1
10
3
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/e6f6f571b07983fd9b8554d91997cd3f.pdf?Expires=1780531200&Signature=ZE017WS5XWrPptapab7Li5FJDhLO51vqoN7tD2JYCQgtbjOK1k6bExKZV9yRGgQMEi-5dEzhiVyngxvG4KQEl4kyD0kxqKWbq9D0JZ3eDsDhT1jBbSr9HXmTWH7C5tKtQxjSCKktMpfaeuE335az0i9U22UJbUeXWZ9FyxLhzGbmbKW3dxElSel%7E9f-mXZGC9Irj2UZencIUgUBa-089H23ujZHgBgRLnx3ceueX3CHUyywp8tDpv9VcMrSr7a7do8a0H%7EnpcmqQiGfSAEnrx46w12GnArQsArfOt4289MmXfFj5dR1oqZSsY1H2A6QcL8JOf9K-cDw1w2sDGk1-UA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
6bc38f29eebfb572508a6d81b2066ef4
PDF Text
Text
NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
BY C. BRADLAUGH.
Most undoubtedly father Abraham is a personage whose his
tory should command our attention, if only because he figures
as the founder of the Jewish race—a race which, having
been promised protection and favour by Deity, appear to
have experienced little else besides the infliction or suffer
ance of misfortune and misery. Men are taught to believe
that God, following out a solemn covenant made with
Abraham, suspended the operations of nature to aggrandise
the Jews; that he promised always to bless and favour
them if they adhered to his worship and obeyed the priests.
The promised blessings were usually—political authority,
individual happiness and sexual power, long life, and great
wealth; the threatened curses for idolatry or disobedience
—disease, loss of property and children, mutilation, death.
Amongst the blessings—the right to kill, plunder, and ravish
their enemies, with protection, whilst pious, against any
subjection to retaliatory measures. And all this because
they were Abraham’s children!
Abraham is an important personage. Without Abraham,
no Jesus, no Christianity, no Church of England, no bishops,
no tithes, no church rates. But for Abraham, England
would have lost all these blessings. Abraham was the great
grandfather of Judah, the head of the tribe to which God’s
father, Joseph, belonged.
In gathering materials for a short biographical sketch, we
are at the same time comforted and dismayed by the fact
that the only reliable account of Abraham’s career is that
furnished by the book of Genesis, supplemented by a few
brief references in other parts of the Bible, and that, outside
“ God’s perfect and infallible revelation to man,” there is
no reliable account of Abraham’s existence at all. We are
comforted by the thought that Genesis is unquestioned by
the faithful, and is at present protected by Church and State
against heretic assaults; but we are dismayed when we think
that, if Infidelity, encouraged by Colenso and Kalisch, up
sets Genesis, Abraham will have little historical claim on
our attention. Some philologists have asserted that Brama
and Abraham are alike corruptions of Abba Rama, or
Abrama, and that Sarah is identical with Sarasvati.
�■ - I W-I-V
2
• ,•
„ ,,1. ?k,y
NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
Abram, is a Chaldean compound, meaning father of the
elevated, or exalted father. OFTON is a compound of
Chaldee and Arabic, signifying father of a multitude. In
part v. of his work, Colenso mentions that Adonis was for
merly identified with Abram, “ high father,” Adonis being
the personified sun.
Leaving incomprehensible philology for the ordinary au
thorised version of our Bibles, we find that Abraham was
the son of Terah. The text does not expressly state where
Abraham was born, and I cannot therefore describe his birth
place with that accuracy of detail which a true believer might
desire, but I may add that he “ dwelt in old time on the
other side of the flood.” (Joshua xxiv. 2 and 3.) The
situation of such dwelling involves a geographical problem
most unlikely to be solved unless the inquirer is “ half seas
over.” Abraham was born when Terah, his father, was
seventy years of age; and, according to Genesis, Terah and
his family came forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and went
to Haran and dwelt there. We turn to the map to look for
Ur of the Chaldees, anxious to discover it as possibly
Abraham’s place of nativity, but find that the translators of
God’s inspired word have taken a slight liberty with the text
by substituting “ Ur of the Chaldees” for “Aur Kasdim,”
the latter being, in plain English, the light of the magi, or con
jurors, or astrologers.
is stated by Kalisch to
have been made the basis for many extraordinary legends,
as to Abraham’s rescue from the flames.
Abraham, being born—according to Hebrew chronology,
2083 years after the creation, and according to the Septuagint 3549 years after that event—when his father was
seventy, grew so slowly that when his father reached the good
old age of 205 years, Abraham had only arrived at 75 years,
having, apparently, lost no less than 60 years’ growth during
his father’s life-time. St. Augustine and St. Jerome gave
this up as a difficulty inexplicable. Calmet endeavours to
explain it, and makes it worse. But what real difficulty is
there ? Do you mean, dear reader, that it is impossible
Abraham could have lived 135 years, and yet be only 75 years
of age? Is this your objection? It is a sensible one, I
admit, but it is an Infidel one. Eschew sense, and retaining
only religion, ever remember that with God all things are
possible. Indeed, I have read myself that gin given to
young children stunts their growth ; and who shall say what
�NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
3
influence of the spirit prevented the full development of
Abraham’s years ? It is a slight question whether Abraham
and his two brothers were not born the same year; if this be
so, he might have been a small child, and not grown so
quickly as he would have otherwise done. “ The Lord ”
spoke to Abraham, and promised to make of him a great
nation, to bless those who blessed Abraham, and to curse
those who cursed him. I do not know precisely which Lord
it was that spake unto Abraham. In the Hebrew it says it
was
Jeue, or, as our translators call it, Jehovah,
but as God said (Exodus vi. 2) that by the name “Jehovah
was I not known ” to either Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, we
must conclude either that the omniscient Deity had forgotten
the matter, or that a counterfeit Lord had assumed a title to
which he had no right. The word Jehovah, which the book
of Exodus says Abraham did not know, is nearly always the
name by which Abraham addresses or speaks of the Jewish
Deity.
Abraham having been promised protection by the God of
Truth, initiated his public career with a diplomacy of state
ment worthy Talleyrand, Thiers, or Gladstone. He repre
sented his wife Sarah as his sister, which, if true, is a sad
reproach to the marriage. The ruling Pharaoh, hearing the
beauty of Sarah commended, took her into his house, she
being at that time a fair Jewish dame, between 60 and 70
years of age, and he entreated Abraham well for her sake,
and he had sheep and oxen, asses and servants, and camels.
We do not read that Abraham objected in any way to the
loss of his wife. The Lord, who is all just, finding out that
Pharaoh had done wrong, not only punished the king, but
also punished the king’s household, who could hardly haw
interfered with his misdoings. Abraham got his wife back
and went away much richer by the transaction. Whethc<
the conduct of father Abraham in pocketing quietly the prict.
of the insult—or honour—offered to his wife, is worthy
modern imitation, is a question I leave to be discussed by
Convocation when it has finished with the Athanasian Creed.
After this transaction we are not surprised to hear that
Abraham was very rich in “ silver and gold.” So was the
Duke of Marlborough after the King had taken his sister in
similar manner into his house. In verse 19 of chapter xii.
there is a curious mistranslation in our version. The text
is : “ It is for that I had taken her for my wifeour version
�4
NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
has : “ I might have taken her.” The Douay so translates as
to take a middle phrase, leaving it doubtful whether or not
Pharaoh actually took Sarah as his wife. In any case, the
Egyptian king acted well throughout. Abraham plays the
part of a timorous, contemptible hypocrite. Strong enough
to have fought for his wife, he sold her. Yet Abraham was
blessed for his faith, and his conduct is our pattern !
