been in possession of these, he would have been no less successful than Moses or Mahomet, and all those who, with like advantages, have elevated themselves above their fellow-men. If he had been more unfortunate, he would not have been less adroit; and several traits in his history prove that the principal defect in his policy was his carelessness in not sufficiently providing for his own security. Otherwise, I do not find that his plans were less skilfully devised than those of the other two: at all events his law has become the rule of faith to people who flatter themselves that they are the wisest in the world.§ 13.On the Politics of Jesus Christ.Can anything be more subtle than the answer of Jesus concerning the woman taken in adultery? The Jews having demanded of him if they should stone her, instead of answering the question directly—a negative answer being directly contrary to the law, and an affirmative convicting him of severity and cruelty, which would have alienated their minds from him—instead, therefore, of replying as an ordinary individual would have done on the occasion—“Let him,” said he, “who is without sin amongst you cast the first stone at her.”13A shrewd reply, and one evincing great presence of mind. On another occasion, being shown a piece of money with the emperor’s image and superscription upon it, and asked if it were lawful to pay tribute money unto Cæsar, he eluded the difficulty of answering: “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s.”14Thefalse position in which they wished to place him was this: that if he denied that it was lawful, he was guilty of high treason; and if he said that it was, he went directly against the law of Moses, which he always protested that he never intended to do—knowing no doubt that he was too helpless to do so with impunity at that time. Afterwards, when he became more celebrated, he endeavoured to abrogate it almost totally: acting in this way not unlike those princes, who, until their power is thoroughly established, always promise to confirm the privileges of their subjects, but who, after that has been secured, care little for their promises.When the Pharisees asked him by what authority he taught the people and preached to them, he penetrated their intention—which was to convict him of falsehood; whether he answered that it was by human authority—he not being of the order of the priesthood, who alone were charged with the instruction of the people; or whether he preached by the express orders of God—his own doctrine being opposed to the law of Moses; he avoided their snare, and embarrassed themselves, by asking them in what name John baptised.15The Pharisees, who from political motives, rejected the baptism of John, would have condemned themselves if they had said that it was in the name of God; and if they hadnotsaid so, they would have exposed themselves to the rage of the populace, who maintained the opposite opinion. To get out of this dilemma, they answered that they could not tell: on which Jesus Christ replied, that neither was he obliged to tell them by what name or authority he taught the people.§ 14.Such was the character of the destroyer of the ancient law, and the founder of the new religion that was built upon its ruins; in which religion a disinterested mind can perceive nothing more divine than in any of those which preceded it. Its founder, who was not altogether ignorant, having witnessed extreme corruption in the Jewish republic, judged that its end was near, and thought it a favorable opportunity for forwarding his own designs.The fear of being anticipated by men more able than himself, made him hasten to secure his ground by means entirely opposite to those adopted by Moses. The former began by rendering himself terrible to other nations. Jesus Christ, on the contrary, attracted mankind to himself by the hope of blessings in a life beyond the grave, which he said they would obtain by believing in him. Whilst Moses only promised temporal benefits to the observers of his law, Jesus Christ led his followers to hope for those which would never end. The laws of the one only regarded exterior observances; those of the other looked into the heart, influenced the thoughts, and stood on opposite grounds to the law of Moses. Whence it follows, that Jesus Christ believed with Aristotle, that it is the same with religion and nations as with individuals who are born and who die; and as there is nothing which is not subject to dissolution, there is no law which must not in turn give place to another.16But as there is difficulty in passing from one law to another, and as the greater part of men are stubborn in religious matters, Jesus Christ, in imitation of other innovators, had recourse to miracles, which have at all times confounded the ignorant, and advanced the projects of ambitious and designing men.§ 15.Christianity having been founded in this way, Jesus Christ wisely imagined that he could profit by the errors in the politics of Moses, and render his new law eternal—an undertaking in which he finally succeeded a little perhaps beyond his expectation. The Hebrew prophets intended to do honour to Moses, by predicting a successor who should resemble him—a Messiah great in virtues, powerful in wealth, and terrible to his enemies. These prophecies, however, produced altogether a different effect from what they expected; a number of ambitious demagogues having embraced theopportunityof palming themselves off for the comingMessiah, which led to those insurrections and civil convulsions which lasted until the entire destruction of the ancient republic of the Hebrews. Jesus Christ, more subtle than the prophets who succeeded Moses, predicted that a man of this description would appear—the great enemy of God—the favorite of the demons—the aggregation of all the vices and the cause of all the desolation in the world. After such a splendid eulogy, one would think that nobody could resist the temptation of calling himselfAntichrist; and I do not believe that it is possible to discover a secret equal to it for eternalizing a law, although there can be nothing more fabulous than what we read of concerning this pretended Antichrist. St. Paul says that he was a ready born; whence it follows that he must have been on the watch for the coming of Jesus Christ: nevertheless, more than sixteen years rolled on after the prediction of the nativity of this formidable personage, without any one having heard of his appearance. I acknowledge that some have applied the terms to Ebion and Cerinthus, two great adversaries of Jesus Christ, whose pretended divinity they disputed. But if this interpretation be the meaning of the Apostle, which is far from being credible, the words referred to must point out a host of Antichrists in all ages—it being impossible that truly learned men should think of injuring the cause of truth, by declaring that the history of Jesus Christ was a contemptible fable,17and that his law was nothing but a series of dreams and reveries, which ignorance had brought in repute, which self-interest had encouraged, and which tyranny had taken under its especial protection.§ 16.They pretend, nevertheless, that a religion built upon so weak foundations is divine and supernatural, as if it werenot an ascertained fact that there is no class of people more fitted to give currency to the most absurd opinions than women and lunatics. It is not to be wondered at that Jesus Christ reckoned none of the learned amongst his followers. He well knew that his law was inconsistent with common sense; and therefore he always declaimed against the sages, excluding them from that kingdom into which he admitted the poor in spirit, the simple and the imbecile. Rational minds ought to be thankful that they have nothing to do with such insanities.§ 17.On the Morality of Jesus Christ.We find nothing more divine in the morality of Jesus Christ than what can be drawn from the works of ancient authors; for this reason, perhaps every text in his code of morals is either borrowed from their’s or is an imitation of it. St. Augustine18acknowledges that in one of the so-called heathen writers, he discovered the whole of the commencement of the gospel according to St. John. We must remark also, that this apostle was so much accustomed to plunder others, that he has not scrupled to pillage from the prophets their enigmas and visions, for the purpose of composing his Apocalypse. Again, whence arises that agreement between the doctrines of the Old and New Testament and those of Plato, unless the Rabbis and others who composed the Jewish Scriptures had stolen from that distinguished man. The account of the creation of the world given in hisTimaeus, is much more satisfactory than that recorded in the book of Genesis; and it will not do to say that Plato, in his tour through Egypt, had read the books of the Jews, since, by the confession of St. Augustine, king Ptolemy had not ordered them to be translated till long after the philosopher had left the country.The landscape which Socrates describes to Simias (Phæton,) possesses infinitely more beauty than the Paradise of Eden: and the fable of the Hermaphrodites19is beyondcomparison a better invention than that which we read of in Genesis, where we are told that one of Adam’s ribs was taken from him for the purpose of creating a female out of it.Can any more plausible account of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah be given, than that it was caused by Phaeton? Is there no resemblance between the fall of Lucifer and that of Vulcan, or of the giants struck down by the thunderbolts of Jove. How close the resemblance between Sampson and Hercules; Elijah and Phaeton; Joseph and Hypolitus; Nebuchadnezzar and Lycaon; Tantalus and the rich man in torment;20the manna in the wilderness and the ambrosia of the gods! St. Augustine,21St. Cyril, and Theophilactus, compare Jonah with Hercules, calledTrinoctius, because he had been three days and three nights in the belly of a whale.The river which Daniel speaks of inchap.vii, v. 10, of his Prophecies, is palpably drawn from that Pyriphlegethon to which Plato alludes in his dialogue on the immortality of the soul. The idea of “Original Sin” is taken from the account of Pandora’s box; and the interrupted sacrifices of Isaac and of Jephtha’s daughter are borrowed from that Iphigenia, in whose room a hind was offered up. What we read of concerning Lot and his wife, is nearly the same as that which fabulous history informs us occurred to Bancis and Philemon. The histories of Perseus and of Bellerophon are the foundation of Michael and the demon whom he vanquished. In short, it is abundantly manifest that the authors of the Scriptures have copied the works of Hesiod, Homer, and some other ancient writers, almost word for word.§ 18.With respect to Jesus Christ himself, Celsus, by appealing to his opponent Origen, shows that he had taken some of his most approved apothegms from Plato—Such as this: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,than a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”22It was owing to the sect of the Pharisees, to which he belonged, that his followers believed in the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, and the torments of hell; and also in the greater part of his morality,23the whole of which I find in Epictetus, Epicures, and a few others. This last mentioned philosopher was referred to by St. Jerome, as a man whose virtues ought to put the best Christians to the blush; and whose mode of life was so temperate that a morsel of cheese, with bread and waterconstitutedhis highest repast. Leading a life so frugal, this philosopher, heathen as he was, declared that it was far better to be unfortunate and gifted with reason, than to be rich and opulent without it; adding, that wealth and wisdom were rarelyfoundunited in the same individual, and that it was impossible to enjoy happiness or contentment unless our conduct were guided by prudence, justice and honesty, which are the qualities whence flow all true and lasting enjoyments.As to Epictetus, I do not believe that there ever existed a man, not even excepting Jesus Christ, more firm, more self-denying, more equable, or who at any time gave forth to the world a more sublime system of morality. Were it not that I should exceed the limits which I have prescribed to myself in this treatise, I could recount many beautifultraits in his character; but the reader must be contented with one example. When a slave to Epaphroditus, a captain of Nero’s guards, his master took the brutal fancy to writhe his limbs, Epictetus, perceiving that it gave the monster satisfaction, said with a smile, that he saw clearly that the joke would not end until he had broken one of them, which happened accordingly. The philosopher with the same equanimity and the same smile, merely said, “Did I not tell you that you would certainly break the limb?” Where is there on record another instance of like firmness? How would Jesus Christ have acted in the circumstances?—he who wept and trembled at the least alarm, and who in his last moments exhibited a pusillanimity altogether contemptible, and which was never shown by the martyrs for his faith.If the work which Arian wrote concerning the life and death of our philosopher had been preserved, I have no doubt that we would have been in possession of many more examples of his equanimity than we have at present. I know that the priests will speak of the example which I have instanced, as they speak of the virtues of philosophic minds in general, and assert that it is based on vanity, and that it is by no means what it appears to be; but I know also, that those people are accustomed to speakex cathedrawhatever suits their purpose and to think they sufficiently earn the money which is given them for instructing the people, by declaiming against every man who knows what sober reason and real virtue are. Nothing in the world can be less in congruity with the actions of these superstitious men who decry them, than the manner of the truly learned. The former, having studied for no other end than to obtain a place to give them bread, become vain, and congratulate themselves when they have obtained it, as if they had arrived at the state of perfection; whereas it is nothing else to them than a state of idleness, pride, voluptuousness, and licentiousness,—a condition in which the great majority of them hold in no respect whatever the maxims of that religion which they profess. But we will leave these men, who have not the remotest conception of real virtue, and examine the evidences for the divinity of their master.§ 19.Having considered the politics and the morality of Jesus Christ, wherein we find nothing so useful or so sublime as we find in the writings of the ancients, let us now consider if the reputation which he acquired after his death be a proof of his divinity.The generality of mankind are so much accustomed to what is irrational, that it is astonishing to find people endeavouring to draw a rational inference from their conduct. Experience teaches us that they are always running after shadows, and that they neither do nor say anything betokening common sense. These fanatical notions on which they found their belief will always be in vogue, in spite of the efforts of the learned who have invariably set themselves against them. So rooted are their follies that they had rather be crammed with them to repletion than make any effort to be rid of them.It was to no purpose that Moses boasted that he was the interpreter of God, and attempted to prove his mission and his authority by extraordinary signs. If he absented himself for a short time (as he did occasionally, to hold conference with the Divinity, by his account, and as in like manner did Numa Pompilius and many other legislators), it was only to find on his return strong traces of the worship of the gods whom the Hebrew people had seen in Egypt. It was in vain that he had led them for forty years through the desert, that they might lose recollection of thedivinitieswhich they had left behind. They had not forgot them, and they always wished for some visible symbol to precede them, which, if they had got, they would have worshipped obstinately, at the risk of being exposed to extreme cruelty.The pride-inspired contempt alone which led them to the hatred of other nations, made them insensibly forget the gods of Egypt, and attach themselves to that of Moses. They worshipped him for some time with all the outward observance of the law; but with that inconstancy which leads the vulgar to run after novelty, they deserted him at last to follow the God of Jesus Christ.§ 20.The most ignorant alone of the Hebrews followed Moses—such also were they who ran after Jesus Christ; and their name being legion, and as they mutually supported each other, it is not to be wondered at if this new system of error was widely circulated. The teaching of these novelties was not without danger to those who undertook the task, but the enthusiasm which they excited extinguished every fear. Thus, the disciples of Christ, miserable as they were in his train, and even dying of hunger—(as we learn from the necessity under which they were, together with their leader, of plucking the ears of corn in the fields to sustain their lives)—these disciples never despaired till they saw their master in the hands of his executioners, and totally incapable of gifting them with that wealth, and power, and grandeur, which he had led them to expect.After his death, his disciples being frustrated in their fondest hopes, made a virtue of necessity. Banished as they were from every place, and persecuted by the Jews, who were eager to treat them as they had treated their master, they wandered into the neighboring countries; in which, on the evidence of some women, they set forth the resurrection of Christ, his divinity, and the other fables wherewith the gospels are filled.It was their want of success among the Jewish people which led to the resolution of seeking their fortune among the Gentiles; but as a little more knowledge than they possessed was necessary for the accomplishment of their design—the Gentiles being philosophically trained, and consequently too much the friends of truth and reason to be duped by trifles—the sectaries of Jesus gained over to their cause a young man24of ardent temperament and active habits, somewhat better instructed than the illiterate fishermen of Galilee, and more capable of drawing audiences to listen to his talk. He being warned from heaven (miraculously of course), leagued himself with them, and drew over some partizans by the threat of “fabled hell,” (a plagiarism from the ancient poets), and by the hope of the joys of paradise,into which blessed abode he was impudent enough to assert that he had at one time been introduced.These disciples then, by strength of delusion and lying, procured for their master the honor of passing for a god—an honor at which, in his life-time, Jesus could never have arrived. His destiny was no better than that of Homer, nor even so good; inasmuch as seven cities which had despised and starved the latter in his lifetime, struggled and fought with each other, in order to ascertain to which was due the merit of having given him birth.§ 21.It may be judged now, from what has been advanced, that Christianity, like every other religion, is only a complicated imposture—the success and progress of which would astonish the inventors themselves, could they revisit this world. Without bewildering ourselves, however, in a labyrinth of error and contradiction, such as we have alluded to, we go to Mahomet, who founded his law on maxims entirely opposite to those of Jesus Christ.§ 22.MAHOMET.Scarcely had the disciples of Jesus Christ torn down the Mosaic fabric for the purpose of establishing Christianity, when men, led by force of circumstances, and influenced by their usual inconstancy, followed the new legislator, who had elevated himself by means similar, as far as possible, to those which Moses employed. Like the Jewish lawgiver, Christ usurped the title of prophet, and ambassador of God; like him he pretended to perform miracles, and took advantage of the passions of the multitude. He soon found himself escorted by an ignorant populace, to whom he explained the new oracles of heaven. These miserably misled people, from the promises and fables of this new impostor, spread his renown far and wide, as having eclipsed all his predecessors.Mahomet, on the contrary, was a man who did not appear at all competent to lay the foundation of an empire. He was distinguished neither as a politician nor a philosopher: hecould neither read nor write.25At first he exhibited so little firmness, that he was frequently upon the point of abandoning his enterprise; and he would have done so, had it not been for the address of one his followers. When he was rising into celebrity, Corais, a powerful Arab chief, being irritated that a man of yesterday should have the boldness to mislead the people, declared himself his enemy, and attempted to thwart his designs; but the people, believing that Mahomet had continued intercourse with God and his angels, supported him till he had an opportunity of being avenged upon his adversary. The tribe of Corais was worsted; and Mahomet seeing himself surrounded by a host of fanatics, thought that he stood in no need of a coadjutor. However, lest Corais should expose his impostures, he took the initiative; and to make sure, he loaded him with promises, and swore that he only wished to become great in order to share with him that power, to the establishment of which he might so much contribute. “We can agree,” said he, “when we reach our proper elevation; we can depend, in the meantime, on that great multitude whom we have gained over, and it only remains that we make sure of them by the employment of that artifice which you have so happily invented.” At the same time he persuaded him to descend into the Cave of Oracles.This was a dried-up sunk well, from the bottom of which Corais spoke, in order that the people might believe that it was the voice of God declaring himself in favour of Mahomet who was in the midst of his proselytes. Deceived by the blandishments of the leader, his associate regularly descended into the well, to counterfeit the oracle. Whilst Mahomet was passing one day at the head of an infatuated multitude, they heard a voice, which said—“I am your God, and I declare that Mahomet is the prophet whom I have appointed for all nations; he will instruct you in my law of truth, which the Jews and Christians have altered.” For a long time the accomplice played this game; but at last he met with the blackest ingratitude. The voice being heard, as usual, proclaiming him an inspired personage, Mahomet turned to the people, and commanded them, in the name of that God who had recognised him as his prophet, to fill up the well with stones, that it might be an enduring witness in his favour, like that pillar which Jacob set up to mark the place where God had appeared to him.26Thus perished, miserably, the chief who had most contributed to the elevation of Mahomet. It was upon this heap of stones that the last of the three most celebrated impostors established his religion, and so solid and stable is its foundation, that after the lapse of twelve hundred years there is little appearance at present of its being overthrown.§ 23.In this way was the power of Mahomet established; and he was more fortunate than Jesus, inasmuch as he lived to see the wide diffusion of his doctrines, which Christ on account of his want of resources, was unable to do. He was even more fortunate in this respect than Moses, who from excess of ambition brought himself to a premature end.—Mahomet died in peace, and loaded with blessings. He had, moreover, a well-grounded hope that his religion would last, because it was accommodated to the nature of a people born and brought up in ignorance; an adaptation in which men more learned than himself, but less accustomed to associate with the lower orders, might have entirely failed.The reader is now in possession of the most remarkable facts concerning the three most celebrated legislators, whose religions have brought into subjection a great part of the human race. They were such as we have represented them; and it is for you to consider if they are worthy of your respect, and if you are justified in allowing yourselves to be led by those whom ambition alone conducted to power, and whose dreams have been perpetuated by ignorance. The following observations, if read with a free and unprejudiced mind, may lead to the discovery of truth, by clearing away those mists wherewith you have been blinded and beguiled.

