Part 1

Produced by David Widger

THE DOUBTS OF INFIDELS, OR, QUERIES RELATIVE TO SCRIPTURAL INCONSISTENCIES & CONTRADICTIONS.

SUBMITTED FOR ELUCIDATION TO THE BENCH OF BISHOPS BY A WEAK BUT SINCERE CHRISTIAN.

By Anonymous

.......Metus omnes et inexoraibile fatum Subjecit pedibus, strepitumque Acherontis avari! Illum non populi fasces, non purpura regum Flexit et infidos agitans discordia fratres. Virg.

Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees! Hypocrites! ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. Matt, xxiii. 23, 24.

The world is divided into two classes of men...the one have understanding but no religion; the other have religion but no understanding.

LONDON:

PRINTED & PUBLISHED BY R. CARLILE, 55, FLEET STREET.

1819.

THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY.

TO THE RIGHT REVEREND AND REVEREND THE BISHOPS, CLERGY, AND ALL OTHER SUPPORTERS OF THE CHURCH MILITANT HERE ON EARTH.

REVEREND SIRS,

Your late zealous exertion against the infidels, in procuring the Sunday Bill to be passed, and prosecutions and pillory against infidel writers and publishers, must have convinced them that you are in earnest in your attempts to propagate and establish our holy faith. An act of parliament is an excellent engine for producing that kind of uniformity of opinions, which consists in holding the tongue; and, however unfair it may be in common transactions to suppress the arguments on one side of any question, yet, in religious matters, even the most cool and charitable must allow, that it is otherwise. When the salvation of men is concerned, every means is justifiable. What right has a man to complain, though by virtue of an act of parliament, by pains and penalties, fines, imprisonment, and the pillory, he may be sent to heaven whether he will or no? It is carrying the notion of liberty too far, to suppose, because we are free-born Englishmen, that we may choose our own faith and go to heaven _our own way!_ What would become of the right reverend and reverend guides and turnpike-men, if people were permitted to avoid the strait gate and go to their journey's end without paying?

Foreigners are so sensible of this, and the priests of other countries are so tenacious of their rights of directing the intellects of the people, that they have invented and deposited in the inner chambers of the holy inquisition, a number of most ingenious machines, which, by means of whips, cords, pullies, screws, wheels, iron crows, red hot pincers, and the like, are found to be extremely serviceable in twisting and warping opinions to any settled models government may require.

Notwithstanding your Lordships' readiness* "to oppose error of every kind by argument and persuasion," it happens unfortunately for us, that these mechanical and persuasive arguments are unknown in _Britain_. Instead of that most strong and logical argument, called the torture, we are obliged to adopt plain reason, or, at most, when that fails us, the _prison, fine, and pillory_. But, it is to be hoped, that the happy time is not far off, when the priests of _Britain_ may be able to argue with as much force as the spiritual directors of other countries; when the Clergy may approach the throne, and avow their readiness to stop the mouths of men, without being under the shameful necessity of contradicting themselves, by "disavowing all violence in the cause of religion.*"

* Vide Address of the Convocation presented to his Majesty the 17th of November, 1780.

In those better days, the Lord Bishop of Chester may overthrow the arguments of an infidel peer, by declaring them "unworthy of a Reply;" and the Bishop of St. David may confirm the defeat, by affirming, that the arguments of unbelievers "deserve no answer;" for every one will then say, they "would not" answer them, not that they "could not," as they impiously affirm at present. But as those glorious times are not yet arrived, we must be contented, in the mean while, to proceed in the old method of reasoning upon even ground with our adversaries. The weak, though _zealous Christian_, who has the honour, to address your Lordships on the present occasion, has presumed to lay before you a few of the Doubts of the Infidels, and he hopes you will answer them to his entire satisfaction.* He is happy in reflecting that the late act of parliament forbids them to speak; but his satisfaction is infinitely greater when he assures himself, that your Lordships' answer will convince them and make them ashamed even to _write, speak, or think_.

* Vide the same address.

Thus fervently prays your Lordships' unworthy co-operator,

The Author.

* The following are the chapters, with many others, which contain the most objectionable parts:--

Genesis, chap. 16, 18, 19, 30, 34, 35, 38, 30. Numbers, 25. Judges, 10, 19. 1 Samuel, 25. 2 Samuel, 11, 13, 16. Ezekiel, 4, 10, 22, 23. Hosea, 1, 2, 3.

The following are those chapters which contain instances of cruel and torturous executions, and unrelenting vindictiveness.

Genesis, chap. 34. Numbers, 31. Joshua, 8,10. Judges, 4, 5, 21. 1 Samuel, 15. 2 Samuel, 12, 21. 1 Kings, 2. 2 Kings, 10.