Despite his timorousness in the matter of his wife, Abraham
was a man of wonderful courage and warlike ability. To
rescue his relative, Lot—with whom he could not live on the
same land without quarrelling, both being religious—he armed
318 servants, and fought with four powerful kings, defeating
them and recovering the spoil. Abraham's victory was so de
cisive, that the King of Sodom, who fled and fell (xiv. 10) in
a previous encounter, now met Abraham alive (see v. 17), to
congratulate him on his victory. Abraham was also offered
bread and wine by Melchisedek, King of Salem, priest of
the Most High God. Where was Salem ? Some identify it
with Jerusalem, which it cannot be, as Jebus was not so
named until after the time of the Judges (Judges xix. 10).
How does this King, of this unknown Salem, never heard of
before or after, come to be priest of the Most High God ?
These are queries for divines—orthodox disciples believe
without inquiring. Melchisedek was most unfortunate as
far as genealogy is concerned. He had no father. I do
not mean by this that any bar sinister defaced his escutcheon.
He not only was without father, but without mother also; he
had no beginning of days or end of life, and is therefore
probably at the present time an extremely old gentleman,
who would be an invaluable acquisition to any antiquarian
association fortunate enough to cultivate his acquaintance.
God having promised Abraham a numerous family, and the
promise not having been in any part fulfilled, the patriarch
grew uneasy, and remonstrated with the Lord, who explained
the matter thoroughly to Abraham when the latter was in a
deep sleep, and a dense darkness prevailed. Religious ex
planations come with greater force under these or similar con
ditions. Natural or artificial light and clear-sightedness are
always detrimental to spiritual manifestations.
Abraham’s wife had a maid named Hagar, and she bore
to Abraham a child named Ishmael; at the time Ishmael
was born, Abraham was 86 years of age. Just before Ish
mael’s birth Hagar was so badly treated that she ran away.
�NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
5
As she was only a slave, God persuaded Hagar to return,
and humble herself to her mistress. Thirteen years after
wards God appeared to Abraham, and instituted the rite of
circumcision—which rite had been practised long before by
other nations—and again renewed the promise. The rite
of circumcision was not only practised by nations long an
terior to that of the Jews, but appears, in many cases, not
even to have been pretended as a religious rite. (See
Kalisch, Genesis, p. 386; Cahen, Genese, p. 43.) After God
had “ left off talking with him, God went up from Abraham.”
As God is infinite, he did not, of course, go up; but still
the Bible says God went up, and it is the duty of the people
to believe that he did so, especially as the infinite Deity
then and now resides habitually in “ heaven,” wherever that
may be. Again the Lord appeared to Abraham, either as
three men or angels, or as one of the three; and Abraham,
who seemed hospitably inclined, invited the three to wash
their feet, and to rest under the tree, and gave butter and
milk and dressed calf, tender and good, to them, and they
did eat; and after the inquiry as to where Sarah then was,
the promise of a son is repeated. Sarah—then by her own
admission an old woman, stricken in years—laughed when
she heard this, and the Lord said, “ Wherefore did Sarah
laugh ?” and Sarah denied it, but the Lord said, “ Nay, but
thou didst laugh.” The three then went toward Sodom, and
Abraham went with them as a guide ; and the Lord ex
plained to Abraham that some sad reports had reached him
about Sodom and Gomorrah, and that he was then going to
find out whether the report was reliable. God is infinite,
and was always therefore at Sodom and Gomorrah, but had
apparently been temporarily absent; he is omniscient, and
therefore knew everything which was' happening at Sodom
and Gomorrah, but he did not know whether or not the
people were as wicked as they had been represented to him.
God, Job tells us, “ put no trust in his servants, and his angels
he charged with folly.” Between the rogues and the fools,
therefore, the all-wise and all-powerful God seems to be as
liable to be mistaken in the reports made to him as any
monarch might be in reports made by his ministers. Two
of the three men, or angels, went on to Sodom, and left the
Lord with Abraham, who began to remonstrate with Deity
on the wholesale destruction contemplated, and asked him
to spare the city if fifty righteous should be found within
�6
NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
it. God said, “ If I find fifty righteous within the city, then
will I spare the place for their sakes.” God, being all-wise,
he knew there were not fifty in Sodom, and was deceiving
Abraham. By dint of hard bargaining in thorough Hebrew
fashion, Abraham, whose faith seemed tempered by distrust,
got the stipulated number reduced to ten, and then “ the
Lord went his way.”
Jacob Ben Chajim, in his introduction to the Rabbinical
Bible, p. 28, tells us that the Hebrew text used to read in
verse 22 : “ And Jehovah still stood before Abraham /’ but
the scribes altered it, and made Abraham stand before the
Lord, thinking the original text offensive to Deity.
The 18th chapter of Genesis has given plenty of work to the
divines. Augustin contended that God can take food,
though he does not require it. Justin compared “the eating
of God with the devouring power of the fire.” Kalisch
sorrows over the holy fathers “ who have taxed all their in
genuity to make the act of eating compatible with the attri
butes of Deity.”
In the Epistle to the Romans, Abraham’s faith is greatly
praised. We are told, iv. 19 and 20, that—
“ Being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body
now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither
yet the deadness of Sarah’s womb.”
“ He staggered not at the promise of God through un
belief ; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God.”
Yet, so far from Abraham giving God glory, we are told
in Genesis, xvii. 17, that—
“ Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in
his heart, shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred
years old ? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear ?”
The Rev. Mr. Boutell says that “ the declaration which
caused Sarah to ‘laugh,’ shows the wonderful familiarity
which was then permitted to Abraham in his communica
tions with God.”
After the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham
journeyed south and sojourned in Gerar, and either untaught
or too well taught by his previous experience, again repre
sented his wife as his sister, and Abimelech, king of Gerar,
sent and took Sarah. As before, we find neither remon
strance nor resistance recorded on the part of Abraham.
This time God punished, d la Malthus, the women in
Abimelech’s house for an offence they did not commit, and
�NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
7
Sarah was again restored to her husband, with sheep, oxen,
men-servants, and women-servants, and money. Infidels
object that the Bible says Sarah “ was old and well stricken
in age;” that “it had ceased to be with her after the manner
of womenthat she was more than 90 years of age; and
that it is not likely King Abim elech would fall in love with
an ugly old woman. We reply, “ chacun a son gout.” It is
clear that Sarah had not ceased to be attractive, as God re
sorted to especial means to protect her virtue from Abimelech.
At length Isaac is born, and his mother Sarah now urges
Abraham to expel Hagar and her son, “ and the thing was
very grievous in Abraham’s sight because of his sonthe
mother being only a bondwoman does not seem to have
troubled him. God, however, approving Sarah’s notion.
Hagar is expelled, “ and she departed and wandered in the
wilderness, and the water was spent in the bottle, and she
cast the child under one of the shrubs.” She had apparently
carried the child, who being at least more than 14, and
according to some calculations as much as 17 years of age,
must have been a heavy child to carry in a warm climate.
God never did tempt any man at any time, but he “ did
tempt Abraham ” to kill Isaac by offering him as a burnt
offering. The doctrine of human sacrifice is one of the holy
mysteries of Christianity, as taught in the Old and New
Testament. Of course, judged from a religious or Biblical
stand-point, it cannot be wrong, as if it were, God would
not have permitted Jephtha to sacrifice his daughter by
offering her as a burnt offering, nor have tempted Abraham
to sacrifice his son, nor have said in Leviticus, “ None de
voted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed;
but shall surely be put to death” (xxvii. 29), nor have in the
New Testament worked out the monstrous sacrifice of his
only son Jesus, at the same time son and begetting father.