§ 1.Before the termReligionwas introduced into the world, mankind followed the law of Nature, that is, they lived conformably to Reason. Instinct was the only bond by which men were united; and this bond, simple as it is, was so strong that divisions were rare. But after terror led them to suspect that there were Gods and invisible Powers, they built altars to the imaginary beings, and shaking off the yoke of reason and of Nature, they bended themselves by foolish ceremonies, and by a superstitious worship of the idle phantoms which themselves had imagined.Such was the origin of the wordReligion, which has made so much noise in the world. After having admitted the existence of these invisible Agencies, men worshipped them to depreciate their anger, and moreover they believed that nature was under the control of these Powers. Afterwards they came to regard themselves as inert matter, or as slaves who could only act under the commands of these imaginary beings. This false idea having obtained possession of their minds, they began to exhibit more contempt for nature, and more respect for those whom they called their Gods. Hence sprung that ignorance in which so many nations were immersed—an ignorance from which, however profound, the true philosophers might have freed them, ifthey had not been always thwarted by those who led the blind, and throve by their own impostures.Now, although there were little appearance of success in our undertaking, we must not forsake the cause of truth. A generous mind will speak of things as they really are, out of regard to those who exhibit symptoms of this malady. The truth, whatever its nature may be, can never be injurious; whereas error, although at the time apparently innocent and even useful, must finally terminate in the most disastrous results.

§ 1.

Before the termReligionwas introduced into the world, mankind followed the law of Nature, that is, they lived conformably to Reason. Instinct was the only bond by which men were united; and this bond, simple as it is, was so strong that divisions were rare. But after terror led them to suspect that there were Gods and invisible Powers, they built altars to the imaginary beings, and shaking off the yoke of reason and of Nature, they bended themselves by foolish ceremonies, and by a superstitious worship of the idle phantoms which themselves had imagined.Such was the origin of the wordReligion, which has made so much noise in the world. After having admitted the existence of these invisible Agencies, men worshipped them to depreciate their anger, and moreover they believed that nature was under the control of these Powers. Afterwards they came to regard themselves as inert matter, or as slaves who could only act under the commands of these imaginary beings. This false idea having obtained possession of their minds, they began to exhibit more contempt for nature, and more respect for those whom they called their Gods. Hence sprung that ignorance in which so many nations were immersed—an ignorance from which, however profound, the true philosophers might have freed them, ifthey had not been always thwarted by those who led the blind, and throve by their own impostures.Now, although there were little appearance of success in our undertaking, we must not forsake the cause of truth. A generous mind will speak of things as they really are, out of regard to those who exhibit symptoms of this malady. The truth, whatever its nature may be, can never be injurious; whereas error, although at the time apparently innocent and even useful, must finally terminate in the most disastrous results.

Before the termReligionwas introduced into the world, mankind followed the law of Nature, that is, they lived conformably to Reason. Instinct was the only bond by which men were united; and this bond, simple as it is, was so strong that divisions were rare. But after terror led them to suspect that there were Gods and invisible Powers, they built altars to the imaginary beings, and shaking off the yoke of reason and of Nature, they bended themselves by foolish ceremonies, and by a superstitious worship of the idle phantoms which themselves had imagined.

Such was the origin of the wordReligion, which has made so much noise in the world. After having admitted the existence of these invisible Agencies, men worshipped them to depreciate their anger, and moreover they believed that nature was under the control of these Powers. Afterwards they came to regard themselves as inert matter, or as slaves who could only act under the commands of these imaginary beings. This false idea having obtained possession of their minds, they began to exhibit more contempt for nature, and more respect for those whom they called their Gods. Hence sprung that ignorance in which so many nations were immersed—an ignorance from which, however profound, the true philosophers might have freed them, ifthey had not been always thwarted by those who led the blind, and throve by their own impostures.

Now, although there were little appearance of success in our undertaking, we must not forsake the cause of truth. A generous mind will speak of things as they really are, out of regard to those who exhibit symptoms of this malady. The truth, whatever its nature may be, can never be injurious; whereas error, although at the time apparently innocent and even useful, must finally terminate in the most disastrous results.

§ 2.Terror having thus created the Gods, men wished to ascertain their nature, and conceiving that they must be of the same substance as the Soul, which they thought was like the appearances in a mirror, or the phantoms of sleep, they believed that their Gods were real substances, but so thin and subtle that to distinguish them fromBodiesthey named themSpirits; althoughBodiesandSpiritsare in truth one and the same thing, for it is impossible to imagine anincorporeal Spirit. Every spirit has its proper shape, which is inclosed in some body; that is, it has its limits, and consequently it is a body, however subtle its nature.1

§ 2.

Terror having thus created the Gods, men wished to ascertain their nature, and conceiving that they must be of the same substance as the Soul, which they thought was like the appearances in a mirror, or the phantoms of sleep, they believed that their Gods were real substances, but so thin and subtle that to distinguish them fromBodiesthey named themSpirits; althoughBodiesandSpiritsare in truth one and the same thing, for it is impossible to imagine anincorporeal Spirit. Every spirit has its proper shape, which is inclosed in some body; that is, it has its limits, and consequently it is a body, however subtle its nature.1

Terror having thus created the Gods, men wished to ascertain their nature, and conceiving that they must be of the same substance as the Soul, which they thought was like the appearances in a mirror, or the phantoms of sleep, they believed that their Gods were real substances, but so thin and subtle that to distinguish them fromBodiesthey named themSpirits; althoughBodiesandSpiritsare in truth one and the same thing, for it is impossible to imagine anincorporeal Spirit. Every spirit has its proper shape, which is inclosed in some body; that is, it has its limits, and consequently it is a body, however subtle its nature.1

§ 3.The ignorant, that is the majority of mankind, having thus determined the nature and substance of their Gods, endeavoured next to discover the means by which these invisible agents acted; and unable to arrive at this because of their ignorance, they had recourse to their own conjectures, judging blindly of the future from the past. How is it possible to draw rational conclusions from any thing which has formerly happened in a certain way, as to what will happen hereafter, seeing that all the circumstances and all the causes which necessarily influence events and human actions, are so exceedingly different. They persisted however in contemplating the past, and they augured well or ill as to the future, according as any former similar undertaking had been successful or otherwise. On this principle, becausePhormis had defeated the Lacedemonians at the battle of Naupactus, the Athenians, after his death appointed another commander of the same name. Hannibal having been conquered by Scipio Africanus, the Romans, on account of his success, sent to the same province, Scipio Cæsar, who was unsuccessful both against the Greeks2and the native forces. Thus have many nations, after two or three experiments, only attributed their bad or good fortune to places, to objects, and to names. Others employed certain words which they denominatedspells, which they considered efficacious enough to make trees speak, to create a man or a God from a morsel of bread, and in short to metamorphose whatever appeared before their eyes.3

§ 3.

The ignorant, that is the majority of mankind, having thus determined the nature and substance of their Gods, endeavoured next to discover the means by which these invisible agents acted; and unable to arrive at this because of their ignorance, they had recourse to their own conjectures, judging blindly of the future from the past. How is it possible to draw rational conclusions from any thing which has formerly happened in a certain way, as to what will happen hereafter, seeing that all the circumstances and all the causes which necessarily influence events and human actions, are so exceedingly different. They persisted however in contemplating the past, and they augured well or ill as to the future, according as any former similar undertaking had been successful or otherwise. On this principle, becausePhormis had defeated the Lacedemonians at the battle of Naupactus, the Athenians, after his death appointed another commander of the same name. Hannibal having been conquered by Scipio Africanus, the Romans, on account of his success, sent to the same province, Scipio Cæsar, who was unsuccessful both against the Greeks2and the native forces. Thus have many nations, after two or three experiments, only attributed their bad or good fortune to places, to objects, and to names. Others employed certain words which they denominatedspells, which they considered efficacious enough to make trees speak, to create a man or a God from a morsel of bread, and in short to metamorphose whatever appeared before their eyes.3

The ignorant, that is the majority of mankind, having thus determined the nature and substance of their Gods, endeavoured next to discover the means by which these invisible agents acted; and unable to arrive at this because of their ignorance, they had recourse to their own conjectures, judging blindly of the future from the past. How is it possible to draw rational conclusions from any thing which has formerly happened in a certain way, as to what will happen hereafter, seeing that all the circumstances and all the causes which necessarily influence events and human actions, are so exceedingly different. They persisted however in contemplating the past, and they augured well or ill as to the future, according as any former similar undertaking had been successful or otherwise. On this principle, becausePhormis had defeated the Lacedemonians at the battle of Naupactus, the Athenians, after his death appointed another commander of the same name. Hannibal having been conquered by Scipio Africanus, the Romans, on account of his success, sent to the same province, Scipio Cæsar, who was unsuccessful both against the Greeks2and the native forces. Thus have many nations, after two or three experiments, only attributed their bad or good fortune to places, to objects, and to names. Others employed certain words which they denominatedspells, which they considered efficacious enough to make trees speak, to create a man or a God from a morsel of bread, and in short to metamorphose whatever appeared before their eyes.3

§ 4.The empire of these invisible powers being now established, men at first did homage to them as their sovereigns, by marks of submission and respect; by gifts, prayers, &c. I say,at first, for nature does not enjoin bloody sacrifices for this purpose; these were only instituted for the subsistence of priests, and others set apart for the services of these imaginary Gods.

§ 4.

The empire of these invisible powers being now established, men at first did homage to them as their sovereigns, by marks of submission and respect; by gifts, prayers, &c. I say,at first, for nature does not enjoin bloody sacrifices for this purpose; these were only instituted for the subsistence of priests, and others set apart for the services of these imaginary Gods.

The empire of these invisible powers being now established, men at first did homage to them as their sovereigns, by marks of submission and respect; by gifts, prayers, &c. I say,at first, for nature does not enjoin bloody sacrifices for this purpose; these were only instituted for the subsistence of priests, and others set apart for the services of these imaginary Gods.

§ 5.These originators of Religion, viz. Hope and Fear, aided by the different opinions and passions of men, have given rise to a vast number of phantastical creeds, which have been the cause of so much mischief and of so many revolutions among the nations.The honor and the revenues attached to the priesthood, or to the ministers of the Gods, have encouraged the ambition and avarice of cunning men who knew how to profit by the stupidity of the vulgar, whom they have gotso much entangled in their snares that they have led them insensibly into the habit of loving a lie and hating the truth.

§ 5.

These originators of Religion, viz. Hope and Fear, aided by the different opinions and passions of men, have given rise to a vast number of phantastical creeds, which have been the cause of so much mischief and of so many revolutions among the nations.The honor and the revenues attached to the priesthood, or to the ministers of the Gods, have encouraged the ambition and avarice of cunning men who knew how to profit by the stupidity of the vulgar, whom they have gotso much entangled in their snares that they have led them insensibly into the habit of loving a lie and hating the truth.

These originators of Religion, viz. Hope and Fear, aided by the different opinions and passions of men, have given rise to a vast number of phantastical creeds, which have been the cause of so much mischief and of so many revolutions among the nations.

The honor and the revenues attached to the priesthood, or to the ministers of the Gods, have encouraged the ambition and avarice of cunning men who knew how to profit by the stupidity of the vulgar, whom they have gotso much entangled in their snares that they have led them insensibly into the habit of loving a lie and hating the truth.

§ 6.A system of falsehood being established, ambitious men, intoxicated with the pleasure of being elevated above their fellow mortals, attempted to add to their reputation by feigning that they were the friends of those invisible Beings whom the common people so much feared. The better to succeed in this every one represented them after his fashion, and they all took the liberty of multiplying them to an extent almost incredible.

§ 6.

A system of falsehood being established, ambitious men, intoxicated with the pleasure of being elevated above their fellow mortals, attempted to add to their reputation by feigning that they were the friends of those invisible Beings whom the common people so much feared. The better to succeed in this every one represented them after his fashion, and they all took the liberty of multiplying them to an extent almost incredible.

A system of falsehood being established, ambitious men, intoxicated with the pleasure of being elevated above their fellow mortals, attempted to add to their reputation by feigning that they were the friends of those invisible Beings whom the common people so much feared. The better to succeed in this every one represented them after his fashion, and they all took the liberty of multiplying them to an extent almost incredible.

§ 7.The rude unformed matter of the world was called the God Chaos. In the same way they deified the Heavens, the Earth, the Sea, Fire, the Winds and Planets. The same honor was conferred on men and women; birds, reptiles, the crocodile, the calf, the dog, the lamb, the serpent and the swine, in fact, all sorts of plants and animals were worshipped. Every river, every fountain, bore the name of some deity; every house had itslaresandpenates, and every man his genius—all was filled above and below the earth with Gods, Spirits, Shadows, and Demons. Neither was it enough to feign divinities in every imaginable place. They outrage in the same way, Time, the Day, the Night, Victory, Strife, Honor, Virtue, Health, and Sickness. They invented these Divinities that they might represent them as ready to take vengeance on those who would not be brought up in temples and at altars. Lastly, they took to worshipping their own Genii; some invokedtheirsunder the name of the Muses, while others, under that of Fortune, worshipped their own ignorance. Some sanctioned their licentiousness under the name of Cupid, their wrath under that of the Furies, their natural parts under thenameofPriapus; in one word there was nothing to which they did not give the name of a God or a Demon.

§ 7.

The rude unformed matter of the world was called the God Chaos. In the same way they deified the Heavens, the Earth, the Sea, Fire, the Winds and Planets. The same honor was conferred on men and women; birds, reptiles, the crocodile, the calf, the dog, the lamb, the serpent and the swine, in fact, all sorts of plants and animals were worshipped. Every river, every fountain, bore the name of some deity; every house had itslaresandpenates, and every man his genius—all was filled above and below the earth with Gods, Spirits, Shadows, and Demons. Neither was it enough to feign divinities in every imaginable place. They outrage in the same way, Time, the Day, the Night, Victory, Strife, Honor, Virtue, Health, and Sickness. They invented these Divinities that they might represent them as ready to take vengeance on those who would not be brought up in temples and at altars. Lastly, they took to worshipping their own Genii; some invokedtheirsunder the name of the Muses, while others, under that of Fortune, worshipped their own ignorance. Some sanctioned their licentiousness under the name of Cupid, their wrath under that of the Furies, their natural parts under thenameofPriapus; in one word there was nothing to which they did not give the name of a God or a Demon.

The rude unformed matter of the world was called the God Chaos. In the same way they deified the Heavens, the Earth, the Sea, Fire, the Winds and Planets. The same honor was conferred on men and women; birds, reptiles, the crocodile, the calf, the dog, the lamb, the serpent and the swine, in fact, all sorts of plants and animals were worshipped. Every river, every fountain, bore the name of some deity; every house had itslaresandpenates, and every man his genius—all was filled above and below the earth with Gods, Spirits, Shadows, and Demons. Neither was it enough to feign divinities in every imaginable place. They outrage in the same way, Time, the Day, the Night, Victory, Strife, Honor, Virtue, Health, and Sickness. They invented these Divinities that they might represent them as ready to take vengeance on those who would not be brought up in temples and at altars. Lastly, they took to worshipping their own Genii; some invokedtheirsunder the name of the Muses, while others, under that of Fortune, worshipped their own ignorance. Some sanctioned their licentiousness under the name of Cupid, their wrath under that of the Furies, their natural parts under thenameofPriapus; in one word there was nothing to which they did not give the name of a God or a Demon.

§ 8.The founders of these Religions, knowing well that their impostures were based upon the ignorance of the people,took care to keep them in it by the adoration of images in which they feigned that the Divinities resided. This rained gold into the coffers of the priesthood, and their benefices were considered as sacred things because they belonged to holy ministers; no one having the rashness or audacity to aspire to them. The better to deceive mankind, the priests pretended to be divinely inspired Prophets, capable of penetrating the mysteries of futurity, boasting that they had intercourse with the Gods; and, as the desire is natural to learn one’s destiny, they by no means failed to take advantage of it. Some were established at Delos, others at Delphi, and in various places, where in ambiguous language they answered the questions put to them. Even women took a part in these impostures, and the Romans in their greatest difficulties consulted the Sybilline books. These knaves were really considered inspired. Those who feigned that they had familiar commerce with the dead were called Necromancers; others pretended to ascertain the future from the flight of birds or the entrails of beasts; in short they could draw a good or bad augury from almost every thing, the eyes, the hands, the countenance, or any extraordinary object. So true it is that ignorance will receive any impression, when men know how to take advantage of it.4

§ 8.