DOUBTS OF INFIDELS,

1. How can _the attributes_ of God be vindicated, in having performed so great a number of miracles, for a long succession of very distant ages, and so few in _latter times?_ If they were performed for the instruction of those times only, are they not equally necessary at present for us? or, if those ancient miracles were intended likewise for our instruction, are they adequate to the purpose? Can God, who gave us reason, act inconsistently with its dictates; and is it rational or fair to demand our belief of things, which are in their own nature far removed from common belief, or common sense, and require something more than the usual testimony of history for their support? When Livy affirms,* that the Gauls conspired against Hannibal, we admit and believe the fact; but when in the same chapter he speaks of shields sweating blood, of its raining hot stones at Arpi, and the like, we justly reject and disbelieve these improbable assertions; neither is any credit given to the account of the wonderful method of curing diseases by the touch, said to be possessed by Mr. Greatrix,* though we find it in the Philosophical Transactions. The miracles of the Old Testament were all performed in those ages of which we have no credible history; what reply then can be made to those who affirm, that miracles have always been confined to the early and fabulous times; that all nations have had them, but that they disappeared in proportion as men became enlightened, and capable of discovering _imposture_ and _priestcraft_.

* T. Livii, lib. xxii, cap. 1.

2. Suppose a book to be published, containing assertions of historical facts long past, which had no collateral testimony of other authors; suppose those facts in general to be improbable and incredible; suppose the book to be anonymous, or, which is worse, ushered into the world under the name of a person who, from the internal evidence of the thing, could not have written it; can it be imagined, that such a book would find credit among people, who have the least pretensions to reason or common sense? Which, then, is the readiest way of confuting the enemies of our holy and only true religion, who do not scruple to affirm, that many books of canonical Scripture are in this predicament? They observe that the books of the Pentateuch bear many strong marks of an author long posterior to Moses; that the book of Numbers** quotes the book of the Wars of the Lord, which, as first written, was most probably the book which Moses wrote; that Moses could not possibly have written the account of his own _death and burial_ in Deuteronomy,**** which nevertheless has no mark to distinguish it from the rest of the book.

* Lowther's Abridgement, Vol. III. p. II. Greatrix published a pamphlet, to which the attestations of Boyle, Wilkins, Cud-worth, and many other great men were affixed. Vide Life of St. Evremont, printed with his works in English, 3 vols. 8vo.

** Numb. xxi. 14.

*** Deut. xxxiv.

And supposing these and other objections of the like nature to be removed, what must we say in reply to their remark, that the Scripture, which we believe to be dictated by the inspiration of the unerring God, is frequently** contradictory with regard to facts, and very often represents the all-wise Creator*** as angry, repenting, unjust, arbitrary, &c. and that consequently we must either give up that dependence, which we naturally place on his goodness and rectitude, or reject those writings which represent him as a demon. Do not your Lordships apprehend, that, for want of better arguments, we shall be under the necessity of recurring to the _argumentum pillorii_, or of adopting some of those _gentle methods_ which were lawfully used for the conversion of heretics in the mild and pious reign of Mary, Queen of England?

** Vide infra.

*** Genesis vi. 6,7. also Exod. vii. 3. xi. 9,10. and 1 Sam. xv. 35.

3. Is the account of the creation and fall of man, in the book of Genesis, physical or allegorical? Did God create light before the sun? How could he divide the light from darkness, since darkness is nothing but the mere privation of light? How could time be divided into days, before the creation of the sun, since a day is the time between sun-rise and sun-rise? How could the firmament be created, since there is no _firmament_, and the false notion of its existence is no more than an imagination of the ancient Grecians?

4. The Scriptures were certainly written for the purpose of being understood, or for no purpose at all. A mystery, that is to say, an assertion or theorem, which the human understanding is incapable of comprehending, must likewise be inexpressible in human speech; we cannot, therefore, avail ourselves of the short and elegant method of clearing and elucidating difficult parts of Scripture, by the use of the word mystery, but how shall we, without this _happy resource_, explain the business of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, of a speaking serpent, and of a tree of life, which God was obliged to guard by cherubim and a flaming sword, lest man should eat of the fruit and become immortal?

5. The serpent was afflicted with the curse of going upon his belly. The scoffers seem to think it no curse at all; for as they take it for granted that he went upon his back before this unfortunate transaction, they apprehended it was doing him a singular piece of service to reverse him, the latter position being evidently the most convenient. They also take notice, that no animal can subsist upon dust, and that whatever the individual serpent in question might have done, the serpents of modern times are so profane, that they universally reject so dry a food, and, by a second act of impiety, emancipate themselves from the consequences of the first.