Abraham did not seem to be entirely satisfied with his
own conduct when about to kill Isaac, for he not only con
cealed from his servants his intent, but positively stated that
which was not true, saying, “ I and the lad will go yonder
and worship, and come again to you.” If he meant that he
and Isaac would come again to them, then he knew that the
sacrifice would not take place. Nay, Abraham even deceived
his own son, who asked him where was thelamb for the burnt
offering ? But we learn from the New Testament that
Abraham acted in this and other matters “ by faith/ so his
�8
NEW LIFE OF ABRAHAM.
falsehoods and evasions, being results and aids of faith, must
be dealt with in an entirely different manner from transactions
of every day life. Just as Abraham stretched forth his hand
to slay his son, the angel of the Lord called to him from
heaven, and prevented the murder, saying, “Now I know
that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy
son.” This would convey the impression that up. to that
moment the angel of the Lord was not certain upon the
subject.
In Genesis xiii. God says to Abraham, “Lift up now
thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art north
ward, and southward, and eastward, and westward. For all
the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy
seed for ever. Arise, walk through the land, in the length
of it, and in the breadth of it, for I will give it unto thee.”
Yet, as is admitted by the Rev. Charles Boutell, in his
“Bible Dictionary,” “ The only portion of territory in that
land of promise, of which Abraham became possessed,” was
a graveyard, which he had bought and paid for. Although
Abraham was too old to have children before the birth of
Isaac, he had many children after Isaac is bom. He
lived to “ a good old age,” and died “ full of years,” but
was yet younger than any of those who preceded him,
and whose ages are given in the Bible history, except
Nahor.
Abraham gave “ all that he had to Isaac,” but appears
to have distributed the rest of the property amongst his
other children, who were sent to enjoy it somewhere down
East.
According to the New Testament, Abraham is now in
Paradise, but Abraham in heaven is scarcely an improvement
upon Abraham on earth. When he was entreated by an
unfortunate in hell for a drop of water to cool his tongue,
father Abraham replied, “ Son, remember that in thy life
time thou receivedst thy good things, and now thou art
tormented,” as if the reminiscence of past good would
alleviate present and future continuity of evil.
PRICE ONE PENNY.
London : Printed and published by Austin & Co., 17, Johnson’s
Court, Fleet Street.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
New life of Abraham
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bradlaugh, Charles [1833-1891.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Date of publication from KVK.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[Austin & Co.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1861]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G4948
Subject
The topic of the resource
Judaism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (New life of Abraham), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Abraham
Bible-O.T.
Judaism
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/534b515ecfc915c523a1c5217a125592.pdf?Expires=1780531200&Signature=Ti9zdwuN3VUpNi7VNNs8C5n7Xna1197MJgf4EERa5CapDGnpjNmB3EzVs28mqzvko3N95hZEWjMQQV2Nm21IjPRv7oc-hD60r7OVmFY9phef9vm3e2Jt3lcTzCf-zbwTlRFm13AXXROPksi66Co-W6aGR1bpUVHUjvMHmAkiN2BBXd69pX7MbvWzWrQwEOqPibg-rYlDJh-9EmDzi-EZGNj1gG7gC17kGSONbS0e8OJNZ3bg95eBG-q2%7E6PfR70Je0HmauCK1I1Q%7E8by4gxla9PpWyDNbwgYn5nwUG%7EbK-DhxkO2y4qVolnvNNKLSf-KZtcCsRx84u61NRn6kekE9Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
62cb12d6224e85b79e0feba4c90a3d11
PDF Text
Text
*'
' -t
V
& A ?p*v
” >y^vr'?X*irW, ?<‘ 7* "x
B ^-2A
bJ < OO
NEW LIFE OF MOSES.
BY C. BEADLAUGH
The “Life of Abraham ” was presented to our readers, because, as
the nominal founder of the Jewish race, his position entitled him
to that honour. The “ Life of David,” because, as one of the worst
men and worst kings ever known, his history might afford matter
for reflection to admirers of monarchical institutions and matter for
comment to the advocates of a republican form of government.
The “ Life of Jacob” served to show how basely mean and con
temptibly deceitful a man might become, and yet enjoy God's love.
Having given thus a brief outline of the career of the patriarch, the
king, and the knave, the life of a priest naturally presents itself as
the most fitting to complement the present quadrifid series.
Moses, the great grandson of Levi, was born in Egypt, not far
distant from the banks of the Nile, a river world-famous for its in
undations, made familiar to ordinary readers by the travellers who
have journeyed to discover its source, and held in bad repute by
strangers, especially on account of the carnivorous Saurians who
infest its waters. The mother and father of our hero were both of
the tribe of Levi, and were named Jochebed and Amram. The in
fant Moses was, at the age of three months, placed in an ark of
bulrushes by the river s brink. This was done in order to avoid
the decree of extermination propounded bv the reigning Pharaoh
against the male Jewish children. The daughter of Pharaoh, com
ing down to the river to bathe, found the child and took compas
sion upon him, adopting him as her son. Of the early life of
Moses we have but scanty record. We are told in the New Testa
ment that he was learned in the wisdom of the Egyptians, and
*
that “when he was come to years he refused” by faithf “to be
called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter.” Perhaps the record from
which the New Testament writers quoted lias been lost; it is certain
that the present version of the Old Testament does not contain
those statements. The record which is lost may have been God’s
original revelation to man, and of which our Bible may be an in
complete version. I am little grieved by the supposition that a
• Acts, c. vii, v. 21,
f Hebrews, c. xi. v. 24.
�2
NEW LIFE OF MOSES.
revelation may have been lost, being, for my own part, more in
clined to think that no revelation has ever been made. Josephus
says that, when quite a baby, Moses trod contemptuously on the
crown of Egypt. The Egyptian monuments and Exodus are both
silent on this point. Josephus also tells us that Moses led the
Egyptians in war against the Ethiopians, and married Tharbis, the
daughter of the Ethiopian monarch. This also is omitted both in
Egyptian history and in the sacred record. When Moses was
grown, according to the Old Testament, or when he was 40 years
of age according to the New, “ it came into his heart to visit his
brethren the children of Israel,” “ And he spied an Egyptian smit
ing an Hebrew;” “And he looked this way and that way, and
when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid
him in the sand.” The New Testament says that he did it, “for
he supposed that his brethren would understand how that God, by
his hand, would deliver them.”* But this is open to the following
objections :—The Old Testament says nothing of the kind;—there
was no man to see the homicide, and as Moses hid the body, it is
hard to conceive how he could expect the Israelites to understand
a matter of which they not only had no knowledge . whatever, but
which he himself did not think was known to them ;—if there were
really no man present, the story of the after accusation against
Moses needs explanation ;—it might be further objected that it does
not appear that Moses at that time did even himself conceive that
he had any mission from God to deliver his people. Moses fled
from the wrath of Pharaoh, and dwelt in Midian, where he married
the daughter of one Reuel or Raguel, or Jethro. This name is not
of much importance, but it is strange that if Moses wrote the books
of the Pentateuch he was not more exact in designating so near a
relation. While acting as shepherd to his father-in-law, “ he led
the flock to the back side of the desert,” and “ the angel of the
Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire that is, the angel was either
a flame, or was the object which was burning, for this angel ap
peared in the midst of a bush which burned with fire, but was not
consumed. This flame appears to have been a luminous one, for
it was a “ great sight,” and attracted Moses, who turned aside to
see it. But the luminosity would depend on substance ignited and
rendered incandescent. Is the angel of the Lord a substanceJsusceptible of ignition and incandesence ? Who knoweth ? If so,
will the fallen angels ingnite and bum in hell ? God called unto
Moses out of the midst of the bush. It is hard to conceive an in
finite God in the middle of a bush, yet as the law of England says
that we must not “deny the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New
Testameut to be of divine authority,” in order not to break
the law, I advise all to believe that, in addition to being in
the middle of a bush, the infinite and all-powerful God also sat
• Aets, c. vii., v. 25.