The founders of these Religions, knowing well that their impostures were based upon the ignorance of the people,took care to keep them in it by the adoration of images in which they feigned that the Divinities resided. This rained gold into the coffers of the priesthood, and their benefices were considered as sacred things because they belonged to holy ministers; no one having the rashness or audacity to aspire to them. The better to deceive mankind, the priests pretended to be divinely inspired Prophets, capable of penetrating the mysteries of futurity, boasting that they had intercourse with the Gods; and, as the desire is natural to learn one’s destiny, they by no means failed to take advantage of it. Some were established at Delos, others at Delphi, and in various places, where in ambiguous language they answered the questions put to them. Even women took a part in these impostures, and the Romans in their greatest difficulties consulted the Sybilline books. These knaves were really considered inspired. Those who feigned that they had familiar commerce with the dead were called Necromancers; others pretended to ascertain the future from the flight of birds or the entrails of beasts; in short they could draw a good or bad augury from almost every thing, the eyes, the hands, the countenance, or any extraordinary object. So true it is that ignorance will receive any impression, when men know how to take advantage of it.4

The founders of these Religions, knowing well that their impostures were based upon the ignorance of the people,took care to keep them in it by the adoration of images in which they feigned that the Divinities resided. This rained gold into the coffers of the priesthood, and their benefices were considered as sacred things because they belonged to holy ministers; no one having the rashness or audacity to aspire to them. The better to deceive mankind, the priests pretended to be divinely inspired Prophets, capable of penetrating the mysteries of futurity, boasting that they had intercourse with the Gods; and, as the desire is natural to learn one’s destiny, they by no means failed to take advantage of it. Some were established at Delos, others at Delphi, and in various places, where in ambiguous language they answered the questions put to them. Even women took a part in these impostures, and the Romans in their greatest difficulties consulted the Sybilline books. These knaves were really considered inspired. Those who feigned that they had familiar commerce with the dead were called Necromancers; others pretended to ascertain the future from the flight of birds or the entrails of beasts; in short they could draw a good or bad augury from almost every thing, the eyes, the hands, the countenance, or any extraordinary object. So true it is that ignorance will receive any impression, when men know how to take advantage of it.4

§ 9.The ambitious, who have always been great masters in the art of deceiving, have followed this method in promulgating their laws; and to induce mankind to give a voluntary submission to them, they havepersuadedthem that they received them from some God or Goddess.However great the multitude of Divinities, amongst those who worshipped them, and who were denominatedPagans, there was never any generally established system of religion. Every republic, every kingdom, every city, and every individual had their own proper rites, and conceived of the Divinity after their own phantasy. But afterwards there arose legislatures more subtle than the former, and who employed more skilful and sure plans in giving forth the laws, the worship, and the ceremonies calculatedto nourish that fanaticism which it was their object to establish.Amongst a great number, Asia has producedTHREE, distinguished as much by their laws and the worship which they established, as by the ideas which they have given of the Divinity, and the methods which they employed to confirm these ideas, and to render their laws sacred.—Moses was the most ancient. After him Jesus Christ appeared, who wrought upon his plan and kept the fundamental portion of his laws, but abolished the remainder. Mahomet, who appeared the last upon the scene, borrowed from each of the Religions in order to compose his own, and thereafter declared himself the sworn enemy of both.—We shall consider the character of the three legislators, and examine their conduct, that afterwards we may be enabled to decide whose opinions are best grounded—those who reverence them as inspired men, or those who regard them as impostors.

§ 9.

The ambitious, who have always been great masters in the art of deceiving, have followed this method in promulgating their laws; and to induce mankind to give a voluntary submission to them, they havepersuadedthem that they received them from some God or Goddess.However great the multitude of Divinities, amongst those who worshipped them, and who were denominatedPagans, there was never any generally established system of religion. Every republic, every kingdom, every city, and every individual had their own proper rites, and conceived of the Divinity after their own phantasy. But afterwards there arose legislatures more subtle than the former, and who employed more skilful and sure plans in giving forth the laws, the worship, and the ceremonies calculatedto nourish that fanaticism which it was their object to establish.Amongst a great number, Asia has producedTHREE, distinguished as much by their laws and the worship which they established, as by the ideas which they have given of the Divinity, and the methods which they employed to confirm these ideas, and to render their laws sacred.—Moses was the most ancient. After him Jesus Christ appeared, who wrought upon his plan and kept the fundamental portion of his laws, but abolished the remainder. Mahomet, who appeared the last upon the scene, borrowed from each of the Religions in order to compose his own, and thereafter declared himself the sworn enemy of both.—We shall consider the character of the three legislators, and examine their conduct, that afterwards we may be enabled to decide whose opinions are best grounded—those who reverence them as inspired men, or those who regard them as impostors.

The ambitious, who have always been great masters in the art of deceiving, have followed this method in promulgating their laws; and to induce mankind to give a voluntary submission to them, they havepersuadedthem that they received them from some God or Goddess.

However great the multitude of Divinities, amongst those who worshipped them, and who were denominatedPagans, there was never any generally established system of religion. Every republic, every kingdom, every city, and every individual had their own proper rites, and conceived of the Divinity after their own phantasy. But afterwards there arose legislatures more subtle than the former, and who employed more skilful and sure plans in giving forth the laws, the worship, and the ceremonies calculatedto nourish that fanaticism which it was their object to establish.

Amongst a great number, Asia has producedTHREE, distinguished as much by their laws and the worship which they established, as by the ideas which they have given of the Divinity, and the methods which they employed to confirm these ideas, and to render their laws sacred.—Moses was the most ancient. After him Jesus Christ appeared, who wrought upon his plan and kept the fundamental portion of his laws, but abolished the remainder. Mahomet, who appeared the last upon the scene, borrowed from each of the Religions in order to compose his own, and thereafter declared himself the sworn enemy of both.—We shall consider the character of the three legislators, and examine their conduct, that afterwards we may be enabled to decide whose opinions are best grounded—those who reverence them as inspired men, or those who regard them as impostors.

§ 10.MOSES.The celebrated Moses, a grandson of a distinguished Magician,5(according to Justin Martyr) possessed every advantage calculated to render him that which he finally became. It is well known that the Hebrews, of whom he became the chief, were a nation of shepherds whom Pharaoh Osiris I. admitted into his kingdom in gratitude for the services which one of them had rendered during a period of severe famine. He assigned them a territory in the East of Egypt, rich in pasturage, and admirably adapted for the rearing of cattle; where, during two centuries, they very much increased in numbers, either, that being regarded as strangers they were not liable to military service, or on account of the other privileges which Osiris had conferred upon them. Many natives of the country joinedthemselves to them, among others, bands of Arabs who regarded them as brethren and of the same origin. However this may be, they multiplied so exceedingly, that the land of Goshen being unable to contain them, they spread over all the land of Egypt; giving just occasion to Pharaoh to dread that they would undertake some dangerous enterprise if his kingdom were attacked by the Ethiopians, his inveterate enemies, as had frequently happened. Reasons of state, therefore, compelled this monarch to take away their privileges, and to devise some means of weakening them and keeping them in subjection.Pharaoh Orus, surnamed Busirus on account of his cruelty, succeeded Memnon, and followed up his plans with respect to the Hebrews; and wishing to eternalize his memory by building the Pyramids, and fortifying the walls of Thebes, condemned the Hebrews to the task of making bricks, for which purpose the earth of that country was well adapted. During their bondage the celebrated Moses was born, the same year in which the king commanded that all the male Hebrew children should be thrown into the Nile, as the surest method of ridding his country from this host of strangers. Moses was in this way exposed to perish in the waters, his mother having placed him in a wicker basket among the willows on the banks of the stream. It happened that Thesmutis, the daughter of the king, was walking by the river, when, hearing the cries of the infant, that compassion so natural to her sex, inspired her with a wish to save it. Orus being dead she succeeded him, and Moses having been presented to her she commanded that he should receive the highest instruction which could be procured, as a son of the Queen of a people at that time the most learned and civilized in the world. “He was learned in all the learning of the Egyptians.” This implies that he was the ablest Politician, the greatest philosopher, and the most distinguished Magician of his time; and besides, it is very evident that he had been initiated into the Egyptian Priesthood, which resembled those of the Druids among the Gauls. Those who are ignorant of the nature of the Egyptian government, must learn that the whole territory was subject to one sole sovereign, but that it was divided into many provinces of but limited extent. The governors of theseprovinces were designated Monarchs, and were generally of the powerful order of the Priesthood, which in fact possessed almost the third part of Egypt. The king nominated these Monarchs; and if we compare what others have written concerning Moses, and what he has written himself, we must conclude that he was Monarch of the Province of Goshen, and that he owed his appointment to Thesmutis, to whom also he owed his life. Such was thestatusof Moses amongst the Egyptians, where he had full time and every opportunity of studying their manners and those of his own nation, and of obtaining a knowledge oftheirdominant inclinations and passions; a knowledge, of which he failed not to avail himself in that revolution of which he was the originator.After the death of Thesmutis, her successor renewed the persecution against the Hebrews, and Moses having fallen from the honor in which he had been formerly held, was afraid that he would find it difficult to justify a homicide of which he had been guilty. He accordingly resolved on flight, and retired into Arabia Petrea. Chance led him to the house of the chief of some native tribe, to whom he rendered so many services, and by whom his talents were so highly appreciated that he gave him one of his daughters in marriage. It must here be remarked that Moses was so little of a Jew, and had so limited a conception of the Deity whom he afterwards imagined, that he married an idolatress, and did not even think of circumcising his children.It was in the Arabian deserts, when watching the flocks of his father-in-law, that he formed the design of taking vengeance upon the King of Egypt for the injuries he had met with. He flattered himself that he would easily succeed in this, as well on account of his own talents, as from the feeling which he knew was general amongst those of his own nation, irritated against the government on account of the cruel treatment which they had experienced.It appears from the history which he has left us of this revolution, or at all events, from the history which the author of the books attributed to Moses, has left us, that Jethro, his father-in-law, was in the plot, as were Aaron his brother,and sister Marion, who remained in Egypt, and with whom, no doubt, he maintained a correspondence.However that may be, we perceive from the result, that he had with the utmost policy schemed out a great design; and that he knew how to bring to bear against the Egyptians that learning which he had acquired amongst them. I allude to magic, in the exhibition of which he showed himself more subtle and expert than all those who attempted the same tricks at the court of Pharaoh.It was by these pretended prodigies that he gained over those of his nation whom he wished to carry off, and to whom disaffected and revolutionary Egyptians, Ethiopians and Arabs joined themselves. By boasting the power of his Divinity, and the frequent communions which he had with him; and by declaring that he had his sanction for all the steps which he took with the leaders of the revolution, he succeeded so well that there followed him 600,000 fighting men, besides women and children, across the Arabian deserts, of which he well knew the localities. After six days painful flight, he ordained to his followers that they should consecrate the seventh day to his God by a general and public rest, for the purpose of persuading them that the Deity favored him and approved of his authority; and to deter any one from having the audacity to dispute his statements.There never existed a more ignorant people than the Hebrews, nor consequently more credulous. To be assured of this we have only to look to their condition in Egypt when Moses caused them to revolt. They were detested by the Egyptians on account of their profession as shepherds, they were persecuted by the sovereign, and employed in the most degrading toil. Amongst a people thus situated it could not be very difficult for a man with the abilities of Moses to exercise a vast influence. He persuaded them that his God, (whom he sometimes merely styles an angel), the God of their fathers, had appeared to him—that it was at his command that he had taken them under his guidance—and that they would be a people highly favored of the Deity, provided they believed in him. The expert employment of deceit, and his knowledge of science, and of human nature, fortified his injunctions; and he strengthened hisposition byprodigies, which are always sure to make a deep impression on the minds of an imbecile populace.It must here be attended to with especial care, that he thought he had discovered a sure method of keeping the Hebrews in subjection to himself, by persuading them that God himself was their conductor—that he preceded them by night as a pillar of fire, and by day as a cloud. It can be proved that this is perhaps a more gross deceit on the part of this leader than any he had ever practised. During his sojourn in Arabia, he had learned that, as the country was of vast extent and uninhabited, it was the custom of those who travelled in caravans to take guides, who conducted them under night by means of a brasier filled with burning wood, the flame of which they followed; and the smoke of which by day equally prevented the parties of the caravan from straggling. Moses took advantage of this and proclaimed it miraculous, adducing it as an evidence of divine protection. No person is called upon to regard this as cheat, on my authority; let them believe Moses himself, who in the book of Numbers, chap, x, v. 31, is represented as beseeching his brother-in-law Habab to journey with the Israelites and show them the way, because he knew thecountry.6This is proof positive. If it were really God who went before the people of Israel by night and by day, as a pillar of cloud and of fire, could they have desired a better guide? Notwithstanding here is this leader entreating his brother-in-law in the most urgent manner to act as his guide; the pillar of cloud and fire, it would seem, being only a God for the people and not for Moses.The unfortunate dupes being delighted to find themselves adopted by the chief of the Gods on their escape from a cruel bondage, cheerfully put faith in Moses, and swore to obey him blindly. His authority being confirmed, he wished to render it perpetual; and under thespeciouspretext of establishing the worship of that God whoseViceregenthe said he was, he appointed at once his brotherand his sons to high authority in the Royal Palace, that is the place whence he thought proper to give forth his oracles; this place being altogether out of the view of the people. Lastly he practised that which is always done at the formation of new institutions; that is, he exhibited prodigies, miracles, whereby some were dazzled, and others confounded, but which only excited pity in those who could see through his impostures.However crafty Moses might have been, he would have had considerable difficulty in securing obedience, without the aid of his armed followers. An impostor without physical force rarely succeeds.But in spite of the great number of dupes who submitted themselves blindly to the will of this clever legislator, there were found people bold enough to reproach him for bad faith; declaring that, under false appearances of justice and equality, he had engrossed the whole—that the sovereign authority was confined to his own family, who had no more right to it than any other individuals—and that he was less the father than the tyrant of his people. But on these occasions Moses, with profound policy, put to death those daring spirits and spared no one who disputed his authority.It was by similar precautions, and by always declaring that his punishments were instances of divine vengeance, that he reigned an absolute despot; and to end as he had begun—that is to say, as a knave and an impostor—he was in the habit of retiring to a cave, which he had caused to be dug in the centre of a waste, under the pretext of having conferences with the Divinity, that he might secure in this way the respect and submission of his followers. His end was like that of other similar impostors. He cast himself from a precipice which he knew of in the remote wilderness, to the end that his body might not be discovered, and that it might be thought the Deity had carried him off. He was not ignorant that the memory of the patriarchs which had preceded him was held in great veneration, although they knew their sepulchres; but this was not enough for an ambition like his—it was necessary that he should be revered as a god, over whom death had no control. This is the explanation of what he said at the commencement of his reign, when he said that God had declared that he wasto be a God unto his brother.7Elijah in like manner, and Romulus,8and Zamolxis, and all those who have had the foolish vanity to wish toeternalizetheir names, have concealed the time and manner of their death, in order that they might be thought immortal.

§ 10.MOSES.