* Gen. vi.--78.

6. The account of the flood is very embarrassing. It is described as the effects of natural agents in the hands of God. It rained; no mention is made of waters created for the purpose. The deluge was universal; all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered; and it ceased, not by the annihilation of the waters, but they were evaporated by a wind. Now from whence came the water? The weight of the whole atmosphere, with all its vapours, is equal to no more than a hollow sphere of three or four and thirty feet thickness, environing the whole globe, and consequently the whole of its contents, if condensed into water, could not deluge the earth to the height of an ordinary house. It is to no purpose to break open the fountains of the abyss, or great deep, if any such fountains there are; for gravity would prevent the waters from issuing out; neither can we easily persuade infidels, that the windows of Heaven were opened, while they know it has no windows; so that we have but three or four and thirty feet of water to deluge the highest mountains, some of which are more than fifteen thousand feet high.*

* The Indian Alps are 20,862 feet above the level of the ocean. Editor. See Col. Kirkpatrick's History of Nepaul, and Asiatic Researches, Vol. VIII.

7. The weak in faith find themselves equally at a loss respecting the ark. It seems strange to them, that so vast an assemblage of animals could be inclosed in an ark or chest, which had but one window, (which window was kept shut for more than five months,) without being stifled for want of air: it appears equally remarkable that Noah and his three sons could unstow and serve out the daily allowance of provisions and water to the passengers; and if their wives were supposed to help them, the work to be done is still prodigious. The lions and other carnivorous animals must have lived on salt provisions; which, no doubt, they were glad of, as seafaring people are not very nice, especially in long voyages.

8. If God set his bow in the clouds, as a token of his covenant with mankind after the flood, ought we not to conclude, that he, at that time, established the law of the various refrangibility and reflexibility of the rays of light, and consequently, that before the flood many optical experiments, which are common with us, would not then have succeeded? For example, a man could not have made a rainbow by spouting water out of his mouth; Mr. Dollond's achromatic telescopes would have then been no better than common ones; natural bodies must have appeared all of one colour, &c. &c.

9. What answer must we give to those who are inclined to deny, that an all-powerful and just God could make use of the most unjustifiable means to attain his great purpose of aggrandizing the posterity of Abraham? Could this benevolent and just Being approve of the ungenerous advantage which Jacob took over his faint and hungry brother? Could this omnipotent and upright Spirit adopt no method of distinguishing his favourite Jacob, but that of fraud and lies, by which he deprived the same unsuspecting brother of his father's blessing? Or, in short, how shall we justify God for the continual distinction and favour he is said to have bestowed on a people, who from their own annals appear to have been unparalleled for cruelty,* ingratitude, inurbanity, &c.?

* See the acts of Joshua; also 1 Sam. xv. &c.

10. When the unbelievers affirm that a just God could not punish Pharaoh for an hardness of heart of which he himself (God) was evidently the cause, we usually answer, that the potter has power over the day to fashion it as he lists; but when in reply, they take notice, that if the clay in the hands of the potter were capable of happiness or misery, according to the fashion impressed on it, the potter must be malevolent and cruel who can give the preference to inflicting pain instead of happiness, then we are obliged to be silent, in hopes that your Lordships will condescend to supply us with better arguments than any we are acquainted with at present.

11. Miracles must have been very common in Egypt, since there was a body of people whose trade it was to work them. When Aaron's rod was turned into a serpent,* Pharaoh, instead of being surprised at it, as an unusual phænomenon, sends for his magicians, who immediately perform the like with their rods. Your Lordships owe us some little explanation concerning this business: we know it is our duty to believe, that Aaron's miracle was performed by the power of God, but are at a loss to discover by what power the magicians performed theirs.

19. When** Aaron turned the waters of Egypt into blood, their streams, their rivers, their ponds, and all their pools, together with all the water throughout the land of Egypt, whether in Vessels of wood, or vessels of stone, the magicians of Egypt did so likewise with their enchantments. Here again our adversaries, who unfortunately have more curiosity than faith, take the liberty to enquire, whether the magicians formed water to practise their art upon, since Aaron had already turned it into blood?

* Exod vii. 3, 4. and ix. 9, 10.