�NEW LIFE OF MOSES.
on the top of a box, dwelt sometimes in a tent, afterwards in a
temple; although invisible, appeared occasionally; and, being a
spirit without body or parts, was hypostatically incarnate as
a man. Moses, when spoken to by God, “ hid his face, for he was
afraid to look upon God.” If Moses had known that God was
invisible, he would have escaped this fear. God told Moses that
the cry of the children of Israel had reached him, and that he had
come down to deliver them, and that Moses was to lead them out
of Egypt. Moses does not seem to have placed entire confidence
in the phlegomic divine communication, and asked, when the Jews
should question him on the name of the Deity, what answer should
he make ? It does not appear from this that the Jews, if they
had so completely forgotten God’s name, had much preserved the
recollection of the promise comparatively so recently made to
Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. The answer given according to
our version is, “I am that I am;” according to the Douay, “I
am who am.” God, in addition, told Moses that the Jews should
spoil the Egyptians of their wealth; but even this promise of
plunder, so congenial to the nature of a bill-discounting Jew of
the Bible type, did not avail to overcorfie the scruples of Moses.
God therefore taught him to throw his rod on the ground, and
thus transform it into a serpent, from which pseudo-serpent Moses
at first fled in fear, but on his taking it by the tail it resumed its
original shape. Moses, with even other wonders at command,
still hesitated; he had an impediment in his speech. God cured
this by the appointment of Aaron, who was eloquent, to aid his
brother. God directed Moses to return to Egypt, but his parting
words must somewhat have damped the future legislator’s hope of
any speedy or successful ending to his mission. God said, “ I will
harden Pharaoh’s heart that he shall not let the people go.” On
the journey back to Egypt God met Moses “ by the way in the inn,
and sought to kill him.” I am ignorant as to the causes which
prevented the omnipotent Deity from carrying out his intention ;
the text does not explain the matter, and I am not a bishop or a
D.D., and I do not therefore feel justified in putting my assump
tions in place of God’s revelation. Moses and Aaron went t<7
Pharaoh, and asked that the Jew's might be permitted to go three
days’ journey in the wilderness; but the King of Egypt not onlj
refused their request, but gave them additional tasks, and in conse
quence Moses and Aaron went again to the Lord, who told them,
“I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob by the
name of God Almighty; but by my name Jehovah was I not known
unto them.” Whether God had forgotten that the name Jehovah
was known to Abraham, or whether he was here deceiving Moses
and Aaron, are points the solution of wdiich I leave to the faithful,
referring them to the fact that Abraham called a place Jehovah*
Genesis, c. xxii., v. 14.
�NEW LIFE OF MOSES.
Jireh. After this Moses and Aaron again went to Pharaoh and
worked wonderfully in his presence. Thaumaturgy is coining into
fashion again, but the exploits of Moses far exceeded any of those
performed by Mr. Home or the Davenport Brothers. Aaron flung
down his rod, and it became a serpent; the Egyptian magicians
flung down their rods, which became serpents also; but the rod of
Aaron, as though it had been a Jew money-lender or a tithe col
lecting parson, swallowed up these miraculous competitors, and
the Jewish leaders could afford to laugh at their defeated rival
conjurors. Moses and Aaron carried on the miracle-working for
some time. All the water of the land of Egvpt was turned by
them into blood, but the magicians did so with their enchantments,
and it had no effect on Pharaoh. Then showers of frogs, at the
instance of Aaron, covered the land of Egypt; but the Egyptians
did so with their enchantments, and frogs abounded still more
plentifully. The Jews next tried their hands at the production of
lice, and here—to the glory of God be it said—the infidel Egyp
tians failed to imitate them. It is written that “ cleanliness is
next to godliness,” but we cannot help thinking that godliness must
have been far from cleanliness when the former so soon resulted
in lice. The magicians were now entirely discomfited. The pre
ceding wonders seem to have affected all the land of Egypt; but
in the next miracle the swarms of flies sent were confined to
Egyptians only, and were not extended to Goshen, in which the
Israelites dwelt.
The next plague in connection with the ministration of Moses
and Aaron was that “ all the cattle of Egypt died.” After “all
the cattle ” were dead, a boil was sent, breaking forth with blains
upon man and beast. This failing in effect, Moses afterwards
stretched forth his hand and smote “ both man and beast ” with
hail, then covered the land with locusts, and followed this with a
thick darkness throughout the land—a darkness which might have
been felt. Whether it was felt is a matter on which I am unable
to pass an opinion. After this, the Egyptians being terrified by
the destruction of their first-born children, the Jews, at the in
stance of Moses, borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, jewels
of gold, and raiment; and they spoiled the Egyptians. The fact
is, that the Egyptians were in the same position as the payers of
church rates, tithes, vicars’ rates, and Easter dues : they lent to
the Lord’s people, who are good borrowers, but slow when repay
*
ment is required. They prefer promising you a crown of glory
to paying you at once five shillings in silver.
Moses led th«
Jews through the Red Sea, which proved a ready means of escape,
as may be easily read in Exodus, which says that the Lord “ made
the sea dry land ” for the Israelites, and afterwards not only over
whelmed in it the Egyptians who sought to follow them, but, as
Josephus tells us, the current of the sea actually carried to the camp
of the Hebrews the arms of the Egyptians, so that the wandering
�NW LIFE OF MOSES.
6
Jews might not be destitute of weapons. After this the Israelites
were led by Moses into Sliur, where they were without water for three
days, and the water they afterwards found was too bitter to drink
until a tree had been cast into the well. The Israelites were then fed
with manna, which, when gathered on Friday, kept for the Sabbath,
but rotted if kept from one week day to another.
The people
grew tired of eating manna, and complained, and God sent fire I
amongst them and burned them up in the uttermost parts of the
camp; and after this the people wept and said, “ Who shall give us
flesh to eat? We remember the fish we did eat in Egypt freely;
the cucumbers and the melons and the leeks and the onions and
the garlic; but now there is nothing at all beside this manna
before our eyes.’’ This angered the Lord, and he gave them a
feast of quails, and while the flesh was yet between their teeth,
ere it was chewed, the anger of the Lord was kindled, and he
smote the Jewish people with a very great plague.
*
The people
again in Rephidim were without water, and Moses therefore smote
the Rock of Horeb with his rod, and water came out of the rock.