The celebrated Moses, a grandson of a distinguished Magician,5(according to Justin Martyr) possessed every advantage calculated to render him that which he finally became. It is well known that the Hebrews, of whom he became the chief, were a nation of shepherds whom Pharaoh Osiris I. admitted into his kingdom in gratitude for the services which one of them had rendered during a period of severe famine. He assigned them a territory in the East of Egypt, rich in pasturage, and admirably adapted for the rearing of cattle; where, during two centuries, they very much increased in numbers, either, that being regarded as strangers they were not liable to military service, or on account of the other privileges which Osiris had conferred upon them. Many natives of the country joinedthemselves to them, among others, bands of Arabs who regarded them as brethren and of the same origin. However this may be, they multiplied so exceedingly, that the land of Goshen being unable to contain them, they spread over all the land of Egypt; giving just occasion to Pharaoh to dread that they would undertake some dangerous enterprise if his kingdom were attacked by the Ethiopians, his inveterate enemies, as had frequently happened. Reasons of state, therefore, compelled this monarch to take away their privileges, and to devise some means of weakening them and keeping them in subjection.Pharaoh Orus, surnamed Busirus on account of his cruelty, succeeded Memnon, and followed up his plans with respect to the Hebrews; and wishing to eternalize his memory by building the Pyramids, and fortifying the walls of Thebes, condemned the Hebrews to the task of making bricks, for which purpose the earth of that country was well adapted. During their bondage the celebrated Moses was born, the same year in which the king commanded that all the male Hebrew children should be thrown into the Nile, as the surest method of ridding his country from this host of strangers. Moses was in this way exposed to perish in the waters, his mother having placed him in a wicker basket among the willows on the banks of the stream. It happened that Thesmutis, the daughter of the king, was walking by the river, when, hearing the cries of the infant, that compassion so natural to her sex, inspired her with a wish to save it. Orus being dead she succeeded him, and Moses having been presented to her she commanded that he should receive the highest instruction which could be procured, as a son of the Queen of a people at that time the most learned and civilized in the world. “He was learned in all the learning of the Egyptians.” This implies that he was the ablest Politician, the greatest philosopher, and the most distinguished Magician of his time; and besides, it is very evident that he had been initiated into the Egyptian Priesthood, which resembled those of the Druids among the Gauls. Those who are ignorant of the nature of the Egyptian government, must learn that the whole territory was subject to one sole sovereign, but that it was divided into many provinces of but limited extent. The governors of theseprovinces were designated Monarchs, and were generally of the powerful order of the Priesthood, which in fact possessed almost the third part of Egypt. The king nominated these Monarchs; and if we compare what others have written concerning Moses, and what he has written himself, we must conclude that he was Monarch of the Province of Goshen, and that he owed his appointment to Thesmutis, to whom also he owed his life. Such was thestatusof Moses amongst the Egyptians, where he had full time and every opportunity of studying their manners and those of his own nation, and of obtaining a knowledge oftheirdominant inclinations and passions; a knowledge, of which he failed not to avail himself in that revolution of which he was the originator.After the death of Thesmutis, her successor renewed the persecution against the Hebrews, and Moses having fallen from the honor in which he had been formerly held, was afraid that he would find it difficult to justify a homicide of which he had been guilty. He accordingly resolved on flight, and retired into Arabia Petrea. Chance led him to the house of the chief of some native tribe, to whom he rendered so many services, and by whom his talents were so highly appreciated that he gave him one of his daughters in marriage. It must here be remarked that Moses was so little of a Jew, and had so limited a conception of the Deity whom he afterwards imagined, that he married an idolatress, and did not even think of circumcising his children.It was in the Arabian deserts, when watching the flocks of his father-in-law, that he formed the design of taking vengeance upon the King of Egypt for the injuries he had met with. He flattered himself that he would easily succeed in this, as well on account of his own talents, as from the feeling which he knew was general amongst those of his own nation, irritated against the government on account of the cruel treatment which they had experienced.It appears from the history which he has left us of this revolution, or at all events, from the history which the author of the books attributed to Moses, has left us, that Jethro, his father-in-law, was in the plot, as were Aaron his brother,and sister Marion, who remained in Egypt, and with whom, no doubt, he maintained a correspondence.However that may be, we perceive from the result, that he had with the utmost policy schemed out a great design; and that he knew how to bring to bear against the Egyptians that learning which he had acquired amongst them. I allude to magic, in the exhibition of which he showed himself more subtle and expert than all those who attempted the same tricks at the court of Pharaoh.It was by these pretended prodigies that he gained over those of his nation whom he wished to carry off, and to whom disaffected and revolutionary Egyptians, Ethiopians and Arabs joined themselves. By boasting the power of his Divinity, and the frequent communions which he had with him; and by declaring that he had his sanction for all the steps which he took with the leaders of the revolution, he succeeded so well that there followed him 600,000 fighting men, besides women and children, across the Arabian deserts, of which he well knew the localities. After six days painful flight, he ordained to his followers that they should consecrate the seventh day to his God by a general and public rest, for the purpose of persuading them that the Deity favored him and approved of his authority; and to deter any one from having the audacity to dispute his statements.There never existed a more ignorant people than the Hebrews, nor consequently more credulous. To be assured of this we have only to look to their condition in Egypt when Moses caused them to revolt. They were detested by the Egyptians on account of their profession as shepherds, they were persecuted by the sovereign, and employed in the most degrading toil. Amongst a people thus situated it could not be very difficult for a man with the abilities of Moses to exercise a vast influence. He persuaded them that his God, (whom he sometimes merely styles an angel), the God of their fathers, had appeared to him—that it was at his command that he had taken them under his guidance—and that they would be a people highly favored of the Deity, provided they believed in him. The expert employment of deceit, and his knowledge of science, and of human nature, fortified his injunctions; and he strengthened hisposition byprodigies, which are always sure to make a deep impression on the minds of an imbecile populace.It must here be attended to with especial care, that he thought he had discovered a sure method of keeping the Hebrews in subjection to himself, by persuading them that God himself was their conductor—that he preceded them by night as a pillar of fire, and by day as a cloud. It can be proved that this is perhaps a more gross deceit on the part of this leader than any he had ever practised. During his sojourn in Arabia, he had learned that, as the country was of vast extent and uninhabited, it was the custom of those who travelled in caravans to take guides, who conducted them under night by means of a brasier filled with burning wood, the flame of which they followed; and the smoke of which by day equally prevented the parties of the caravan from straggling. Moses took advantage of this and proclaimed it miraculous, adducing it as an evidence of divine protection. No person is called upon to regard this as cheat, on my authority; let them believe Moses himself, who in the book of Numbers, chap, x, v. 31, is represented as beseeching his brother-in-law Habab to journey with the Israelites and show them the way, because he knew thecountry.6This is proof positive. If it were really God who went before the people of Israel by night and by day, as a pillar of cloud and of fire, could they have desired a better guide? Notwithstanding here is this leader entreating his brother-in-law in the most urgent manner to act as his guide; the pillar of cloud and fire, it would seem, being only a God for the people and not for Moses.The unfortunate dupes being delighted to find themselves adopted by the chief of the Gods on their escape from a cruel bondage, cheerfully put faith in Moses, and swore to obey him blindly. His authority being confirmed, he wished to render it perpetual; and under thespeciouspretext of establishing the worship of that God whoseViceregenthe said he was, he appointed at once his brotherand his sons to high authority in the Royal Palace, that is the place whence he thought proper to give forth his oracles; this place being altogether out of the view of the people. Lastly he practised that which is always done at the formation of new institutions; that is, he exhibited prodigies, miracles, whereby some were dazzled, and others confounded, but which only excited pity in those who could see through his impostures.However crafty Moses might have been, he would have had considerable difficulty in securing obedience, without the aid of his armed followers. An impostor without physical force rarely succeeds.But in spite of the great number of dupes who submitted themselves blindly to the will of this clever legislator, there were found people bold enough to reproach him for bad faith; declaring that, under false appearances of justice and equality, he had engrossed the whole—that the sovereign authority was confined to his own family, who had no more right to it than any other individuals—and that he was less the father than the tyrant of his people. But on these occasions Moses, with profound policy, put to death those daring spirits and spared no one who disputed his authority.It was by similar precautions, and by always declaring that his punishments were instances of divine vengeance, that he reigned an absolute despot; and to end as he had begun—that is to say, as a knave and an impostor—he was in the habit of retiring to a cave, which he had caused to be dug in the centre of a waste, under the pretext of having conferences with the Divinity, that he might secure in this way the respect and submission of his followers. His end was like that of other similar impostors. He cast himself from a precipice which he knew of in the remote wilderness, to the end that his body might not be discovered, and that it might be thought the Deity had carried him off. He was not ignorant that the memory of the patriarchs which had preceded him was held in great veneration, although they knew their sepulchres; but this was not enough for an ambition like his—it was necessary that he should be revered as a god, over whom death had no control. This is the explanation of what he said at the commencement of his reign, when he said that God had declared that he wasto be a God unto his brother.7Elijah in like manner, and Romulus,8and Zamolxis, and all those who have had the foolish vanity to wish toeternalizetheir names, have concealed the time and manner of their death, in order that they might be thought immortal.

The celebrated Moses, a grandson of a distinguished Magician,5(according to Justin Martyr) possessed every advantage calculated to render him that which he finally became. It is well known that the Hebrews, of whom he became the chief, were a nation of shepherds whom Pharaoh Osiris I. admitted into his kingdom in gratitude for the services which one of them had rendered during a period of severe famine. He assigned them a territory in the East of Egypt, rich in pasturage, and admirably adapted for the rearing of cattle; where, during two centuries, they very much increased in numbers, either, that being regarded as strangers they were not liable to military service, or on account of the other privileges which Osiris had conferred upon them. Many natives of the country joinedthemselves to them, among others, bands of Arabs who regarded them as brethren and of the same origin. However this may be, they multiplied so exceedingly, that the land of Goshen being unable to contain them, they spread over all the land of Egypt; giving just occasion to Pharaoh to dread that they would undertake some dangerous enterprise if his kingdom were attacked by the Ethiopians, his inveterate enemies, as had frequently happened. Reasons of state, therefore, compelled this monarch to take away their privileges, and to devise some means of weakening them and keeping them in subjection.

Pharaoh Orus, surnamed Busirus on account of his cruelty, succeeded Memnon, and followed up his plans with respect to the Hebrews; and wishing to eternalize his memory by building the Pyramids, and fortifying the walls of Thebes, condemned the Hebrews to the task of making bricks, for which purpose the earth of that country was well adapted. During their bondage the celebrated Moses was born, the same year in which the king commanded that all the male Hebrew children should be thrown into the Nile, as the surest method of ridding his country from this host of strangers. Moses was in this way exposed to perish in the waters, his mother having placed him in a wicker basket among the willows on the banks of the stream. It happened that Thesmutis, the daughter of the king, was walking by the river, when, hearing the cries of the infant, that compassion so natural to her sex, inspired her with a wish to save it. Orus being dead she succeeded him, and Moses having been presented to her she commanded that he should receive the highest instruction which could be procured, as a son of the Queen of a people at that time the most learned and civilized in the world. “He was learned in all the learning of the Egyptians.” This implies that he was the ablest Politician, the greatest philosopher, and the most distinguished Magician of his time; and besides, it is very evident that he had been initiated into the Egyptian Priesthood, which resembled those of the Druids among the Gauls. Those who are ignorant of the nature of the Egyptian government, must learn that the whole territory was subject to one sole sovereign, but that it was divided into many provinces of but limited extent. The governors of theseprovinces were designated Monarchs, and were generally of the powerful order of the Priesthood, which in fact possessed almost the third part of Egypt. The king nominated these Monarchs; and if we compare what others have written concerning Moses, and what he has written himself, we must conclude that he was Monarch of the Province of Goshen, and that he owed his appointment to Thesmutis, to whom also he owed his life. Such was thestatusof Moses amongst the Egyptians, where he had full time and every opportunity of studying their manners and those of his own nation, and of obtaining a knowledge oftheirdominant inclinations and passions; a knowledge, of which he failed not to avail himself in that revolution of which he was the originator.

After the death of Thesmutis, her successor renewed the persecution against the Hebrews, and Moses having fallen from the honor in which he had been formerly held, was afraid that he would find it difficult to justify a homicide of which he had been guilty. He accordingly resolved on flight, and retired into Arabia Petrea. Chance led him to the house of the chief of some native tribe, to whom he rendered so many services, and by whom his talents were so highly appreciated that he gave him one of his daughters in marriage. It must here be remarked that Moses was so little of a Jew, and had so limited a conception of the Deity whom he afterwards imagined, that he married an idolatress, and did not even think of circumcising his children.

It was in the Arabian deserts, when watching the flocks of his father-in-law, that he formed the design of taking vengeance upon the King of Egypt for the injuries he had met with. He flattered himself that he would easily succeed in this, as well on account of his own talents, as from the feeling which he knew was general amongst those of his own nation, irritated against the government on account of the cruel treatment which they had experienced.

It appears from the history which he has left us of this revolution, or at all events, from the history which the author of the books attributed to Moses, has left us, that Jethro, his father-in-law, was in the plot, as were Aaron his brother,and sister Marion, who remained in Egypt, and with whom, no doubt, he maintained a correspondence.

However that may be, we perceive from the result, that he had with the utmost policy schemed out a great design; and that he knew how to bring to bear against the Egyptians that learning which he had acquired amongst them. I allude to magic, in the exhibition of which he showed himself more subtle and expert than all those who attempted the same tricks at the court of Pharaoh.

It was by these pretended prodigies that he gained over those of his nation whom he wished to carry off, and to whom disaffected and revolutionary Egyptians, Ethiopians and Arabs joined themselves. By boasting the power of his Divinity, and the frequent communions which he had with him; and by declaring that he had his sanction for all the steps which he took with the leaders of the revolution, he succeeded so well that there followed him 600,000 fighting men, besides women and children, across the Arabian deserts, of which he well knew the localities. After six days painful flight, he ordained to his followers that they should consecrate the seventh day to his God by a general and public rest, for the purpose of persuading them that the Deity favored him and approved of his authority; and to deter any one from having the audacity to dispute his statements.

There never existed a more ignorant people than the Hebrews, nor consequently more credulous. To be assured of this we have only to look to their condition in Egypt when Moses caused them to revolt. They were detested by the Egyptians on account of their profession as shepherds, they were persecuted by the sovereign, and employed in the most degrading toil. Amongst a people thus situated it could not be very difficult for a man with the abilities of Moses to exercise a vast influence. He persuaded them that his God, (whom he sometimes merely styles an angel), the God of their fathers, had appeared to him—that it was at his command that he had taken them under his guidance—and that they would be a people highly favored of the Deity, provided they believed in him. The expert employment of deceit, and his knowledge of science, and of human nature, fortified his injunctions; and he strengthened hisposition byprodigies, which are always sure to make a deep impression on the minds of an imbecile populace.

It must here be attended to with especial care, that he thought he had discovered a sure method of keeping the Hebrews in subjection to himself, by persuading them that God himself was their conductor—that he preceded them by night as a pillar of fire, and by day as a cloud. It can be proved that this is perhaps a more gross deceit on the part of this leader than any he had ever practised. During his sojourn in Arabia, he had learned that, as the country was of vast extent and uninhabited, it was the custom of those who travelled in caravans to take guides, who conducted them under night by means of a brasier filled with burning wood, the flame of which they followed; and the smoke of which by day equally prevented the parties of the caravan from straggling. Moses took advantage of this and proclaimed it miraculous, adducing it as an evidence of divine protection. No person is called upon to regard this as cheat, on my authority; let them believe Moses himself, who in the book of Numbers, chap, x, v. 31, is represented as beseeching his brother-in-law Habab to journey with the Israelites and show them the way, because he knew thecountry.6This is proof positive. If it were really God who went before the people of Israel by night and by day, as a pillar of cloud and of fire, could they have desired a better guide? Notwithstanding here is this leader entreating his brother-in-law in the most urgent manner to act as his guide; the pillar of cloud and fire, it would seem, being only a God for the people and not for Moses.

The unfortunate dupes being delighted to find themselves adopted by the chief of the Gods on their escape from a cruel bondage, cheerfully put faith in Moses, and swore to obey him blindly. His authority being confirmed, he wished to render it perpetual; and under thespeciouspretext of establishing the worship of that God whoseViceregenthe said he was, he appointed at once his brotherand his sons to high authority in the Royal Palace, that is the place whence he thought proper to give forth his oracles; this place being altogether out of the view of the people. Lastly he practised that which is always done at the formation of new institutions; that is, he exhibited prodigies, miracles, whereby some were dazzled, and others confounded, but which only excited pity in those who could see through his impostures.

However crafty Moses might have been, he would have had considerable difficulty in securing obedience, without the aid of his armed followers. An impostor without physical force rarely succeeds.

But in spite of the great number of dupes who submitted themselves blindly to the will of this clever legislator, there were found people bold enough to reproach him for bad faith; declaring that, under false appearances of justice and equality, he had engrossed the whole—that the sovereign authority was confined to his own family, who had no more right to it than any other individuals—and that he was less the father than the tyrant of his people. But on these occasions Moses, with profound policy, put to death those daring spirits and spared no one who disputed his authority.

It was by similar precautions, and by always declaring that his punishments were instances of divine vengeance, that he reigned an absolute despot; and to end as he had begun—that is to say, as a knave and an impostor—he was in the habit of retiring to a cave, which he had caused to be dug in the centre of a waste, under the pretext of having conferences with the Divinity, that he might secure in this way the respect and submission of his followers. His end was like that of other similar impostors. He cast himself from a precipice which he knew of in the remote wilderness, to the end that his body might not be discovered, and that it might be thought the Deity had carried him off. He was not ignorant that the memory of the patriarchs which had preceded him was held in great veneration, although they knew their sepulchres; but this was not enough for an ambition like his—it was necessary that he should be revered as a god, over whom death had no control. This is the explanation of what he said at the commencement of his reign, when he said that God had declared that he wasto be a God unto his brother.7Elijah in like manner, and Romulus,8and Zamolxis, and all those who have had the foolish vanity to wish toeternalizetheir names, have concealed the time and manner of their death, in order that they might be thought immortal.

§ 11.But to return to the legislators. There have never been any who did not assert that their laws did not emanate from some divinities9, and who have not attempted to persuade their followers that they themselves were more than mortal. Numa Pompilius, after having tasted the sweets of retirement, was with difficulty persuaded to leave them, although it was to fill the throne of Romulus; but compelled by the acclamations of the people, he profited by the devotedness of the Romans, and insinuated to them that if they really wished him to be their king, they must be prepared to obey him without enquiry, and to observe religiously the laws and divine institutions which had been communicated to him by the goddess Egeria.10Alexander the Great had? no less vanity. Not content with seeing himself master of the world, he wished to persuade mankind that he was the son of Jupiter. Perseus pretended also to have derived his origin from the same god and the virgin Danae. Plato also insisted on a virgin nativity, regarding Apollo as his father. There have been many other personages who have been guilty of the same absurdity. No doubt all these great men believed in the opinion of the Egyptians, who maintained that the Spirit of God was capable of having intercourse with the female sex, and rendering them pregnant.

§ 11.

But to return to the legislators. There have never been any who did not assert that their laws did not emanate from some divinities9, and who have not attempted to persuade their followers that they themselves were more than mortal. Numa Pompilius, after having tasted the sweets of retirement, was with difficulty persuaded to leave them, although it was to fill the throne of Romulus; but compelled by the acclamations of the people, he profited by the devotedness of the Romans, and insinuated to them that if they really wished him to be their king, they must be prepared to obey him without enquiry, and to observe religiously the laws and divine institutions which had been communicated to him by the goddess Egeria.10Alexander the Great had? no less vanity. Not content with seeing himself master of the world, he wished to persuade mankind that he was the son of Jupiter. Perseus pretended also to have derived his origin from the same god and the virgin Danae. Plato also insisted on a virgin nativity, regarding Apollo as his father. There have been many other personages who have been guilty of the same absurdity. No doubt all these great men believed in the opinion of the Egyptians, who maintained that the Spirit of God was capable of having intercourse with the female sex, and rendering them pregnant.

But to return to the legislators. There have never been any who did not assert that their laws did not emanate from some divinities9, and who have not attempted to persuade their followers that they themselves were more than mortal. Numa Pompilius, after having tasted the sweets of retirement, was with difficulty persuaded to leave them, although it was to fill the throne of Romulus; but compelled by the acclamations of the people, he profited by the devotedness of the Romans, and insinuated to them that if they really wished him to be their king, they must be prepared to obey him without enquiry, and to observe religiously the laws and divine institutions which had been communicated to him by the goddess Egeria.10

Alexander the Great had? no less vanity. Not content with seeing himself master of the world, he wished to persuade mankind that he was the son of Jupiter. Perseus pretended also to have derived his origin from the same god and the virgin Danae. Plato also insisted on a virgin nativity, regarding Apollo as his father. There have been many other personages who have been guilty of the same absurdity. No doubt all these great men believed in the opinion of the Egyptians, who maintained that the Spirit of God was capable of having intercourse with the female sex, and rendering them pregnant.