** Exod. vii. 10.

*** Exod. vii. 10, &c.

13. Pharaoh still continuing inflexible, though successively exposed to the plagues of frogs, lice, and flies;* his cattle, namely, the horses, the asses, the camels, the oxen, and the sheep, were afflicted with a very grievous murrain, and all the cattle of Egypt died, except those of the children of Israel.** This producing no good effect with Pharaoh, the whole nation of Egyptians were plagued with boils and blains;*** notwithstanding which Pharaoh's heart continued as hard as ever.**** Moses was therefore sent early in the morning, to advise Pharaoh to send for his cattle, and all that he had in the field, and shelter them against a terrible hail storm, the approach of which he predicted. They among Pharaoh's servants who feared the word of the Lord, saved their cattle and servants, by removing them into houses; for the next day came on a storm of thunder, lightning, and hail, which broke the trees, destroyed the herbage, and killed every living creature that was in the field, excepting only that in the land of Goshen, where the children of Israel were, there was no hail. _Divine truths_ are so different from those which carnal minds are used to contemplate, that it must be very difficult by the force of mere human reason to persuade mankind in general, that Pharaoh's cattle were in any great danger from the hail storm, since they were all previously dead by the murrain; and some people are so stupid, that they think killing them a second time was no punishment at all. There are not wonting some amongst the present perverse generation; who are at a loss to conceive how those of Pharaoh's servants, who feared the word of the Lord, could make their Cattle flee into houses, since they pretend to maintain, that cattle already dead, whether by the murrain or otherwise, are incapable of fleeing. Notwithstanding those people are so obviously in the wrong, yet we depend upon your Lordships, that you will expose their errors in more glaring colours than any in which they have yet appeared.

* Exod. viii.

** Exod. ix. 3, 6.

*** Exod. ix.

**** Exod. ix. 13, &c.

14. Some weak believers are in doubts whether so mean, so ungenerous, and so dishonest an act, as borrowing the jewels of the Egyptians* without any intention of returning them, did not rather originate in that disposition which characterizes the Jews to this day, than in the command of the just God, who certainly could need no such tricks to accomplish his intentions.

15. The plague of hail being succeeded by locusts, thick darkness, and the death of all the first-born of Egypt, cattle included, Pharaoh at length permitted the Israelites to depart; but afterwards repenting, he went in pursuit of them** with six hundred chariots and all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, and his horsemen and his army, and overtook them by the sea, near Baal Zephon. The Red Sea was parted in two to afford a passage for the Israelites, the Egyptians followed them, and were punished for their rashness by the return of the waters, which swallowed them up. Here again our petulant and unsatisfied opposers demand how Pharaoh could pursue with chariots and horsemen, since his horses were all slain twice over, once by the murrain and once by the hail; not to mention that the first born of cattle were slain even a third time. They likewise add, that Egypt, which, to facilitate the dispersion of the waters of the overflowing Nile, is intersected by numberless canals, must have always been a very improper country either for cavalry or chariots.

* Exod. xi.

** Exod. xiv.

16. God came to Balaam at night and said unto him, "If the men come to call thee, rise up and go with them."* Balaam accordingly rose up, saddled his ass, and went with the princes of Moab. "But God's anger was kindled because he went," insomuch that he sent an angel to oppose him, who would certainly have slain him, if the ass he rode on had not exhibited a specimen of penetration and prudence, of which the asses of modern times seem to be divested. The infidels here insist, that it is better to reject the whole story, than to believe that the Supreme Being could be angry with Balaam, merely because he obeyed his command; but the true believers, the sons of the church, who think there would be no exercise for our faith, if we were required to admit nothing but what can be supported by argument, are not at all concerned in this difficulty; the more improbable the doctrine, the greater must be the merit in believing.

* Numb. xxii. 20, &c.

17. "The Lord was with Judah,** and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountains, but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." It is difficult to conceive, how the Lord of heaven and earth, who had so often changed the order, and suspended the established laws of nature in favour of his people the Jews, could not succeed against the inhabitants of a valley, because they had chariots of iron! Or ought we not rather to infer that the book in which this passage is found, has nothing of divine inspiration in it, but was written by one of the Jews who considered the God of Israel their protector as a local divinity; who was in some instances more, and in others less powerful, than the gods of their enemies. Thus David in many places compares the Lord with other gods "The Lord is a great God, and a great king above all gods," &c. and Jephtha says to the king of the children of Ammon, "Wilt thou not possess that which Chemosh thy God giveth thee, to possess? So whomsoever the Lord our God shall drive out from before us, them will we possess."

** Judges i. 19.

18. How unjustly are the Spaniards stigmatised for the zeal they exhibited in converting the natives of Peru and Mexico to the Christian religion!*** It is true, they ripped up women with child, dashed infants to pieces against the rocks, and broiled men to death with slow fires; but as their pious intention was purely that of delivering these uninstructed and ignorant people from the more horrible pains of futurity, the truly compassionate can not but approve their conduct. How can we enough admire the mild and humane transaction of hanging up thirteen Indians in honour of Christ and the twelve apostles!

*** See Marmoutel's Preface to the Incas, and the authors there cited.