At Rephidim the Amalekites and the Jews fought together, and
while they fought Moses, like a prudent general, went to the top of
a hill, accompanied by Aaron and Hur, and it came to pass that
when Moses held up his hands Israel prevailed, and when he let
down his hands Amalek prevailed. But Moses’ hands w’ere heavy,
and they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat thereon,
and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side
and the other ou the other side, and his hands were steady until
the going down of the sun, and Joshua discomfited Amalek, and
his people with the edge of the sword. How the true believer
ought to rejoice that the stone was so convenient, as otherwise the
Jews might have been slaughtered, and there might have been no
royal line of David, no Jesus, no Christianity. That stone should
be more valued than the precious black stone of the Moslem; it
is the corner-stone of the system, the stone which supported the
Mosaic rule. God is everywhere, but Moses went up unto him,
and the Lord called to him out of a mountain and came to him in a
thick cloud, and descended on Mount Sinai in a fire, in consequence
of which the mountain smoked, and the Lord came down upon the
top of the mountain and called Moses up to him; and then the
Lord gave Moses the Ten Commandments, and also those pre
cepts which follow, in which Jews are permitted to buy their fellowcountrymen for six years, and in which it is provided that, if the
slave-master shall give his six-year slave a wife, and she bear him
sons or daughters, that the wife and the children shall be the pro
perty of her master. In these precepts it is also permitted that a
man may sell his own daughter for the most base purposes. Also
that a master may beat his slave, so that if he do not die until a
• Numbers, c. xi.
�6
NEW LIFE OF MOSES.
few days after the ill-treatment, the master shall escape justice be
cause the slave is his money. Also that Jews may buy strangers
and keep them as slaves for ever. While Moses was up in the
mount the people clamoured for Aaron to make them gods. Moses
had stopped away so long that the people gave him up for lost.
Aaron, whose duty it was to have pacified and restrained them, and
to have kept them in the right faith, did nothing of the kind. He
induced them to bring all their gold, and then made it into a calf,
before which he built an altar, and then proclaimed a feast. Man
ners and customs change. In those days the Jews did see the
God that. Aaron took their gold for, but now the priests take the
people’s gold, and the poor contributors do not even see a calf for
their pains, unless indeed they are near a mirror at the time when
they are making their voluntary contributions. And the Lord told
Moses what happened, and said, “ I have seen this people, and
behold it is a stiffnecked people. Now, therefore, let me alone
that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may
consume them.” Moses would not comply with God’s request,
but remonstrated, and expostulated, and begged him not to afford
the Egyptians an opportunity of speaking against him. Moses
succeeded in changing the unchangeable, and the Lord repented
of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.
Although Moses would not let God’s “ wrath wax hot ” his own
“ anger waxed hot,” and he broke in his rage, the two tables of
stone which God had given him, and on which the Lord had graven
and written with his own finger. We have now no means of know
ing in what language God wrote, or whether Moses afterwards
took any pains to rivet together the broken pieces. It is almost
to be wondered at that the Christian Evidence Societies have not
sent missionaries to search for these pieces of the tables, which may
even yet remain beneath the mount. Moses took the calf which
they had made and burned it with fire and ground it to powder,
and strewed it upon water and made the children of Israel drink
of it. After this Moses armed the priests and killed 3,000 Jew's,
“ and the Lord plagued the people because they had made the
calf which Aaron had made.”* Moses afterwards pitched the ta
bernacle without the camp; and the cloudy pillar in which the
Lord w'ent, descended and stood at the door of the tabernacle;
and the Lord talked to Moses “ face to face, as a man would to
his friend.”f And the Lord then told Moses, “ Thou canst not
see my face, for there shall no man see me and live.”J Before
this Moses and Aaron and Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the
elders of Israel, “ saw the God of Israel, and there w'as under his
feet, as it were, a paved work of sapphire stone, . . . and
Upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand;
also they saw God, and did eat and drink.Ӥ
* Exodus, c. xxxii., v. 35.
f c. xxxiii., v. 11.
J v. 20.
§ c. xxiv., v. 9.
�NEW LIFE OF MOSES.
7
Aaron., the brother of Moses, died under very strange circum
stances. The Lord said unto Moses, “ Strip Aaron of his garments
and put them upon Eleazar, his son, and Aaron shall be gathered
unto his people and shall die there.” And Moses did as the Lord
commanded, and Aaron died there on the top of the mount, where
Moses had taken him. There does not appear to have been any
coroner’s inquest in the time of Aaron, and the suspicious circum
stances of the death of the brother of Moses have been passed over
by the faithful.
When Moses was leading the Israelites near Moab, Balak the
King of the Moabites sent to Balaam in order to get Balaam to
curse the Jews. When Balak’s messengers were with Balaam,
God came to Balaam also, and asked what men they were. Of
course God knew, but he inquired for his own wise purposes, and
Balaam told him truthfully. God ordered Balaam not to curse the
Jews, and therefore the latter refused, and sent the Moabitish
messengers away. Then Balak sent again high and mighty princes
under whose influence Balaam went mounted on an ass, and God’s
anger was kindled against Balaam, and he sent an angel to stop
him by the way; but the angel did not understand his business
well, and the ass first ran into a field, and then close against the
wall, and it was not until the angel removed to a narrower place
that he succeeded in stopping the donkey ; and when the ass saw
the angel she fell down. Balaam did not see the angel at first; and,
Indeed, we may take it as a fact of history that asses have always
been the most ready to perceive angels.
Moses may have been a great author, but we have little
means of ascertaining what he wrote in the present day. Divines
talk of Genesis to Deuteronomy as the five books of Moses,
but Eusebius, in the fourth century, attributed them to Ezra,
*
and Saint Chrysostom says that the name of Moses has been
affixed to the books without authority, by persons living long after
him.f It is quite certain that if Moses lived 3,300 years ago,
he did not write in square letter Hebrew, and this because the
character has not existed so long. It is indeed doubtful if it can
be carried back 2,000 years. The ancient Hebrew character, though
probably older than this, yet is comparatively modern amongst the
ancient languages of the earth.
°
It is urged by orthodox chronologists that Moses was born about
1450 B.c., and that the Exodus took place about 1491 b.c. Unfor
tunately “ there are no recorded dates in the Jewish Scripture^
that are trustworthy.” Moses, or the Hebrews, not being mentioned
upon Egyptian monuments from the twelfth to the seventeenth
century b.c. inclusive, and never being alluded to by any extant
writer who lived prior to the Septuagint translation at Alexandria
�NEW LIFE OF MOSES.
(commencing in the third century b.c.), there are no extraneous
aids, from sources alien to the Jewish Books, through which any
information, worthy of historical acceptance, can be gathered else
where about him or them.”*
Moses died in the land of Moab when he was 120 years of age.
The Lord buried Moses in a valley of Moab, over against Bethpeor,
but no man knowetli of his sepulchre unto this day. Josephus says
that “ a cloud came over him on the sudden and he disappeared in
a certain valley.” The devil disputed about the body of Moses,
contending with the Archangel Michael ;f but whether the devil or
the angel had the best of the discussion, the Bible does not tell us.
De Beauvoir Priaulx,J looking at Moses as a counsellor, leader,
and legislator, says:—“Invested with this high authority, he
announced to the Jews their future religion, and announced it to
them as a state religion, and as framed for a particular state, and
that state only. He gave this religion, moreover, a creed so nar
row and negative—he limited it to objects so purely temporal, he
crowded it with observances so entirely ceremonial or national—
that we find it difficult to determine whether Moses merely estab
lished this religion in order that by a community of worship he
might induce in the tribe-divided Israelites that community of
sentiment which would constitute them a nation; or, whether he
only roused them to a sense of their national dignity, in the hope
that they might then more faithfully perform the duties of priests
and servants of Jehovah. In other words, we hesitate to decide
whether in the mind of Moses the state was subservient to the pur
poses of religion, or religion to the purposes of state.”