§ 12.JESUS CHRIST.Jesus Christ, who was acquainted with the maxims and the science of the Egyptians, gave currency to the belief alluded to above, because he thought it suitable to his purposes. Reflecting how Moses had become renowned by his command of an ignorant people, he undertook to build on this foundation, and got some few imbecile people to follow him, whom he persuaded that the Holy Ghost was his father, and that his mother was a virgin. These simple folks, accustomed to give themselves over to dreams and reveries, adopted his opinions, and believed whatever he wished: indeed, something considerably beyond this miraculous birth would by no means have been too miraculous for them. A beautiful dove overshadowed a virgin: there is nothing surprising in that. It happened frequently in Lydia; and the swan of Leda is the counterpart of the dove of Mary.11That a man should be born of a virgin, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, is neither more extraordinary nor more miraculous that that Genghis Khan should be born of a virgin, as the Tartars assert; or that Foh, according to the Chinese belief, derived his origin from a virgin rendered pregnant by the rays of the sun.This prodigy appeared at a time when the Jews, wearied with their God as they had formerly been with their Judges,12were desirous to have some visible ruler among them, as was the case with other nations. As the number of fools is infinite, Jesus Christ in a short time had many followers; but as his extreme poverty was an invincible obstacle tohis elevation, the Pharisees—at one time his admirers, and at another time startled at his boldness—forwarded or thwarted his interests, according to the inconstant humour of the populace. The report of his divine origin was spread about; but without forces, as he was, it was impossible that he could succeed, although some cures which he performed, and some resurrections from the dead to which he pretended, brought him somewhat into repute. Without money or arms he could not fail to perish: if he had been in possession of these, he would have been no less successful than Moses or Mahomet, and all those who, with like advantages, have elevated themselves above their fellow-men. If he had been more unfortunate, he would not have been less adroit; and several traits in his history prove that the principal defect in his policy was his carelessness in not sufficiently providing for his own security. Otherwise, I do not find that his plans were less skilfully devised than those of the other two: at all events his law has become the rule of faith to people who flatter themselves that they are the wisest in the world.

§ 12.JESUS CHRIST.

Jesus Christ, who was acquainted with the maxims and the science of the Egyptians, gave currency to the belief alluded to above, because he thought it suitable to his purposes. Reflecting how Moses had become renowned by his command of an ignorant people, he undertook to build on this foundation, and got some few imbecile people to follow him, whom he persuaded that the Holy Ghost was his father, and that his mother was a virgin. These simple folks, accustomed to give themselves over to dreams and reveries, adopted his opinions, and believed whatever he wished: indeed, something considerably beyond this miraculous birth would by no means have been too miraculous for them. A beautiful dove overshadowed a virgin: there is nothing surprising in that. It happened frequently in Lydia; and the swan of Leda is the counterpart of the dove of Mary.11That a man should be born of a virgin, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, is neither more extraordinary nor more miraculous that that Genghis Khan should be born of a virgin, as the Tartars assert; or that Foh, according to the Chinese belief, derived his origin from a virgin rendered pregnant by the rays of the sun.This prodigy appeared at a time when the Jews, wearied with their God as they had formerly been with their Judges,12were desirous to have some visible ruler among them, as was the case with other nations. As the number of fools is infinite, Jesus Christ in a short time had many followers; but as his extreme poverty was an invincible obstacle tohis elevation, the Pharisees—at one time his admirers, and at another time startled at his boldness—forwarded or thwarted his interests, according to the inconstant humour of the populace. The report of his divine origin was spread about; but without forces, as he was, it was impossible that he could succeed, although some cures which he performed, and some resurrections from the dead to which he pretended, brought him somewhat into repute. Without money or arms he could not fail to perish: if he had been in possession of these, he would have been no less successful than Moses or Mahomet, and all those who, with like advantages, have elevated themselves above their fellow-men. If he had been more unfortunate, he would not have been less adroit; and several traits in his history prove that the principal defect in his policy was his carelessness in not sufficiently providing for his own security. Otherwise, I do not find that his plans were less skilfully devised than those of the other two: at all events his law has become the rule of faith to people who flatter themselves that they are the wisest in the world.

Jesus Christ, who was acquainted with the maxims and the science of the Egyptians, gave currency to the belief alluded to above, because he thought it suitable to his purposes. Reflecting how Moses had become renowned by his command of an ignorant people, he undertook to build on this foundation, and got some few imbecile people to follow him, whom he persuaded that the Holy Ghost was his father, and that his mother was a virgin. These simple folks, accustomed to give themselves over to dreams and reveries, adopted his opinions, and believed whatever he wished: indeed, something considerably beyond this miraculous birth would by no means have been too miraculous for them. A beautiful dove overshadowed a virgin: there is nothing surprising in that. It happened frequently in Lydia; and the swan of Leda is the counterpart of the dove of Mary.11That a man should be born of a virgin, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, is neither more extraordinary nor more miraculous that that Genghis Khan should be born of a virgin, as the Tartars assert; or that Foh, according to the Chinese belief, derived his origin from a virgin rendered pregnant by the rays of the sun.

This prodigy appeared at a time when the Jews, wearied with their God as they had formerly been with their Judges,12were desirous to have some visible ruler among them, as was the case with other nations. As the number of fools is infinite, Jesus Christ in a short time had many followers; but as his extreme poverty was an invincible obstacle tohis elevation, the Pharisees—at one time his admirers, and at another time startled at his boldness—forwarded or thwarted his interests, according to the inconstant humour of the populace. The report of his divine origin was spread about; but without forces, as he was, it was impossible that he could succeed, although some cures which he performed, and some resurrections from the dead to which he pretended, brought him somewhat into repute. Without money or arms he could not fail to perish: if he had been in possession of these, he would have been no less successful than Moses or Mahomet, and all those who, with like advantages, have elevated themselves above their fellow-men. If he had been more unfortunate, he would not have been less adroit; and several traits in his history prove that the principal defect in his policy was his carelessness in not sufficiently providing for his own security. Otherwise, I do not find that his plans were less skilfully devised than those of the other two: at all events his law has become the rule of faith to people who flatter themselves that they are the wisest in the world.

§ 13.On the Politics of Jesus Christ.Can anything be more subtle than the answer of Jesus concerning the woman taken in adultery? The Jews having demanded of him if they should stone her, instead of answering the question directly—a negative answer being directly contrary to the law, and an affirmative convicting him of severity and cruelty, which would have alienated their minds from him—instead, therefore, of replying as an ordinary individual would have done on the occasion—“Let him,” said he, “who is without sin amongst you cast the first stone at her.”13A shrewd reply, and one evincing great presence of mind. On another occasion, being shown a piece of money with the emperor’s image and superscription upon it, and asked if it were lawful to pay tribute money unto Cæsar, he eluded the difficulty of answering: “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s.”14Thefalse position in which they wished to place him was this: that if he denied that it was lawful, he was guilty of high treason; and if he said that it was, he went directly against the law of Moses, which he always protested that he never intended to do—knowing no doubt that he was too helpless to do so with impunity at that time. Afterwards, when he became more celebrated, he endeavoured to abrogate it almost totally: acting in this way not unlike those princes, who, until their power is thoroughly established, always promise to confirm the privileges of their subjects, but who, after that has been secured, care little for their promises.When the Pharisees asked him by what authority he taught the people and preached to them, he penetrated their intention—which was to convict him of falsehood; whether he answered that it was by human authority—he not being of the order of the priesthood, who alone were charged with the instruction of the people; or whether he preached by the express orders of God—his own doctrine being opposed to the law of Moses; he avoided their snare, and embarrassed themselves, by asking them in what name John baptised.15The Pharisees, who from political motives, rejected the baptism of John, would have condemned themselves if they had said that it was in the name of God; and if they hadnotsaid so, they would have exposed themselves to the rage of the populace, who maintained the opposite opinion. To get out of this dilemma, they answered that they could not tell: on which Jesus Christ replied, that neither was he obliged to tell them by what name or authority he taught the people.

§ 13.On the Politics of Jesus Christ.

Can anything be more subtle than the answer of Jesus concerning the woman taken in adultery? The Jews having demanded of him if they should stone her, instead of answering the question directly—a negative answer being directly contrary to the law, and an affirmative convicting him of severity and cruelty, which would have alienated their minds from him—instead, therefore, of replying as an ordinary individual would have done on the occasion—“Let him,” said he, “who is without sin amongst you cast the first stone at her.”13A shrewd reply, and one evincing great presence of mind. On another occasion, being shown a piece of money with the emperor’s image and superscription upon it, and asked if it were lawful to pay tribute money unto Cæsar, he eluded the difficulty of answering: “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s.”14Thefalse position in which they wished to place him was this: that if he denied that it was lawful, he was guilty of high treason; and if he said that it was, he went directly against the law of Moses, which he always protested that he never intended to do—knowing no doubt that he was too helpless to do so with impunity at that time. Afterwards, when he became more celebrated, he endeavoured to abrogate it almost totally: acting in this way not unlike those princes, who, until their power is thoroughly established, always promise to confirm the privileges of their subjects, but who, after that has been secured, care little for their promises.When the Pharisees asked him by what authority he taught the people and preached to them, he penetrated their intention—which was to convict him of falsehood; whether he answered that it was by human authority—he not being of the order of the priesthood, who alone were charged with the instruction of the people; or whether he preached by the express orders of God—his own doctrine being opposed to the law of Moses; he avoided their snare, and embarrassed themselves, by asking them in what name John baptised.15The Pharisees, who from political motives, rejected the baptism of John, would have condemned themselves if they had said that it was in the name of God; and if they hadnotsaid so, they would have exposed themselves to the rage of the populace, who maintained the opposite opinion. To get out of this dilemma, they answered that they could not tell: on which Jesus Christ replied, that neither was he obliged to tell them by what name or authority he taught the people.

Can anything be more subtle than the answer of Jesus concerning the woman taken in adultery? The Jews having demanded of him if they should stone her, instead of answering the question directly—a negative answer being directly contrary to the law, and an affirmative convicting him of severity and cruelty, which would have alienated their minds from him—instead, therefore, of replying as an ordinary individual would have done on the occasion—“Let him,” said he, “who is without sin amongst you cast the first stone at her.”13A shrewd reply, and one evincing great presence of mind. On another occasion, being shown a piece of money with the emperor’s image and superscription upon it, and asked if it were lawful to pay tribute money unto Cæsar, he eluded the difficulty of answering: “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s.”14Thefalse position in which they wished to place him was this: that if he denied that it was lawful, he was guilty of high treason; and if he said that it was, he went directly against the law of Moses, which he always protested that he never intended to do—knowing no doubt that he was too helpless to do so with impunity at that time. Afterwards, when he became more celebrated, he endeavoured to abrogate it almost totally: acting in this way not unlike those princes, who, until their power is thoroughly established, always promise to confirm the privileges of their subjects, but who, after that has been secured, care little for their promises.

When the Pharisees asked him by what authority he taught the people and preached to them, he penetrated their intention—which was to convict him of falsehood; whether he answered that it was by human authority—he not being of the order of the priesthood, who alone were charged with the instruction of the people; or whether he preached by the express orders of God—his own doctrine being opposed to the law of Moses; he avoided their snare, and embarrassed themselves, by asking them in what name John baptised.15

The Pharisees, who from political motives, rejected the baptism of John, would have condemned themselves if they had said that it was in the name of God; and if they hadnotsaid so, they would have exposed themselves to the rage of the populace, who maintained the opposite opinion. To get out of this dilemma, they answered that they could not tell: on which Jesus Christ replied, that neither was he obliged to tell them by what name or authority he taught the people.

§ 14.Such was the character of the destroyer of the ancient law, and the founder of the new religion that was built upon its ruins; in which religion a disinterested mind can perceive nothing more divine than in any of those which preceded it. Its founder, who was not altogether ignorant, having witnessed extreme corruption in the Jewish republic, judged that its end was near, and thought it a favorable opportunity for forwarding his own designs.The fear of being anticipated by men more able than himself, made him hasten to secure his ground by means entirely opposite to those adopted by Moses. The former began by rendering himself terrible to other nations. Jesus Christ, on the contrary, attracted mankind to himself by the hope of blessings in a life beyond the grave, which he said they would obtain by believing in him. Whilst Moses only promised temporal benefits to the observers of his law, Jesus Christ led his followers to hope for those which would never end. The laws of the one only regarded exterior observances; those of the other looked into the heart, influenced the thoughts, and stood on opposite grounds to the law of Moses. Whence it follows, that Jesus Christ believed with Aristotle, that it is the same with religion and nations as with individuals who are born and who die; and as there is nothing which is not subject to dissolution, there is no law which must not in turn give place to another.16But as there is difficulty in passing from one law to another, and as the greater part of men are stubborn in religious matters, Jesus Christ, in imitation of other innovators, had recourse to miracles, which have at all times confounded the ignorant, and advanced the projects of ambitious and designing men.

§ 14.

Such was the character of the destroyer of the ancient law, and the founder of the new religion that was built upon its ruins; in which religion a disinterested mind can perceive nothing more divine than in any of those which preceded it. Its founder, who was not altogether ignorant, having witnessed extreme corruption in the Jewish republic, judged that its end was near, and thought it a favorable opportunity for forwarding his own designs.The fear of being anticipated by men more able than himself, made him hasten to secure his ground by means entirely opposite to those adopted by Moses. The former began by rendering himself terrible to other nations. Jesus Christ, on the contrary, attracted mankind to himself by the hope of blessings in a life beyond the grave, which he said they would obtain by believing in him. Whilst Moses only promised temporal benefits to the observers of his law, Jesus Christ led his followers to hope for those which would never end. The laws of the one only regarded exterior observances; those of the other looked into the heart, influenced the thoughts, and stood on opposite grounds to the law of Moses. Whence it follows, that Jesus Christ believed with Aristotle, that it is the same with religion and nations as with individuals who are born and who die; and as there is nothing which is not subject to dissolution, there is no law which must not in turn give place to another.16But as there is difficulty in passing from one law to another, and as the greater part of men are stubborn in religious matters, Jesus Christ, in imitation of other innovators, had recourse to miracles, which have at all times confounded the ignorant, and advanced the projects of ambitious and designing men.

Such was the character of the destroyer of the ancient law, and the founder of the new religion that was built upon its ruins; in which religion a disinterested mind can perceive nothing more divine than in any of those which preceded it. Its founder, who was not altogether ignorant, having witnessed extreme corruption in the Jewish republic, judged that its end was near, and thought it a favorable opportunity for forwarding his own designs.

The fear of being anticipated by men more able than himself, made him hasten to secure his ground by means entirely opposite to those adopted by Moses. The former began by rendering himself terrible to other nations. Jesus Christ, on the contrary, attracted mankind to himself by the hope of blessings in a life beyond the grave, which he said they would obtain by believing in him. Whilst Moses only promised temporal benefits to the observers of his law, Jesus Christ led his followers to hope for those which would never end. The laws of the one only regarded exterior observances; those of the other looked into the heart, influenced the thoughts, and stood on opposite grounds to the law of Moses. Whence it follows, that Jesus Christ believed with Aristotle, that it is the same with religion and nations as with individuals who are born and who die; and as there is nothing which is not subject to dissolution, there is no law which must not in turn give place to another.16But as there is difficulty in passing from one law to another, and as the greater part of men are stubborn in religious matters, Jesus Christ, in imitation of other innovators, had recourse to miracles, which have at all times confounded the ignorant, and advanced the projects of ambitious and designing men.

§ 15.Christianity having been founded in this way, Jesus Christ wisely imagined that he could profit by the errors in the politics of Moses, and render his new law eternal—an undertaking in which he finally succeeded a little perhaps beyond his expectation. The Hebrew prophets intended to do honour to Moses, by predicting a successor who should resemble him—a Messiah great in virtues, powerful in wealth, and terrible to his enemies. These prophecies, however, produced altogether a different effect from what they expected; a number of ambitious demagogues having embraced theopportunityof palming themselves off for the comingMessiah, which led to those insurrections and civil convulsions which lasted until the entire destruction of the ancient republic of the Hebrews. Jesus Christ, more subtle than the prophets who succeeded Moses, predicted that a man of this description would appear—the great enemy of God—the favorite of the demons—the aggregation of all the vices and the cause of all the desolation in the world. After such a splendid eulogy, one would think that nobody could resist the temptation of calling himselfAntichrist; and I do not believe that it is possible to discover a secret equal to it for eternalizing a law, although there can be nothing more fabulous than what we read of concerning this pretended Antichrist. St. Paul says that he was a ready born; whence it follows that he must have been on the watch for the coming of Jesus Christ: nevertheless, more than sixteen years rolled on after the prediction of the nativity of this formidable personage, without any one having heard of his appearance. I acknowledge that some have applied the terms to Ebion and Cerinthus, two great adversaries of Jesus Christ, whose pretended divinity they disputed. But if this interpretation be the meaning of the Apostle, which is far from being credible, the words referred to must point out a host of Antichrists in all ages—it being impossible that truly learned men should think of injuring the cause of truth, by declaring that the history of Jesus Christ was a contemptible fable,17and that his law was nothing but a series of dreams and reveries, which ignorance had brought in repute, which self-interest had encouraged, and which tyranny had taken under its especial protection.

§ 15.