The same writer observes§ that, according to the Jewish writings,
Moses “ is the friend and favourite of the Deity. He is one whose
prayers and wishes the Deity hastens to fulfil, one to whom the
Deitv makes known his designs. The relations between God and
the prophet are most intimate. God does not disdain to answer
the questions of Moses, to remove his doubts, and even occasionally
to receive his suggestions, and to act upon them even in opposition
to his own pre-determined decrees.”
* G R. Gliddon’s Types of Mankind: Mankind’s Chronology, p 711
f Jude, v. 9
J Quesliones Mosaicae, p. 438.
§ p. 418.
PRICE ONE PENNY.
London: Printed by Annib Besavt and 0 hables Beadlaugh,
63, Fleet Street, E.O
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
New life of Moses
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bradlaugh, Charles [1833-1891]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Date of publication from Champion of liberty (Bradlaugh Centenary, 1933), bibliography. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Annie Besant and Charles Bradlaugh
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1861]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N100
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bible
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (New life of Moses), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Moses (Biblical Leader)
NSS
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/4dc68da50b99f8c1030d78fe1a955423.pdf?Expires=1780531200&Signature=W5Et5B03MKyCkG4OwwfT8apTrjfypDg80m9On9wOn9ogN7KwiniQ5uRFIweF9m2zpU%7EVlJu%7ELNiWqHp%7Es0hebUeSME9DZ1I5ZdviwVJjHApU1I8XCrM2DutxkFEjXfBl5CJ5V8-iaOHZOPhhMboHh2GyV5i1%7El-mi2cbfLuvzPvEOAw1Julat7d8LPIIKmohU9dgXdrl0A0ihzJKBRfM-C-1wubdaaWczVhDEYE4lw6K0KAmzotLOhtNY9bE7UGvL8m8zntakEBnFvgmCuYHLwiIgSQToudgS2uWe6v5sIuKxSQm%7EmcLbNorXfr8HYWrxmmc2GKeQovWy3qRFf47Rw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
0cadd2aafdfac81b9cb1eb6a4b773c6d
PDF Text
Text
WERE ADAM & EVE OUR FIRST PARENTS?
BY 0. BliADLAUGH.
This question. Were Adam and Eve our first parents? is indeed one of most
grave importance. If the answer be a negative one, it is, in fact, a denial
of the whole scheme of Christianity. The Christian theory is that Adam,
the common father of the whole human race, sinned, and that by his sin he
dragged down all his posterity to a state from which redemption was needed,
and that Jesus is, and was, the Redeemer, by whom all mankind are and
were saved from the consequences of the fall of Adam. If Adam therefore
be proved not to be the first man, if it be shown that it is not to Adam the
various races of mankind are indebted for their origin, then the whole hypo
thesis of fall and redemption is dissipated.
In a pamphlet like the present, it is impossible (even if I possessed the
ability, which I do not) to attempt to give any statement and analysis
of the various hypotheses as to the origin of the human race. I frankly
admit, that my only wish and intent is, to compel people to examine the Bible
record for themselves, instead of making it their fetish, bowing down before
it without thought. I am inclined to the opinion that the doctrine of a
plurality of sources for the various types of the human race is a correct one.
That wherever the conditions for life have been found, there also has been
the degree of life resultant on those conditions. My purpose in this essay
is not to demonstrate the correctness of my own thinking, but rather to illus
trate the incorrectness of the Genesiacal teaching. Were Adam and
Eve our first parents? On the one hand an answer in the affirma
tive to this question can be obtained from the Bible, which asserts Adam
and Eve to be the first man and woman made by God, and fixes ths
date of their making about 6,000 years, little more or less, from the present
time. On the other hand, it seems to me that science emphatically declares
man to have existed on the earth for a far more extended period, affirms
that as far as we can trace man, we find him in isolated groups, diverse in
type, till we lose him in the ante-historic period; and with nearly equal dis
tinctness, denies that the various existing races find their common parentage
in one pair. It is only on the first point that I attack the Bible chronology
of man’s existence. I am aware that compilations based upon the authorised
version of the Old Testament Scriptures are open to objection, and that
while from the Hebrew, 1656 years represent the period from Adam to the
Deluge generally acknowledged, the Samaritan Pentateuch only yields for
the same period 130T years, while the Septuagint vsrsicn furnishes 2243
�ft
WEBB ADAM AND EVE OCR FIRST PARENTS?
years; there is, I am also informed, on the authority of a most erudite
Egyptologist, a fatal objection to the Septuagint chronology—i.e., that it
makes Methusaleh outlive the Flood.
*
The deluge occurred, according to the Septuagint, in the year of the world
4242, and by adding up the generations previous to his (Methusaleh’s.)
Adam
Seth
Enos
Cainan
Mahaleel
Jared
Enoch
...
...
...
...
..
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
230
205
190
170
165
162
165
1287
We shall find that he was born in the year of the world 1287. He lived
969 years, and therefore died in 2256. But this is 14 years after the
deluge.
The Rev. Dr. Lightfoot, who wrote about 1644, fixes the month of the
creation at September, 5572 years preceding the date of his book, and
says that Adam was expelled from Eden on the day on which he was
created.^ In the London ‘ Ethnological Journal,’ for which I am indebted to
the kindness of its Editor, an able ethnologist and careful thinker, the reader
will find a chronology of Genesis ably and elaborately examined. At pre
sent, for our immediate purpose, we will take the ordinary English Bible,
which gives the following result:—
From Adam to Abraham (Genesis v. and xi.)
...
.M
From Abraham to Isaac (Gen. xxi. 5)
.............................
From Isaac to Jacob (Gen. xxv. 26)
...
................
From Jacob going into Egypt (Gen. xlvii. 9)
...
...
Sojourn in Egypt (Exodus xii. 41)......................................
Duration of Moses’s leadership (Exodus vii. 7, xxxi. 2) ...
Thence to David, about
......................................................
From David to Captivity, 14 generations (27), about 22
reigns
...
...
......................................................
Captivity to Jesus, 14 generations, about............................
Less disputed 230 years of sojourn in Egypt
...
...
2008
100
60
130
430
40
400
473
593
4234
230
4004
From Adam to Abraham the dates are certain, if we take the Bible state
ment, and there is certainly no portion of the orthodox text, except the
period of the Judges, which will admit any considerable extension of the
ordinary Oxford chronology.
• Sharpe’s History of Egypt, page 196.
t Harmony of the Four Evangelists, and Harmony of the Old Testament.
�VERB ADAM AND EVB OUR MnsI PARENTS?
3
The Book of Judges is not a book of history. Everything in it is recounted without chronological order. It will suffice to say, that the cyphers
which we find in the book of Judges, and in the first book of Samuel
*
yield us, from the death of Joshua to the commencement of the reign
of Saul, the sum total of 500 years, which would make, since the exodo
from Egypt, 565 years; whereas the first book of Kings counts but 480
years, from the going out of Egypt down to the foundation of the temple
under Solomon. According to this we must suppose that several of the
judges governed simultaneously.
*
In reading Alfred Maury’s profound essay on the classification of tongues,
I was much struck with the fact that he, in his philological researches, traces
back some of the ancient Greek mythologies, to a Sanscrit source. He has
the following remark, worthy of earnest attention:—“The God of Heaven
*
or the sky, is called by the Greeks Zeus Pater; and let us have notice
that the pronunciation of Z resembles very much that of D, inasmuch as
the word Zeus becomes in the genitive Dios. The Latins termed the
same God, Dies-piter, or Jupiter. Now in the Veda, the God of Heaven
is called Dyashpitai.” What is this, but the original of our own Christian
God, the father, the H'ln'1 (Jeue) pater of the Old Testament? I introduce
this remark for the purpose of shaking a very commonly entertained
opinion, that the Hebrew Records, whether or not God inspired, are at
any rate the most antique, and are written in a primitive tongue. Neither
is it true that the Hebrew mythology is the most ancient, nor the Hebrew
language the most primitive; on the contrary, the mythology is clearly
derived, and the language in a secondary or tertiary state.
What is the value of this Book of Genesis, which is the sole authority
for the hypothesis that Adam and Eve, about 5,865 years ago, were the sole
founders of the peoples now living on the face of the earth? Written we
know not by whom, we know not when, and we know not in what
language. If we respect the book, it must be from its internal merits; its
author is to us unknown. Eusebius, Chrysostom, and Clemens Alexan>
drinus alike agree that the name of Moses should not stand at the head oit
Genesis as the author of the book. As to its internal merit, Origen did not
hesitate to declare the contents of the first and second chapters of Genesis
to be purely figurative. Our translation of it has been severely criticised
by the learned and pious Bellamy, and by the more learned and less pious
Sir Wiliiam Drummond. Errors almost innumerable have been pointed
out, the correctness of the Hebrew text itself questioned, and yet this book
is an unerring guide to the students of ethnology. They may do anything,
everything, except stray out of the beaten track. We have, therefore, on
.he one hand, an anonymous book, which indeed does not take you back so
much as 6,000 years, for at least 1,600 years must be deducted for the
Noachian deluge, when the world’s inhabitants were again reduced to one
family, one race, one type. On the other hand, we have now existing
Esquimaux men, of the Arctic realm—Chinamen, of the Asiatic realm—
Englishmen, of the European realm—Sahara negroes, of the Af rican realm
—Euegians, of the American realm—New Zealanders, of the Polynesian
realm—the Malay, representative of the realm which bears his name—the
• Munks’ Palestine, page 231.
1
�4
WEBB ADAM AND EVE OUR EIR8T PARENTST
Tasmanian, of the Australian realm, with other families of each realm, too
numerous for mention here; dark and fair, black-skinned and white
skinned, woolly-haired and straight-haired; low forehead, high forehead;
Hottentot limb, Negro limb, Caucasian limb. Do all these different and
differing structures and colours trace their origin to one pair? To Adam
and Eve, or rather to Noah and his family? Or are they (the various
races) indigenous to their nature, soils, and climates? And are these
various types naturally resultant, with all their differences, from the
differing conditions for life persistent to and consistent with them ?
The question, then, really is this—Have the different races of man all
found their common parent in Noah, about 4,300 years ago? Assuming
the unity of the races or species of men now existing, there are but three
suppositions on which the diversity now seen can be accounted for:—>
“ 1st. A miracle or direct act of the Almighty, in changing one type into
another.
“2nd. The gradual action of physical causes, such as climate, food,
mode of life, &c.
“ 3rd. Congenital or accidental varieties.”*
We may fairly dismiss entirely from our minds the question of miracle.
Such a miracle is nowhere recorded in the Bible, and it lies'upon any one
hardy enough to assert that the present diversity has a miraculous origin,
to show some kind of reasons for his faith, some kind of evidence for our
conviction, and until this is done we have no reason to dwell on the first
hypothesis.
Of the permanence of type under its own climatic conditions—that is, in
the country to which it is indigenous—we have overwhelming proof in the
statue of an ancient Egyptian scribe, taken from a tomb of the fifth
dynasty, 5,000 years old, and precisely corresponding to the Fellah of the
present day. J The sand had preserved the colour of the statuette, which,
from its portrait-like beauty, marks a long era of art-progress preceding
its production. It ante-dates the orthodox era of the flood, carries us back
to a time when, if the Bible were true, Adam was yet alive, and still we
find before it kings reigning and ruling in mighty Egypt. Can the reader
wonder that these facts are held to impeach the orthodox faith?
On the second point Dr. Nott writes, “ It is a commonly received error
that the influence of a hot climate is gradually exerted on successive
generations, until one species of mankind is completely changed into
another. . . . This idea is proven to be false. ... A sunburnt
cheek is never handed down to succeeding generations. The exposed parts
of the body are alone tanned by the sun, and the children of the white
skinned Europeans in New Orleans, Mobile, and the West Indies are bom
as fair as their ancestors, and would remain so if carried back to a colder
climate.^
Pure negroes and negresses, transported from Central Africa to England,
and marrying among themselves, would Dever acquire the characteristics
of the Caucasian races; nor would pure Englishmen and Englishwomen,
• “ Types of Mankind,” Dr. Nott, p- 57.
t M. Pulzsky on Iconography—“ Indigenous Races,” p. Ill,
I “ Types of Mankind,” p. 58.
�WERE ADAM AND EVE OUR FIRST PARENTS?
5
emigrating to Central Africa, and in like manner inter-marrying, ever
become negroes or negresses. The fact is, that while you don’t bleach the
colour out of the dark- skinned African by placing him in London, you
bleach the life out of him; and vice versa with the Englishman.
*
For a
long time there has been ascribed to man the faculty of adapting himself to
every climate. The following facts will show the ascription a most
erroneous one:—“In Egypt the austral negroes are, and the Caucasian
Memlooks were, unable to raise up even a third generation; in Corsica
French families vanish beneath Italian summers. Where are the descen
dants of the Bomans, the.Vandals, or the Greeks in Africa? In Modern
Arabia, 1830 years after Mahomed Ali had got clear of the Morea war,
18,000 Arnaots (Albanians) were soon reduced to some 400 men. At
Gibraltar, in 1617, a negro regiment was almost annihilated by consump
tion. In 1841, during the three weeks on the Niger, 130 Europeans out of
145 caught African fever, and 40 died; out of 158 negro sailors only eleven
were affected, and not one died. In 1809 the British expedition to Walchereen failed in the Netherlands through marsh fever. About the same
time, in St. Domingo, about 15,000 French soldiers died from malaria. Of
30,000 Frenchmen, only 8,000 survived exposure to that Antillian island;
while the Dominicanized African negro, Toussaint l’Overture, retransported
to Europe, was perishing from the chili of his prison in France.”
On the third point we again quote Dr. Nott:—
*• The only argument left, then, is that of congenital varieties or pecu•iarities, which are said to spring up and be transmitted from parent to child,
40 as to form new races. Let us pause for a moment to illustrate this
fanciful idea. The negroes of Africa, for example, are admitted not to be
offsets from some other race which have been gradually blackened and
changed in a moral and physical type by the action of climate; but it is
asserted that ‘once, in the flight of ages’ some genuine little negro, or
rather many such, were born of Caucasian, Mongol, or other light-skinned
parents, and then have turned about and changed the type of the inhabi
tants of a whole continent. So in America, the countless aborigines found
on this continent, which we have reason to believe were building mounds
before the time of Abraham, are the offspring of a race changed by acci
dental or congenital varieties. Thus, too, old China, India, Australia
*
Oceana, &c., all owe their types, physical and mental, to congenital and
accidental varieties, and are descended from Adam and Eve! Can human
credulity go farther, or hi man ingenuity invent any argument more
absurd ?”
But even supposing these cbjections to the second and third suppositions
set aside, there are two other propositions which, if affirmed, as I believe
they may be, entirely overthrow the orthodox assertion:—“That Adam
and Eve, six thousand years ago, were the first pair; and that all diver
sities now existing must find their common source in Noah—less than four
thousand three hundred years from the present time.” These two are as
follows:—
• ‘ Indigenous Races of the Earth,’ p. 458. The alleged discovery of white-skinned
Megroes in Western Africa does not affect this question, it is not only to the colour
if the skin but also the general negro characteristics that the above remarks apply.