Christianity having been founded in this way, Jesus Christ wisely imagined that he could profit by the errors in the politics of Moses, and render his new law eternal—an undertaking in which he finally succeeded a little perhaps beyond his expectation. The Hebrew prophets intended to do honour to Moses, by predicting a successor who should resemble him—a Messiah great in virtues, powerful in wealth, and terrible to his enemies. These prophecies, however, produced altogether a different effect from what they expected; a number of ambitious demagogues having embraced theopportunityof palming themselves off for the comingMessiah, which led to those insurrections and civil convulsions which lasted until the entire destruction of the ancient republic of the Hebrews. Jesus Christ, more subtle than the prophets who succeeded Moses, predicted that a man of this description would appear—the great enemy of God—the favorite of the demons—the aggregation of all the vices and the cause of all the desolation in the world. After such a splendid eulogy, one would think that nobody could resist the temptation of calling himselfAntichrist; and I do not believe that it is possible to discover a secret equal to it for eternalizing a law, although there can be nothing more fabulous than what we read of concerning this pretended Antichrist. St. Paul says that he was a ready born; whence it follows that he must have been on the watch for the coming of Jesus Christ: nevertheless, more than sixteen years rolled on after the prediction of the nativity of this formidable personage, without any one having heard of his appearance. I acknowledge that some have applied the terms to Ebion and Cerinthus, two great adversaries of Jesus Christ, whose pretended divinity they disputed. But if this interpretation be the meaning of the Apostle, which is far from being credible, the words referred to must point out a host of Antichrists in all ages—it being impossible that truly learned men should think of injuring the cause of truth, by declaring that the history of Jesus Christ was a contemptible fable,17and that his law was nothing but a series of dreams and reveries, which ignorance had brought in repute, which self-interest had encouraged, and which tyranny had taken under its especial protection.

Christianity having been founded in this way, Jesus Christ wisely imagined that he could profit by the errors in the politics of Moses, and render his new law eternal—an undertaking in which he finally succeeded a little perhaps beyond his expectation. The Hebrew prophets intended to do honour to Moses, by predicting a successor who should resemble him—a Messiah great in virtues, powerful in wealth, and terrible to his enemies. These prophecies, however, produced altogether a different effect from what they expected; a number of ambitious demagogues having embraced theopportunityof palming themselves off for the comingMessiah, which led to those insurrections and civil convulsions which lasted until the entire destruction of the ancient republic of the Hebrews. Jesus Christ, more subtle than the prophets who succeeded Moses, predicted that a man of this description would appear—the great enemy of God—the favorite of the demons—the aggregation of all the vices and the cause of all the desolation in the world. After such a splendid eulogy, one would think that nobody could resist the temptation of calling himselfAntichrist; and I do not believe that it is possible to discover a secret equal to it for eternalizing a law, although there can be nothing more fabulous than what we read of concerning this pretended Antichrist. St. Paul says that he was a ready born; whence it follows that he must have been on the watch for the coming of Jesus Christ: nevertheless, more than sixteen years rolled on after the prediction of the nativity of this formidable personage, without any one having heard of his appearance. I acknowledge that some have applied the terms to Ebion and Cerinthus, two great adversaries of Jesus Christ, whose pretended divinity they disputed. But if this interpretation be the meaning of the Apostle, which is far from being credible, the words referred to must point out a host of Antichrists in all ages—it being impossible that truly learned men should think of injuring the cause of truth, by declaring that the history of Jesus Christ was a contemptible fable,17and that his law was nothing but a series of dreams and reveries, which ignorance had brought in repute, which self-interest had encouraged, and which tyranny had taken under its especial protection.

§ 16.They pretend, nevertheless, that a religion built upon so weak foundations is divine and supernatural, as if it werenot an ascertained fact that there is no class of people more fitted to give currency to the most absurd opinions than women and lunatics. It is not to be wondered at that Jesus Christ reckoned none of the learned amongst his followers. He well knew that his law was inconsistent with common sense; and therefore he always declaimed against the sages, excluding them from that kingdom into which he admitted the poor in spirit, the simple and the imbecile. Rational minds ought to be thankful that they have nothing to do with such insanities.

§ 16.

They pretend, nevertheless, that a religion built upon so weak foundations is divine and supernatural, as if it werenot an ascertained fact that there is no class of people more fitted to give currency to the most absurd opinions than women and lunatics. It is not to be wondered at that Jesus Christ reckoned none of the learned amongst his followers. He well knew that his law was inconsistent with common sense; and therefore he always declaimed against the sages, excluding them from that kingdom into which he admitted the poor in spirit, the simple and the imbecile. Rational minds ought to be thankful that they have nothing to do with such insanities.

They pretend, nevertheless, that a religion built upon so weak foundations is divine and supernatural, as if it werenot an ascertained fact that there is no class of people more fitted to give currency to the most absurd opinions than women and lunatics. It is not to be wondered at that Jesus Christ reckoned none of the learned amongst his followers. He well knew that his law was inconsistent with common sense; and therefore he always declaimed against the sages, excluding them from that kingdom into which he admitted the poor in spirit, the simple and the imbecile. Rational minds ought to be thankful that they have nothing to do with such insanities.

§ 17.On the Morality of Jesus Christ.We find nothing more divine in the morality of Jesus Christ than what can be drawn from the works of ancient authors; for this reason, perhaps every text in his code of morals is either borrowed from their’s or is an imitation of it. St. Augustine18acknowledges that in one of the so-called heathen writers, he discovered the whole of the commencement of the gospel according to St. John. We must remark also, that this apostle was so much accustomed to plunder others, that he has not scrupled to pillage from the prophets their enigmas and visions, for the purpose of composing his Apocalypse. Again, whence arises that agreement between the doctrines of the Old and New Testament and those of Plato, unless the Rabbis and others who composed the Jewish Scriptures had stolen from that distinguished man. The account of the creation of the world given in hisTimaeus, is much more satisfactory than that recorded in the book of Genesis; and it will not do to say that Plato, in his tour through Egypt, had read the books of the Jews, since, by the confession of St. Augustine, king Ptolemy had not ordered them to be translated till long after the philosopher had left the country.The landscape which Socrates describes to Simias (Phæton,) possesses infinitely more beauty than the Paradise of Eden: and the fable of the Hermaphrodites19is beyondcomparison a better invention than that which we read of in Genesis, where we are told that one of Adam’s ribs was taken from him for the purpose of creating a female out of it.Can any more plausible account of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah be given, than that it was caused by Phaeton? Is there no resemblance between the fall of Lucifer and that of Vulcan, or of the giants struck down by the thunderbolts of Jove. How close the resemblance between Sampson and Hercules; Elijah and Phaeton; Joseph and Hypolitus; Nebuchadnezzar and Lycaon; Tantalus and the rich man in torment;20the manna in the wilderness and the ambrosia of the gods! St. Augustine,21St. Cyril, and Theophilactus, compare Jonah with Hercules, calledTrinoctius, because he had been three days and three nights in the belly of a whale.The river which Daniel speaks of inchap.vii, v. 10, of his Prophecies, is palpably drawn from that Pyriphlegethon to which Plato alludes in his dialogue on the immortality of the soul. The idea of “Original Sin” is taken from the account of Pandora’s box; and the interrupted sacrifices of Isaac and of Jephtha’s daughter are borrowed from that Iphigenia, in whose room a hind was offered up. What we read of concerning Lot and his wife, is nearly the same as that which fabulous history informs us occurred to Bancis and Philemon. The histories of Perseus and of Bellerophon are the foundation of Michael and the demon whom he vanquished. In short, it is abundantly manifest that the authors of the Scriptures have copied the works of Hesiod, Homer, and some other ancient writers, almost word for word.

§ 17.On the Morality of Jesus Christ.

We find nothing more divine in the morality of Jesus Christ than what can be drawn from the works of ancient authors; for this reason, perhaps every text in his code of morals is either borrowed from their’s or is an imitation of it. St. Augustine18acknowledges that in one of the so-called heathen writers, he discovered the whole of the commencement of the gospel according to St. John. We must remark also, that this apostle was so much accustomed to plunder others, that he has not scrupled to pillage from the prophets their enigmas and visions, for the purpose of composing his Apocalypse. Again, whence arises that agreement between the doctrines of the Old and New Testament and those of Plato, unless the Rabbis and others who composed the Jewish Scriptures had stolen from that distinguished man. The account of the creation of the world given in hisTimaeus, is much more satisfactory than that recorded in the book of Genesis; and it will not do to say that Plato, in his tour through Egypt, had read the books of the Jews, since, by the confession of St. Augustine, king Ptolemy had not ordered them to be translated till long after the philosopher had left the country.The landscape which Socrates describes to Simias (Phæton,) possesses infinitely more beauty than the Paradise of Eden: and the fable of the Hermaphrodites19is beyondcomparison a better invention than that which we read of in Genesis, where we are told that one of Adam’s ribs was taken from him for the purpose of creating a female out of it.Can any more plausible account of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah be given, than that it was caused by Phaeton? Is there no resemblance between the fall of Lucifer and that of Vulcan, or of the giants struck down by the thunderbolts of Jove. How close the resemblance between Sampson and Hercules; Elijah and Phaeton; Joseph and Hypolitus; Nebuchadnezzar and Lycaon; Tantalus and the rich man in torment;20the manna in the wilderness and the ambrosia of the gods! St. Augustine,21St. Cyril, and Theophilactus, compare Jonah with Hercules, calledTrinoctius, because he had been three days and three nights in the belly of a whale.The river which Daniel speaks of inchap.vii, v. 10, of his Prophecies, is palpably drawn from that Pyriphlegethon to which Plato alludes in his dialogue on the immortality of the soul. The idea of “Original Sin” is taken from the account of Pandora’s box; and the interrupted sacrifices of Isaac and of Jephtha’s daughter are borrowed from that Iphigenia, in whose room a hind was offered up. What we read of concerning Lot and his wife, is nearly the same as that which fabulous history informs us occurred to Bancis and Philemon. The histories of Perseus and of Bellerophon are the foundation of Michael and the demon whom he vanquished. In short, it is abundantly manifest that the authors of the Scriptures have copied the works of Hesiod, Homer, and some other ancient writers, almost word for word.

We find nothing more divine in the morality of Jesus Christ than what can be drawn from the works of ancient authors; for this reason, perhaps every text in his code of morals is either borrowed from their’s or is an imitation of it. St. Augustine18acknowledges that in one of the so-called heathen writers, he discovered the whole of the commencement of the gospel according to St. John. We must remark also, that this apostle was so much accustomed to plunder others, that he has not scrupled to pillage from the prophets their enigmas and visions, for the purpose of composing his Apocalypse. Again, whence arises that agreement between the doctrines of the Old and New Testament and those of Plato, unless the Rabbis and others who composed the Jewish Scriptures had stolen from that distinguished man. The account of the creation of the world given in hisTimaeus, is much more satisfactory than that recorded in the book of Genesis; and it will not do to say that Plato, in his tour through Egypt, had read the books of the Jews, since, by the confession of St. Augustine, king Ptolemy had not ordered them to be translated till long after the philosopher had left the country.

The landscape which Socrates describes to Simias (Phæton,) possesses infinitely more beauty than the Paradise of Eden: and the fable of the Hermaphrodites19is beyondcomparison a better invention than that which we read of in Genesis, where we are told that one of Adam’s ribs was taken from him for the purpose of creating a female out of it.

Can any more plausible account of the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah be given, than that it was caused by Phaeton? Is there no resemblance between the fall of Lucifer and that of Vulcan, or of the giants struck down by the thunderbolts of Jove. How close the resemblance between Sampson and Hercules; Elijah and Phaeton; Joseph and Hypolitus; Nebuchadnezzar and Lycaon; Tantalus and the rich man in torment;20the manna in the wilderness and the ambrosia of the gods! St. Augustine,21St. Cyril, and Theophilactus, compare Jonah with Hercules, calledTrinoctius, because he had been three days and three nights in the belly of a whale.

The river which Daniel speaks of inchap.vii, v. 10, of his Prophecies, is palpably drawn from that Pyriphlegethon to which Plato alludes in his dialogue on the immortality of the soul. The idea of “Original Sin” is taken from the account of Pandora’s box; and the interrupted sacrifices of Isaac and of Jephtha’s daughter are borrowed from that Iphigenia, in whose room a hind was offered up. What we read of concerning Lot and his wife, is nearly the same as that which fabulous history informs us occurred to Bancis and Philemon. The histories of Perseus and of Bellerophon are the foundation of Michael and the demon whom he vanquished. In short, it is abundantly manifest that the authors of the Scriptures have copied the works of Hesiod, Homer, and some other ancient writers, almost word for word.

§ 18.With respect to Jesus Christ himself, Celsus, by appealing to his opponent Origen, shows that he had taken some of his most approved apothegms from Plato—Such as this: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,than a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”22It was owing to the sect of the Pharisees, to which he belonged, that his followers believed in the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, and the torments of hell; and also in the greater part of his morality,23the whole of which I find in Epictetus, Epicures, and a few others. This last mentioned philosopher was referred to by St. Jerome, as a man whose virtues ought to put the best Christians to the blush; and whose mode of life was so temperate that a morsel of cheese, with bread and waterconstitutedhis highest repast. Leading a life so frugal, this philosopher, heathen as he was, declared that it was far better to be unfortunate and gifted with reason, than to be rich and opulent without it; adding, that wealth and wisdom were rarelyfoundunited in the same individual, and that it was impossible to enjoy happiness or contentment unless our conduct were guided by prudence, justice and honesty, which are the qualities whence flow all true and lasting enjoyments.As to Epictetus, I do not believe that there ever existed a man, not even excepting Jesus Christ, more firm, more self-denying, more equable, or who at any time gave forth to the world a more sublime system of morality. Were it not that I should exceed the limits which I have prescribed to myself in this treatise, I could recount many beautifultraits in his character; but the reader must be contented with one example. When a slave to Epaphroditus, a captain of Nero’s guards, his master took the brutal fancy to writhe his limbs, Epictetus, perceiving that it gave the monster satisfaction, said with a smile, that he saw clearly that the joke would not end until he had broken one of them, which happened accordingly. The philosopher with the same equanimity and the same smile, merely said, “Did I not tell you that you would certainly break the limb?” Where is there on record another instance of like firmness? How would Jesus Christ have acted in the circumstances?—he who wept and trembled at the least alarm, and who in his last moments exhibited a pusillanimity altogether contemptible, and which was never shown by the martyrs for his faith.If the work which Arian wrote concerning the life and death of our philosopher had been preserved, I have no doubt that we would have been in possession of many more examples of his equanimity than we have at present. I know that the priests will speak of the example which I have instanced, as they speak of the virtues of philosophic minds in general, and assert that it is based on vanity, and that it is by no means what it appears to be; but I know also, that those people are accustomed to speakex cathedrawhatever suits their purpose and to think they sufficiently earn the money which is given them for instructing the people, by declaiming against every man who knows what sober reason and real virtue are. Nothing in the world can be less in congruity with the actions of these superstitious men who decry them, than the manner of the truly learned. The former, having studied for no other end than to obtain a place to give them bread, become vain, and congratulate themselves when they have obtained it, as if they had arrived at the state of perfection; whereas it is nothing else to them than a state of idleness, pride, voluptuousness, and licentiousness,—a condition in which the great majority of them hold in no respect whatever the maxims of that religion which they profess. But we will leave these men, who have not the remotest conception of real virtue, and examine the evidences for the divinity of their master.

§ 18.

With respect to Jesus Christ himself, Celsus, by appealing to his opponent Origen, shows that he had taken some of his most approved apothegms from Plato—Such as this: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,than a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”22It was owing to the sect of the Pharisees, to which he belonged, that his followers believed in the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, and the torments of hell; and also in the greater part of his morality,23the whole of which I find in Epictetus, Epicures, and a few others. This last mentioned philosopher was referred to by St. Jerome, as a man whose virtues ought to put the best Christians to the blush; and whose mode of life was so temperate that a morsel of cheese, with bread and waterconstitutedhis highest repast. Leading a life so frugal, this philosopher, heathen as he was, declared that it was far better to be unfortunate and gifted with reason, than to be rich and opulent without it; adding, that wealth and wisdom were rarelyfoundunited in the same individual, and that it was impossible to enjoy happiness or contentment unless our conduct were guided by prudence, justice and honesty, which are the qualities whence flow all true and lasting enjoyments.As to Epictetus, I do not believe that there ever existed a man, not even excepting Jesus Christ, more firm, more self-denying, more equable, or who at any time gave forth to the world a more sublime system of morality. Were it not that I should exceed the limits which I have prescribed to myself in this treatise, I could recount many beautifultraits in his character; but the reader must be contented with one example. When a slave to Epaphroditus, a captain of Nero’s guards, his master took the brutal fancy to writhe his limbs, Epictetus, perceiving that it gave the monster satisfaction, said with a smile, that he saw clearly that the joke would not end until he had broken one of them, which happened accordingly. The philosopher with the same equanimity and the same smile, merely said, “Did I not tell you that you would certainly break the limb?” Where is there on record another instance of like firmness? How would Jesus Christ have acted in the circumstances?—he who wept and trembled at the least alarm, and who in his last moments exhibited a pusillanimity altogether contemptible, and which was never shown by the martyrs for his faith.If the work which Arian wrote concerning the life and death of our philosopher had been preserved, I have no doubt that we would have been in possession of many more examples of his equanimity than we have at present. I know that the priests will speak of the example which I have instanced, as they speak of the virtues of philosophic minds in general, and assert that it is based on vanity, and that it is by no means what it appears to be; but I know also, that those people are accustomed to speakex cathedrawhatever suits their purpose and to think they sufficiently earn the money which is given them for instructing the people, by declaiming against every man who knows what sober reason and real virtue are. Nothing in the world can be less in congruity with the actions of these superstitious men who decry them, than the manner of the truly learned. The former, having studied for no other end than to obtain a place to give them bread, become vain, and congratulate themselves when they have obtained it, as if they had arrived at the state of perfection; whereas it is nothing else to them than a state of idleness, pride, voluptuousness, and licentiousness,—a condition in which the great majority of them hold in no respect whatever the maxims of that religion which they profess. But we will leave these men, who have not the remotest conception of real virtue, and examine the evidences for the divinity of their master.