�4
WERE ADAK AMD ETE OUR. FIRST PARENTS?
1. That man may be traced back on the earth long prior to the alleged
Adamic era.
2. That there are diversities traceable as existing amongst the human
race four thousand five hundred years ago, as marked as in the present day.
To illustrate the position that man may be traced back to a period long
prior to the Adamic era, we refer our readers to the chronology of the late
Baron Bunsen, who, while allowing about 2,2000 years for man’s existence on
earth, fixes the following dates, after a patient examination of the Nilotic
antiquities:—
Egyptians under a republican form......................................... 10,000 n.0.
Ascension of Bytis, the Theban, 1st Priest King................ 9085
Elective Kings in Egypt
................
7230
Hereditary Kings in Upper and Lower Egypt, a double
empire, form
.............................
5143*
The assertion of such an antiquity for Egypt is no modern hypothesis.
Plato puts language into the mouth of an Egyptian, first claiming in that
day an antecedent, 10,000 years for painting and sculpture in Egypt. This
has long been regarded as fabulous because it was contrary to the Hebrew
Chronology.
If this be the result of the researches into Egyptian archaeology, the
reader will scarcely be surprised to find me endeavouring from other sources
to get corroborative evidence of a still more astonising character.
There are few who now pretend that the whole creation (?) took place
6000 years ago, although if it be true that God made all in six days, and
man on the sixth, then the universe would only be more ancient than
Adam by some five days. To state the age of the earth at 6000 years is
simply preposterous, when we ascertain that it would require about
4,000,000 of years for the formation of the fosiliferous rocks alone, and
that 15,000,000 of years have been stated as a moderate estimate for the
antiquity of our globe. The deltas of the great rivers afford corroboration
to our position as to man’s duration. The delta of the Nile, formed by
immense quantities of sedimentary matter, which in like manner is still
carried down and deposited, has not perceptibly increased during the last
3000 years. “ In the days of the earliest Pharoahs, the delta, as it now
exists, was covered with ancient cities and filled with a dense population,
whose civilization must have required a period going back far beyond any
date that has yet been assigned to the deluge of Noah, or even to the
creation of the world.”f
From borings which have been made at New Orleans to the depth of
600 feet, from excavations for public works, and from examinations in
parts of Louisiana, where the range between high and low water is much
greater than it is at New Orleans, no less than 10 distinct cypress forests
divided from each other by eras of aquatic plants, &c., have been traced,
arranged vertically above each other, and from these and other data it is
estimated by Dr. Benet Dowler, that the age of the delta is at least 158,000
* Nott and Gliddon, “ Indigenous Races,” page 587.
f Gliddon’s “ Types of Mankind,” page 335.
�WERE ADAM AND EVE OUR FIRST PARENTS?
r
years, and in the excavations above referred to, human remains have beeB
found below the further forest level, making it appear that the human race
existed m the delta of the Mississippi more than 57,000 years ago.
*
It is further urged, by the same competent writer, that human bones
discovered oh the coast of Brazil near Santas, and on the borders of a
lake called Lagoa Santa, by Captain Elliott and Dr. Lund, thoroughly
incorporated with a very hard breccia, every one in a fossil state, demon
strate that aboriginal man in America antedates the Mississippi alluvia, and
that he can even boast a geological antiquity, because numerous species of
animals have become extinct since American humanity’s first appearance.f
With reference to the second point as to the possibility of tracing back the
diversities of the Human Race to an antediluvian date, it is amply sufficient
to point on the one side to the remains of the American Indian disentombed
from the Mississippi forests, and on the other to the Egyptian monuments,
tombs, pyramids, and stuccoes, revealing to us Caucasian men, and Negro
men, their diversities as marked as in the present day. Sir William J ones,
in his day, claimed for Sanscrit literature a vast antiquity, and asserted the
existence of the religions of Egypt, Greece, India, and Italy, prior to the
Mosaic era. So far as Egypt is concerned, the researches of Lepsius,
Bunsen, Champoilion, Lenormant, Gliddon, and others, have fully verified
the position of the learned president of the Asiatic Society.
We have Egyptian statutes of the third dynasty, going back far beyond
the 4,300 years, which would give the orthodox era of the deluge, and tak
ing us over the 4,500 years fixed by our second proposition. The fourth
dynasty is rich in pyramids, tombs, and statues; and according to Lepsius,
this dynasty commenced 3,426 B.C., or about 5,287 years from the present
date.
In reading a modern work on the orthodox side,} I have been much
pained by the constant assumption that the long chronologists must be in
error, because their views do not coincide with orthodox teachings. Ortho
dox authors treat their heterodox brethren as unworthy of credit, because
of their heterodoxy. The writer asserts§ that the earliest reference to the
Negro tribes is in the era of the 12th dynasty. Supposing for a moment
this to be correct, I ask what even then will be the state of the argument?
The 12th dynasty, according to Lepsius, ends about 4,000 years ago. The
orthodox chronology fixes the deluge about 300 years earlier. Will any
sane man argue that there was sufficient lapse of time in three centuries
for the development of Caucasian and Negro man from one family?
The fact is, that we trace back the various types of man now known,
not to one centre, not to one country, not to one family, not to one pair,
but we trace them to different centres, to distinct countries, to separate
families, probably to many pairs. Wherever the conditions for life are
found, there are living beings also. The conditions of climate, soil, &c^
of Central Africa, differ from those of Europe. The indigenous races of
Central Africa, differ from those of Europe.
• “ Types,” pages 336 to 369.
} "Archaia,” by Dr. Dawson.
f “ Types,” pages 350 and 357.
§ “ Archaia,” page 306.
�9
WEBB ADAM AND EVE OUB FIRST PABENTS?
Without pretending, in the present limited essay, to do more than index
some of the most prominent features of the case, I yet hope that enough is
here stated to interest my readers in the prosecution of future inquiry, upon
the important question which serves as the title to these pages. I put
forward no knowledge from myself, but am ready to listen to the teachings
of wiser men; and while I shrink from the ordinary orthodox assertion of
Adamic unity of origin, accompanied as it is by threats of pains and penal
ties if rejected, I am yet ready to receive it, if it can be presented to me
associated with facts, and divested of those future hell-fire torments and
present societarian persecutions which now form its chief, it not sole,
supports.
The rejection of the Bible account of the peopling of the world involves
also the rejection, as has been already remarked, of the entire scheme of
Christianity. According to the orthodox rendering of both New and Old
Testament teaching, all men are involved in the curse which followed
Adam’s sin. But if the account of the Fall be mythical; not historical; if
Adam and Eve—supposing them to have ever existed—were preceded on
the earth by many nations and empires, what becomes of the doctrine that
Jesus came to redeem mankind from a sin committed by one who was not
the common father of all humanity?
Reject Adam, and you cannot accept Jesus. Refuse to believe Genesis,
and you cannot give credence to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul.
The Old and New Testaments are so connected together, that to dissolve
the union is to destroy the system. The account of the Creation and Fall
of Man is the foundation-stone of the Christian Church—if this stone ba
rotten, the superstructure cannot be stable. It is therefore most important,
that those who profess a faith in Christianity should consider facts which so
vitally and materially affect the creed they hold.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Were Adam & Eve our first parents?
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Bradlaugh, C
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Date of publication from KVK.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1861]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G4947
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bible
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Were Adam & Eve our first parents?), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Bible-O.T.-Genesis
Creation-Biblical Teaching