With respect to Jesus Christ himself, Celsus, by appealing to his opponent Origen, shows that he had taken some of his most approved apothegms from Plato—Such as this: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,than a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”22It was owing to the sect of the Pharisees, to which he belonged, that his followers believed in the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, and the torments of hell; and also in the greater part of his morality,23the whole of which I find in Epictetus, Epicures, and a few others. This last mentioned philosopher was referred to by St. Jerome, as a man whose virtues ought to put the best Christians to the blush; and whose mode of life was so temperate that a morsel of cheese, with bread and waterconstitutedhis highest repast. Leading a life so frugal, this philosopher, heathen as he was, declared that it was far better to be unfortunate and gifted with reason, than to be rich and opulent without it; adding, that wealth and wisdom were rarelyfoundunited in the same individual, and that it was impossible to enjoy happiness or contentment unless our conduct were guided by prudence, justice and honesty, which are the qualities whence flow all true and lasting enjoyments.

As to Epictetus, I do not believe that there ever existed a man, not even excepting Jesus Christ, more firm, more self-denying, more equable, or who at any time gave forth to the world a more sublime system of morality. Were it not that I should exceed the limits which I have prescribed to myself in this treatise, I could recount many beautifultraits in his character; but the reader must be contented with one example. When a slave to Epaphroditus, a captain of Nero’s guards, his master took the brutal fancy to writhe his limbs, Epictetus, perceiving that it gave the monster satisfaction, said with a smile, that he saw clearly that the joke would not end until he had broken one of them, which happened accordingly. The philosopher with the same equanimity and the same smile, merely said, “Did I not tell you that you would certainly break the limb?” Where is there on record another instance of like firmness? How would Jesus Christ have acted in the circumstances?—he who wept and trembled at the least alarm, and who in his last moments exhibited a pusillanimity altogether contemptible, and which was never shown by the martyrs for his faith.

If the work which Arian wrote concerning the life and death of our philosopher had been preserved, I have no doubt that we would have been in possession of many more examples of his equanimity than we have at present. I know that the priests will speak of the example which I have instanced, as they speak of the virtues of philosophic minds in general, and assert that it is based on vanity, and that it is by no means what it appears to be; but I know also, that those people are accustomed to speakex cathedrawhatever suits their purpose and to think they sufficiently earn the money which is given them for instructing the people, by declaiming against every man who knows what sober reason and real virtue are. Nothing in the world can be less in congruity with the actions of these superstitious men who decry them, than the manner of the truly learned. The former, having studied for no other end than to obtain a place to give them bread, become vain, and congratulate themselves when they have obtained it, as if they had arrived at the state of perfection; whereas it is nothing else to them than a state of idleness, pride, voluptuousness, and licentiousness,—a condition in which the great majority of them hold in no respect whatever the maxims of that religion which they profess. But we will leave these men, who have not the remotest conception of real virtue, and examine the evidences for the divinity of their master.

§ 19.Having considered the politics and the morality of Jesus Christ, wherein we find nothing so useful or so sublime as we find in the writings of the ancients, let us now consider if the reputation which he acquired after his death be a proof of his divinity.The generality of mankind are so much accustomed to what is irrational, that it is astonishing to find people endeavouring to draw a rational inference from their conduct. Experience teaches us that they are always running after shadows, and that they neither do nor say anything betokening common sense. These fanatical notions on which they found their belief will always be in vogue, in spite of the efforts of the learned who have invariably set themselves against them. So rooted are their follies that they had rather be crammed with them to repletion than make any effort to be rid of them.It was to no purpose that Moses boasted that he was the interpreter of God, and attempted to prove his mission and his authority by extraordinary signs. If he absented himself for a short time (as he did occasionally, to hold conference with the Divinity, by his account, and as in like manner did Numa Pompilius and many other legislators), it was only to find on his return strong traces of the worship of the gods whom the Hebrew people had seen in Egypt. It was in vain that he had led them for forty years through the desert, that they might lose recollection of thedivinitieswhich they had left behind. They had not forgot them, and they always wished for some visible symbol to precede them, which, if they had got, they would have worshipped obstinately, at the risk of being exposed to extreme cruelty.The pride-inspired contempt alone which led them to the hatred of other nations, made them insensibly forget the gods of Egypt, and attach themselves to that of Moses. They worshipped him for some time with all the outward observance of the law; but with that inconstancy which leads the vulgar to run after novelty, they deserted him at last to follow the God of Jesus Christ.

§ 19.

Having considered the politics and the morality of Jesus Christ, wherein we find nothing so useful or so sublime as we find in the writings of the ancients, let us now consider if the reputation which he acquired after his death be a proof of his divinity.The generality of mankind are so much accustomed to what is irrational, that it is astonishing to find people endeavouring to draw a rational inference from their conduct. Experience teaches us that they are always running after shadows, and that they neither do nor say anything betokening common sense. These fanatical notions on which they found their belief will always be in vogue, in spite of the efforts of the learned who have invariably set themselves against them. So rooted are their follies that they had rather be crammed with them to repletion than make any effort to be rid of them.It was to no purpose that Moses boasted that he was the interpreter of God, and attempted to prove his mission and his authority by extraordinary signs. If he absented himself for a short time (as he did occasionally, to hold conference with the Divinity, by his account, and as in like manner did Numa Pompilius and many other legislators), it was only to find on his return strong traces of the worship of the gods whom the Hebrew people had seen in Egypt. It was in vain that he had led them for forty years through the desert, that they might lose recollection of thedivinitieswhich they had left behind. They had not forgot them, and they always wished for some visible symbol to precede them, which, if they had got, they would have worshipped obstinately, at the risk of being exposed to extreme cruelty.The pride-inspired contempt alone which led them to the hatred of other nations, made them insensibly forget the gods of Egypt, and attach themselves to that of Moses. They worshipped him for some time with all the outward observance of the law; but with that inconstancy which leads the vulgar to run after novelty, they deserted him at last to follow the God of Jesus Christ.

Having considered the politics and the morality of Jesus Christ, wherein we find nothing so useful or so sublime as we find in the writings of the ancients, let us now consider if the reputation which he acquired after his death be a proof of his divinity.

The generality of mankind are so much accustomed to what is irrational, that it is astonishing to find people endeavouring to draw a rational inference from their conduct. Experience teaches us that they are always running after shadows, and that they neither do nor say anything betokening common sense. These fanatical notions on which they found their belief will always be in vogue, in spite of the efforts of the learned who have invariably set themselves against them. So rooted are their follies that they had rather be crammed with them to repletion than make any effort to be rid of them.

It was to no purpose that Moses boasted that he was the interpreter of God, and attempted to prove his mission and his authority by extraordinary signs. If he absented himself for a short time (as he did occasionally, to hold conference with the Divinity, by his account, and as in like manner did Numa Pompilius and many other legislators), it was only to find on his return strong traces of the worship of the gods whom the Hebrew people had seen in Egypt. It was in vain that he had led them for forty years through the desert, that they might lose recollection of thedivinitieswhich they had left behind. They had not forgot them, and they always wished for some visible symbol to precede them, which, if they had got, they would have worshipped obstinately, at the risk of being exposed to extreme cruelty.

The pride-inspired contempt alone which led them to the hatred of other nations, made them insensibly forget the gods of Egypt, and attach themselves to that of Moses. They worshipped him for some time with all the outward observance of the law; but with that inconstancy which leads the vulgar to run after novelty, they deserted him at last to follow the God of Jesus Christ.

§ 20.The most ignorant alone of the Hebrews followed Moses—such also were they who ran after Jesus Christ; and their name being legion, and as they mutually supported each other, it is not to be wondered at if this new system of error was widely circulated. The teaching of these novelties was not without danger to those who undertook the task, but the enthusiasm which they excited extinguished every fear. Thus, the disciples of Christ, miserable as they were in his train, and even dying of hunger—(as we learn from the necessity under which they were, together with their leader, of plucking the ears of corn in the fields to sustain their lives)—these disciples never despaired till they saw their master in the hands of his executioners, and totally incapable of gifting them with that wealth, and power, and grandeur, which he had led them to expect.After his death, his disciples being frustrated in their fondest hopes, made a virtue of necessity. Banished as they were from every place, and persecuted by the Jews, who were eager to treat them as they had treated their master, they wandered into the neighboring countries; in which, on the evidence of some women, they set forth the resurrection of Christ, his divinity, and the other fables wherewith the gospels are filled.It was their want of success among the Jewish people which led to the resolution of seeking their fortune among the Gentiles; but as a little more knowledge than they possessed was necessary for the accomplishment of their design—the Gentiles being philosophically trained, and consequently too much the friends of truth and reason to be duped by trifles—the sectaries of Jesus gained over to their cause a young man24of ardent temperament and active habits, somewhat better instructed than the illiterate fishermen of Galilee, and more capable of drawing audiences to listen to his talk. He being warned from heaven (miraculously of course), leagued himself with them, and drew over some partizans by the threat of “fabled hell,” (a plagiarism from the ancient poets), and by the hope of the joys of paradise,into which blessed abode he was impudent enough to assert that he had at one time been introduced.These disciples then, by strength of delusion and lying, procured for their master the honor of passing for a god—an honor at which, in his life-time, Jesus could never have arrived. His destiny was no better than that of Homer, nor even so good; inasmuch as seven cities which had despised and starved the latter in his lifetime, struggled and fought with each other, in order to ascertain to which was due the merit of having given him birth.

§ 20.

The most ignorant alone of the Hebrews followed Moses—such also were they who ran after Jesus Christ; and their name being legion, and as they mutually supported each other, it is not to be wondered at if this new system of error was widely circulated. The teaching of these novelties was not without danger to those who undertook the task, but the enthusiasm which they excited extinguished every fear. Thus, the disciples of Christ, miserable as they were in his train, and even dying of hunger—(as we learn from the necessity under which they were, together with their leader, of plucking the ears of corn in the fields to sustain their lives)—these disciples never despaired till they saw their master in the hands of his executioners, and totally incapable of gifting them with that wealth, and power, and grandeur, which he had led them to expect.After his death, his disciples being frustrated in their fondest hopes, made a virtue of necessity. Banished as they were from every place, and persecuted by the Jews, who were eager to treat them as they had treated their master, they wandered into the neighboring countries; in which, on the evidence of some women, they set forth the resurrection of Christ, his divinity, and the other fables wherewith the gospels are filled.It was their want of success among the Jewish people which led to the resolution of seeking their fortune among the Gentiles; but as a little more knowledge than they possessed was necessary for the accomplishment of their design—the Gentiles being philosophically trained, and consequently too much the friends of truth and reason to be duped by trifles—the sectaries of Jesus gained over to their cause a young man24of ardent temperament and active habits, somewhat better instructed than the illiterate fishermen of Galilee, and more capable of drawing audiences to listen to his talk. He being warned from heaven (miraculously of course), leagued himself with them, and drew over some partizans by the threat of “fabled hell,” (a plagiarism from the ancient poets), and by the hope of the joys of paradise,into which blessed abode he was impudent enough to assert that he had at one time been introduced.These disciples then, by strength of delusion and lying, procured for their master the honor of passing for a god—an honor at which, in his life-time, Jesus could never have arrived. His destiny was no better than that of Homer, nor even so good; inasmuch as seven cities which had despised and starved the latter in his lifetime, struggled and fought with each other, in order to ascertain to which was due the merit of having given him birth.

The most ignorant alone of the Hebrews followed Moses—such also were they who ran after Jesus Christ; and their name being legion, and as they mutually supported each other, it is not to be wondered at if this new system of error was widely circulated. The teaching of these novelties was not without danger to those who undertook the task, but the enthusiasm which they excited extinguished every fear. Thus, the disciples of Christ, miserable as they were in his train, and even dying of hunger—(as we learn from the necessity under which they were, together with their leader, of plucking the ears of corn in the fields to sustain their lives)—these disciples never despaired till they saw their master in the hands of his executioners, and totally incapable of gifting them with that wealth, and power, and grandeur, which he had led them to expect.

After his death, his disciples being frustrated in their fondest hopes, made a virtue of necessity. Banished as they were from every place, and persecuted by the Jews, who were eager to treat them as they had treated their master, they wandered into the neighboring countries; in which, on the evidence of some women, they set forth the resurrection of Christ, his divinity, and the other fables wherewith the gospels are filled.

It was their want of success among the Jewish people which led to the resolution of seeking their fortune among the Gentiles; but as a little more knowledge than they possessed was necessary for the accomplishment of their design—the Gentiles being philosophically trained, and consequently too much the friends of truth and reason to be duped by trifles—the sectaries of Jesus gained over to their cause a young man24of ardent temperament and active habits, somewhat better instructed than the illiterate fishermen of Galilee, and more capable of drawing audiences to listen to his talk. He being warned from heaven (miraculously of course), leagued himself with them, and drew over some partizans by the threat of “fabled hell,” (a plagiarism from the ancient poets), and by the hope of the joys of paradise,into which blessed abode he was impudent enough to assert that he had at one time been introduced.

These disciples then, by strength of delusion and lying, procured for their master the honor of passing for a god—an honor at which, in his life-time, Jesus could never have arrived. His destiny was no better than that of Homer, nor even so good; inasmuch as seven cities which had despised and starved the latter in his lifetime, struggled and fought with each other, in order to ascertain to which was due the merit of having given him birth.

§ 21.It may be judged now, from what has been advanced, that Christianity, like every other religion, is only a complicated imposture—the success and progress of which would astonish the inventors themselves, could they revisit this world. Without bewildering ourselves, however, in a labyrinth of error and contradiction, such as we have alluded to, we go to Mahomet, who founded his law on maxims entirely opposite to those of Jesus Christ.

§ 21.

It may be judged now, from what has been advanced, that Christianity, like every other religion, is only a complicated imposture—the success and progress of which would astonish the inventors themselves, could they revisit this world. Without bewildering ourselves, however, in a labyrinth of error and contradiction, such as we have alluded to, we go to Mahomet, who founded his law on maxims entirely opposite to those of Jesus Christ.

It may be judged now, from what has been advanced, that Christianity, like every other religion, is only a complicated imposture—the success and progress of which would astonish the inventors themselves, could they revisit this world. Without bewildering ourselves, however, in a labyrinth of error and contradiction, such as we have alluded to, we go to Mahomet, who founded his law on maxims entirely opposite to those of Jesus Christ.

§ 22.MAHOMET.Scarcely had the disciples of Jesus Christ torn down the Mosaic fabric for the purpose of establishing Christianity, when men, led by force of circumstances, and influenced by their usual inconstancy, followed the new legislator, who had elevated himself by means similar, as far as possible, to those which Moses employed. Like the Jewish lawgiver, Christ usurped the title of prophet, and ambassador of God; like him he pretended to perform miracles, and took advantage of the passions of the multitude. He soon found himself escorted by an ignorant populace, to whom he explained the new oracles of heaven. These miserably misled people, from the promises and fables of this new impostor, spread his renown far and wide, as having eclipsed all his predecessors.Mahomet, on the contrary, was a man who did not appear at all competent to lay the foundation of an empire. He was distinguished neither as a politician nor a philosopher: hecould neither read nor write.25At first he exhibited so little firmness, that he was frequently upon the point of abandoning his enterprise; and he would have done so, had it not been for the address of one his followers. When he was rising into celebrity, Corais, a powerful Arab chief, being irritated that a man of yesterday should have the boldness to mislead the people, declared himself his enemy, and attempted to thwart his designs; but the people, believing that Mahomet had continued intercourse with God and his angels, supported him till he had an opportunity of being avenged upon his adversary. The tribe of Corais was worsted; and Mahomet seeing himself surrounded by a host of fanatics, thought that he stood in no need of a coadjutor. However, lest Corais should expose his impostures, he took the initiative; and to make sure, he loaded him with promises, and swore that he only wished to become great in order to share with him that power, to the establishment of which he might so much contribute. “We can agree,” said he, “when we reach our proper elevation; we can depend, in the meantime, on that great multitude whom we have gained over, and it only remains that we make sure of them by the employment of that artifice which you have so happily invented.” At the same time he persuaded him to descend into the Cave of Oracles.This was a dried-up sunk well, from the bottom of which Corais spoke, in order that the people might believe that it was the voice of God declaring himself in favour of Mahomet who was in the midst of his proselytes. Deceived by the blandishments of the leader, his associate regularly descended into the well, to counterfeit the oracle. Whilst Mahomet was passing one day at the head of an infatuated multitude, they heard a voice, which said—“I am your God, and I declare that Mahomet is the prophet whom I have appointed for all nations; he will instruct you in my law of truth, which the Jews and Christians have altered.” For a long time the accomplice played this game; but at last he met with the blackest ingratitude. The voice being heard, as usual, proclaiming him an inspired personage, Mahomet turned to the people, and commanded them, in the name of that God who had recognised him as his prophet, to fill up the well with stones, that it might be an enduring witness in his favour, like that pillar which Jacob set up to mark the place where God had appeared to him.26Thus perished, miserably, the chief who had most contributed to the elevation of Mahomet. It was upon this heap of stones that the last of the three most celebrated impostors established his religion, and so solid and stable is its foundation, that after the lapse of twelve hundred years there is little appearance at present of its being overthrown.

§ 22.MAHOMET.

Scarcely had the disciples of Jesus Christ torn down the Mosaic fabric for the purpose of establishing Christianity, when men, led by force of circumstances, and influenced by their usual inconstancy, followed the new legislator, who had elevated himself by means similar, as far as possible, to those which Moses employed. Like the Jewish lawgiver, Christ usurped the title of prophet, and ambassador of God; like him he pretended to perform miracles, and took advantage of the passions of the multitude. He soon found himself escorted by an ignorant populace, to whom he explained the new oracles of heaven. These miserably misled people, from the promises and fables of this new impostor, spread his renown far and wide, as having eclipsed all his predecessors.Mahomet, on the contrary, was a man who did not appear at all competent to lay the foundation of an empire. He was distinguished neither as a politician nor a philosopher: hecould neither read nor write.25At first he exhibited so little firmness, that he was frequently upon the point of abandoning his enterprise; and he would have done so, had it not been for the address of one his followers. When he was rising into celebrity, Corais, a powerful Arab chief, being irritated that a man of yesterday should have the boldness to mislead the people, declared himself his enemy, and attempted to thwart his designs; but the people, believing that Mahomet had continued intercourse with God and his angels, supported him till he had an opportunity of being avenged upon his adversary. The tribe of Corais was worsted; and Mahomet seeing himself surrounded by a host of fanatics, thought that he stood in no need of a coadjutor. However, lest Corais should expose his impostures, he took the initiative; and to make sure, he loaded him with promises, and swore that he only wished to become great in order to share with him that power, to the establishment of which he might so much contribute. “We can agree,” said he, “when we reach our proper elevation; we can depend, in the meantime, on that great multitude whom we have gained over, and it only remains that we make sure of them by the employment of that artifice which you have so happily invented.” At the same time he persuaded him to descend into the Cave of Oracles.This was a dried-up sunk well, from the bottom of which Corais spoke, in order that the people might believe that it was the voice of God declaring himself in favour of Mahomet who was in the midst of his proselytes. Deceived by the blandishments of the leader, his associate regularly descended into the well, to counterfeit the oracle. Whilst Mahomet was passing one day at the head of an infatuated multitude, they heard a voice, which said—“I am your God, and I declare that Mahomet is the prophet whom I have appointed for all nations; he will instruct you in my law of truth, which the Jews and Christians have altered.” For a long time the accomplice played this game; but at last he met with the blackest ingratitude. The voice being heard, as usual, proclaiming him an inspired personage, Mahomet turned to the people, and commanded them, in the name of that God who had recognised him as his prophet, to fill up the well with stones, that it might be an enduring witness in his favour, like that pillar which Jacob set up to mark the place where God had appeared to him.26Thus perished, miserably, the chief who had most contributed to the elevation of Mahomet. It was upon this heap of stones that the last of the three most celebrated impostors established his religion, and so solid and stable is its foundation, that after the lapse of twelve hundred years there is little appearance at present of its being overthrown.

Scarcely had the disciples of Jesus Christ torn down the Mosaic fabric for the purpose of establishing Christianity, when men, led by force of circumstances, and influenced by their usual inconstancy, followed the new legislator, who had elevated himself by means similar, as far as possible, to those which Moses employed. Like the Jewish lawgiver, Christ usurped the title of prophet, and ambassador of God; like him he pretended to perform miracles, and took advantage of the passions of the multitude. He soon found himself escorted by an ignorant populace, to whom he explained the new oracles of heaven. These miserably misled people, from the promises and fables of this new impostor, spread his renown far and wide, as having eclipsed all his predecessors.

Mahomet, on the contrary, was a man who did not appear at all competent to lay the foundation of an empire. He was distinguished neither as a politician nor a philosopher: hecould neither read nor write.25At first he exhibited so little firmness, that he was frequently upon the point of abandoning his enterprise; and he would have done so, had it not been for the address of one his followers. When he was rising into celebrity, Corais, a powerful Arab chief, being irritated that a man of yesterday should have the boldness to mislead the people, declared himself his enemy, and attempted to thwart his designs; but the people, believing that Mahomet had continued intercourse with God and his angels, supported him till he had an opportunity of being avenged upon his adversary. The tribe of Corais was worsted; and Mahomet seeing himself surrounded by a host of fanatics, thought that he stood in no need of a coadjutor. However, lest Corais should expose his impostures, he took the initiative; and to make sure, he loaded him with promises, and swore that he only wished to become great in order to share with him that power, to the establishment of which he might so much contribute. “We can agree,” said he, “when we reach our proper elevation; we can depend, in the meantime, on that great multitude whom we have gained over, and it only remains that we make sure of them by the employment of that artifice which you have so happily invented.” At the same time he persuaded him to descend into the Cave of Oracles.

This was a dried-up sunk well, from the bottom of which Corais spoke, in order that the people might believe that it was the voice of God declaring himself in favour of Mahomet who was in the midst of his proselytes. Deceived by the blandishments of the leader, his associate regularly descended into the well, to counterfeit the oracle. Whilst Mahomet was passing one day at the head of an infatuated multitude, they heard a voice, which said—“I am your God, and I declare that Mahomet is the prophet whom I have appointed for all nations; he will instruct you in my law of truth, which the Jews and Christians have altered.” For a long time the accomplice played this game; but at last he met with the blackest ingratitude. The voice being heard, as usual, proclaiming him an inspired personage, Mahomet turned to the people, and commanded them, in the name of that God who had recognised him as his prophet, to fill up the well with stones, that it might be an enduring witness in his favour, like that pillar which Jacob set up to mark the place where God had appeared to him.26Thus perished, miserably, the chief who had most contributed to the elevation of Mahomet. It was upon this heap of stones that the last of the three most celebrated impostors established his religion, and so solid and stable is its foundation, that after the lapse of twelve hundred years there is little appearance at present of its being overthrown.

§ 23.In this way was the power of Mahomet established; and he was more fortunate than Jesus, inasmuch as he lived to see the wide diffusion of his doctrines, which Christ on account of his want of resources, was unable to do. He was even more fortunate in this respect than Moses, who from excess of ambition brought himself to a premature end.—Mahomet died in peace, and loaded with blessings. He had, moreover, a well-grounded hope that his religion would last, because it was accommodated to the nature of a people born and brought up in ignorance; an adaptation in which men more learned than himself, but less accustomed to associate with the lower orders, might have entirely failed.The reader is now in possession of the most remarkable facts concerning the three most celebrated legislators, whose religions have brought into subjection a great part of the human race. They were such as we have represented them; and it is for you to consider if they are worthy of your respect, and if you are justified in allowing yourselves to be led by those whom ambition alone conducted to power, and whose dreams have been perpetuated by ignorance. The following observations, if read with a free and unprejudiced mind, may lead to the discovery of truth, by clearing away those mists wherewith you have been blinded and beguiled.

§ 23.

In this way was the power of Mahomet established; and he was more fortunate than Jesus, inasmuch as he lived to see the wide diffusion of his doctrines, which Christ on account of his want of resources, was unable to do. He was even more fortunate in this respect than Moses, who from excess of ambition brought himself to a premature end.—Mahomet died in peace, and loaded with blessings. He had, moreover, a well-grounded hope that his religion would last, because it was accommodated to the nature of a people born and brought up in ignorance; an adaptation in which men more learned than himself, but less accustomed to associate with the lower orders, might have entirely failed.The reader is now in possession of the most remarkable facts concerning the three most celebrated legislators, whose religions have brought into subjection a great part of the human race. They were such as we have represented them; and it is for you to consider if they are worthy of your respect, and if you are justified in allowing yourselves to be led by those whom ambition alone conducted to power, and whose dreams have been perpetuated by ignorance. The following observations, if read with a free and unprejudiced mind, may lead to the discovery of truth, by clearing away those mists wherewith you have been blinded and beguiled.

In this way was the power of Mahomet established; and he was more fortunate than Jesus, inasmuch as he lived to see the wide diffusion of his doctrines, which Christ on account of his want of resources, was unable to do. He was even more fortunate in this respect than Moses, who from excess of ambition brought himself to a premature end.—Mahomet died in peace, and loaded with blessings. He had, moreover, a well-grounded hope that his religion would last, because it was accommodated to the nature of a people born and brought up in ignorance; an adaptation in which men more learned than himself, but less accustomed to associate with the lower orders, might have entirely failed.

The reader is now in possession of the most remarkable facts concerning the three most celebrated legislators, whose religions have brought into subjection a great part of the human race. They were such as we have represented them; and it is for you to consider if they are worthy of your respect, and if you are justified in allowing yourselves to be led by those whom ambition alone conducted to power, and whose dreams have been perpetuated by ignorance. The following observations, if read with a free and unprejudiced mind, may lead to the discovery of truth, by clearing away those mists wherewith you have been blinded and beguiled.

1Consult Hobbes’ Leviathan “De Homine,” chap. xli, pages 56, 57 and 58.↑2Philip of Macedon had sent auxiliaries and money to Hannibal in Africa. “Infensos Philippo, ob auxilia cum pecunia nuper in Africam missu Annibale.” Levy, Book xxxi. chap. 1.—Translator’s Note.↑3Hobbe’s Leviathan, “De Homine,” chap. xii, pp. 56 and 57.↑4Hobbes, ubi supra “De Homine,” chap. xii. pages 58 and 59.↑5This word must not be taken in its usual acceptation. What rational men understand by the term is a dexterous man, an able cheat, and a master of jugglery, which requires great readiness and address; and not by any means a person in compact with the Devil as the vulgar suppose.↑6“And he said, Leave us not, I pray thee; for as much as thouknowesthow we are to encamp in the wilderness,and thou mayest be to us instead of eyes.”—Num. chap. x, v. 31.↑7Exodus iv. 16.↑8When Romulus was reviewing his forces in the plain of Caprae, here suddenly arose a thunder-storm, during which he was enveloped in so thick a cloud that he was lost to the view of his army; nor thereafter on this earth was Romulus seen.—Liv.1. I. c. 16.—Translator’s note.↑9Hobbes’ Leviathan; de homine, chap. xii. pp. 59 and 60.↑10It is recorded by Livy, that “there is a grove, through which flowed aperennialstream, taking its origin in a dark cave, in which Numa was accustomed to meet the goddess, and receive instructions as to his political and religions institutions.”—Liv.1. I. c. 21.↑11Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aileVienne obom brer une Purcelle,Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;L’on en vit autant en Lydie.Et le beau Cygne de LedaVaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.↑12I. Samuel, chap. viii. vs. 5 and 6.↑13The Gospel according toJohn, chap. viii. v. 7.↑14Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxii. v. 21.↑15Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxi. v. 27.↑16Saint Paul,Hebrews, chap. viii. v. 13speaks in these terms: “In that he saith anewcovenant, he hath made thefirstold. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”—Translator’s note.↑17This was the opinion of Pope Leo X. as appears from an expression of his, which, considering that it was made use of at a time when the philosophical spirit of inquiry had made little progress, was remarkably bold. “It has been well known in all ages,” he observed to Cardinal Beinbo, “how much this fable of Jesus Christ has been profitable to us and ours.”Quantum nobis nostrisque sa de Christo fabula profuerit, satis est omnibus saeculis notum.↑18Confessions, 1. VII. c. ix. v. 28.↑19See the discourse of Aristophanes, in the “Banquet of Plato.”↑20Luke’s Gospel, chap. xvi. v. 24.↑21“The City of God,” book I. chap. xiv.↑22Orig. adv. Cels. 1. VIII. chap. iv. Compare with,Matthew, chap. xix. v. 24.↑23Op. adv. Jorin. 1. II. chap.viii.—“In indication of their refusal to take an oath, the Society of Friends quote the words of Christ, “Swear not at all;” unaware, or overlooking, that this expression is descriptive of a state of social perfection, when the word of a man will be as good as his oath. Many others of Christ’s precepts besides this are unobserved by Christians, such as ‘Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth,’ ‘Give to every one that asketh, and from him that would borrow of you turn not thou away.’The morality of Christ is a beau ideal so far from being realized, that there is not even a similitude of it in the Christian world.The Quakers who vauntingly obey this precept regarding oaths, has no hesitation in breaking the other precepts respecting the hoarding of money, and refusing to give it away.”—Translator’s Note.↑24St. Paul.↑25“I can believe,” observes the Count de Boulainvilliers, “that Mahomet was ignorant of the common elements of education. But assuredly he wasnotignorant in respect to that vast knowledge which a far travelled man of great natural powers may acquire. He wasnotignorant of his native tongue, although he could not read it, being master of all its subtleness and all its beauties. He was thoroughly qualified to render hateful whatever was truly blameworthy, and to paint truth in colours so simple and vivid, that it was impossible to misunderstand it.All that he has said is true, as regards the essential dogmas of Religion; buthe has not said all that is true, and in this respect alone does our religion differ from his.” Farther on he adds, that “Mahomet was neither ignorant nor a barbarian; he conducted his enterprise with all the skill, delicacy, perseverance, and intrepidity, which was necessary to ensure its success. His views were as lofty as any which Alexander the Great, or Julius Cæsar, were capable of entertaining, had they been in his position.”—Life of Mahomet by Count de Boulainvilliers, book II. pp. 266–8. Amsterdam edit. 1731.↑26Genesis chap. xxviii. v. 18.↑

1Consult Hobbes’ Leviathan “De Homine,” chap. xli, pages 56, 57 and 58.↑

2Philip of Macedon had sent auxiliaries and money to Hannibal in Africa. “Infensos Philippo, ob auxilia cum pecunia nuper in Africam missu Annibale.” Levy, Book xxxi. chap. 1.—Translator’s Note.↑

3Hobbe’s Leviathan, “De Homine,” chap. xii, pp. 56 and 57.↑

4Hobbes, ubi supra “De Homine,” chap. xii. pages 58 and 59.↑

5This word must not be taken in its usual acceptation. What rational men understand by the term is a dexterous man, an able cheat, and a master of jugglery, which requires great readiness and address; and not by any means a person in compact with the Devil as the vulgar suppose.↑

6“And he said, Leave us not, I pray thee; for as much as thouknowesthow we are to encamp in the wilderness,and thou mayest be to us instead of eyes.”—Num. chap. x, v. 31.↑

7Exodus iv. 16.↑

8When Romulus was reviewing his forces in the plain of Caprae, here suddenly arose a thunder-storm, during which he was enveloped in so thick a cloud that he was lost to the view of his army; nor thereafter on this earth was Romulus seen.—Liv.1. I. c. 16.—Translator’s note.↑

9Hobbes’ Leviathan; de homine, chap. xii. pp. 59 and 60.↑

10It is recorded by Livy, that “there is a grove, through which flowed aperennialstream, taking its origin in a dark cave, in which Numa was accustomed to meet the goddess, and receive instructions as to his political and religions institutions.”—Liv.1. I. c. 21.↑

11

Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aileVienne obom brer une Purcelle,Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;L’on en vit autant en Lydie.Et le beau Cygne de LedaVaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.

Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aileVienne obom brer une Purcelle,Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;L’on en vit autant en Lydie.Et le beau Cygne de LedaVaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.

Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aileVienne obom brer une Purcelle,Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;L’on en vit autant en Lydie.Et le beau Cygne de LedaVaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.

Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aileVienne obom brer une Purcelle,Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;L’on en vit autant en Lydie.Et le beau Cygne de LedaVaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.

Qu’un beauPigeona tire d’aile

Vienne obom brer une Purcelle,

Rien n’est sur prenant en cela;

L’on en vit autant en Lydie.

Et le beau Cygne de Leda

Vaut bien le Pigeon de Marie.

↑

12I. Samuel, chap. viii. vs. 5 and 6.↑

13The Gospel according toJohn, chap. viii. v. 7.↑

14Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxii. v. 21.↑

15Matthew’s Gospel, chap. xxi. v. 27.↑

16Saint Paul,Hebrews, chap. viii. v. 13speaks in these terms: “In that he saith anewcovenant, he hath made thefirstold. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”—Translator’s note.↑

17This was the opinion of Pope Leo X. as appears from an expression of his, which, considering that it was made use of at a time when the philosophical spirit of inquiry had made little progress, was remarkably bold. “It has been well known in all ages,” he observed to Cardinal Beinbo, “how much this fable of Jesus Christ has been profitable to us and ours.”Quantum nobis nostrisque sa de Christo fabula profuerit, satis est omnibus saeculis notum.↑

18Confessions, 1. VII. c. ix. v. 28.↑

19See the discourse of Aristophanes, in the “Banquet of Plato.”↑

20Luke’s Gospel, chap. xvi. v. 24.↑

21“The City of God,” book I. chap. xiv.↑

22Orig. adv. Cels. 1. VIII. chap. iv. Compare with,Matthew, chap. xix. v. 24.↑

23Op. adv. Jorin. 1. II. chap.viii.—“In indication of their refusal to take an oath, the Society of Friends quote the words of Christ, “Swear not at all;” unaware, or overlooking, that this expression is descriptive of a state of social perfection, when the word of a man will be as good as his oath. Many others of Christ’s precepts besides this are unobserved by Christians, such as ‘Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth,’ ‘Give to every one that asketh, and from him that would borrow of you turn not thou away.’The morality of Christ is a beau ideal so far from being realized, that there is not even a similitude of it in the Christian world.The Quakers who vauntingly obey this precept regarding oaths, has no hesitation in breaking the other precepts respecting the hoarding of money, and refusing to give it away.”—Translator’s Note.↑

24St. Paul.↑

25“I can believe,” observes the Count de Boulainvilliers, “that Mahomet was ignorant of the common elements of education. But assuredly he wasnotignorant in respect to that vast knowledge which a far travelled man of great natural powers may acquire. He wasnotignorant of his native tongue, although he could not read it, being master of all its subtleness and all its beauties. He was thoroughly qualified to render hateful whatever was truly blameworthy, and to paint truth in colours so simple and vivid, that it was impossible to misunderstand it.All that he has said is true, as regards the essential dogmas of Religion; buthe has not said all that is true, and in this respect alone does our religion differ from his.” Farther on he adds, that “Mahomet was neither ignorant nor a barbarian; he conducted his enterprise with all the skill, delicacy, perseverance, and intrepidity, which was necessary to ensure its success. His views were as lofty as any which Alexander the Great, or Julius Cæsar, were capable of entertaining, had they been in his position.”—Life of Mahomet by Count de Boulainvilliers, book II. pp. 266–8. Amsterdam edit. 1731.↑

26Genesis chap. xxviii. v. 18.↑

Back to IndexNext