part19-第8章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



exposed　him　to　the　inference　of　being　an　impostor。　　For　if　we　could

believe　that　he　really　countenanced　the　follies；　the　falsehoods　and

the　charlatanisms　which　his　biographers　father　on　him；　and　admit　the

misconstructions；　interpolations　and　theorizations　of　the　fathers　of

the　early；　and　fanatics　of　the　latter　ages；　the　conclusion　would　be

irresistible　by　every　sound　mind；　that　he　was　an　impostor。　　I　give　no

credit　to　their　falsifications　of　his　actions　and　doctrines；　and　to

rescue　his　character；　the　postulate　in　my　letter　asked　only　what　is

granted　in　reading　every　other　historian。　　When　Livy　and　Siculus；　for

example；　tell　us　things　which　coincide　with　our　experience　of　the

order　of　nature；　we　credit　them　on　their　word；　and　place　their

narrations　among　the　records　of　credible　history。　　But　when　they　tell

us　of　calves　speaking；　of　statues　sweating　blood；　and　other　things

against　the　course　of　nature；　we　reject　these　as　fables　not　belonging

to　history。　　In　like　manner；　when　an　historian；　speaking　of　a

character　well　known　and　established　on　satisfactory　testimony；

imputes　to　it　things　incompatible　with　that　character；　we　reject　them

without　hesitation；　and　assent　to　that　only　of　which　we　have　better

evidence。　　Had　Plutarch　informed　us　that　Caesar　and　Cicero　passed

their　whole　lives　in　religious　exercises；　and　abstinence　from　the

affairs　of　the　world；　we　should　reject　what　was　so　inconsistent　with

their　established　characters；　still　crediting　what　he　relates　in

conformity　with　our　ideas　of　them。　　So　again；　the　superlative　wisdom

of　Socrates　is　testified　by　all　antiquity；　and　placed　on　ground　not

to　be　questioned。　　When；　therefore；　Plato　puts　into　his　mouth　such

paralogisms；　such　quibbles　on　words；　and　sophisms；　as　a　school　boy

would　be　ashamed　of；　we　conclude　they　were　the　whimsies　of　Plato's

own　foggy　brain；　and　acquit　Socrates　of　puerilities　so　unlike　his

character。　　（Speaking　of　Plato；　I　will　add；　that　no　writer；　antient

or　modern；　has　bewildered　the　world　with　more　_ignes　fatui_；　than

this　renowned　philosopher；　in　Ethics；　in　Politics　and　Physics。　　In

the　latter；　to　specify　a　single　example；　compare　his　views　of　the

animal　economy；　in　his　Timaeus；　with　those　of　Mrs。　Bryan　in　her

Conversations　on　Chemistry；　and　weigh　the　science　of　the　canonised

philosopher　against　the　good　sense　of　the　unassuming　lady。　　But

Plato's　visions　have　furnished　a　basis　for　endless　systems　of

mystical　theology；　and　he　is　therefore　all　but　adopted　as　a　Christian

saint。　　It　is　surely　time　for　men　to　think　for　themselves；　and　to

throw　off　the　authority　of　names　so　artificially　magnified。　　But　to

return　from　this　parenthasis。）　I　say；　that　this　free　exercise　of

reason　is　all　I　ask　for　the　vindication　of　the　character　of　Jesus。

We　find　in　the　writings　of　his　biographers　matter　of　two　distinct

descriptions。　　First；　a　groundwork　of　vulgar　ignorance；　of　things

impossible；　of　superstitions；　fanaticisms　and　fabrications。

Intermixed　with　these；　again；　are　sublime　ideas　of　the　Supreme　Being；

aphorisms　and　precepts　of　the　purest　morality　and　benevolence；

sanctioned　by　a　life　of　humility；　innocence　and　simplicity　of

manners；　neglect　of　riches；　absence　of　worldly　ambition　and　honors；

with　an　eloquence　and　persuasiveness　which　have　not　been　surpassed。

These　could　not　be　inventions　of　the　groveling　authors　who　relate

them。　　They　are　far　beyond　the　powers　of　their　feeble　minds。　　They

shew　that　there　was　a　character；　the　subject　of　their　history；　whose

splendid　conceptions　were　above　all　suspicion　of　being　interpolations

from　their　hands。　　Can　we　be　at　a　loss　in　separating　such　materials；

and　ascribing　each　to　its　genuine　author？　　The　difference　is　obvious

to　the　eye　and　to　the　understanding；　and　we　may　read　as　we　run　to

each　his　part；　and　I　will　venture　to　affirm；　that　he　who；　as　I　have

done；　will　undertake　to　winnow　this　grain　from　its　chaff；　will　find

it　not　to　require　a　moment's　consideration。　　The　parts　fall　asunder

of　themselves；　as　would　those　of　an　image　of　metal　and　clay。




　　　　　　　　There　are；　I　acknowledge；　passages　not　free　from　objection；

which　we　may；　with　probability；　ascribe　to　Jesus　himself；　but

claiming　indulgence　from　the　circumstances　under　which　he　acted。　　His

object　was　the　reformation　of　some　articles　in　the　religion　of　the

Jews；　as　taught　by　Moses。　　That　sect　had　presented　for　the　object　of

their　worship；　a　being　of　terrific　character；　cruel；　vindictive；

capricious　and　unjust。　　Jesus；　taking　for　his　type　the　best　qualities

of　the　human　head　and　heart；　wisdom；　justice；　goodness；　and　adding　to

them　power；　ascribed　all　of　these；　but　in　infinite　perfection；　to　the

Supreme　Being；　and　formed　him　really　worthy　of　their　adoration。

Moses　had　either　not　believed　in　a　future　state　of　existence；　or　had

not　thought　it　essential　to　be　explicitly　taught　to　his　people。

Jesus　inculcated　that　doctrine　with　emphasis　and　precision。　　Moses

had　bound　the　Jews　to　many　idle　ceremonies；　mummeries　and

observances；　of　no　effect　towards　producing　the　social　utilities

which　constitute　the　essence　of　virtue；　Jesus　exposed　their　futility

and　insignificance。　　The　one　instilled　into　his　people　the　most

anti…social　spirit　towards　other　nations；　the　other　preached

philanthropy　and　universal　charity　and　benevolence。　　The　office　of

reformer　of　the　superstitions　of　a　nation；　is　ever　dangerous。　　Jesus

had　to　walk　on　the　perilous　confines　of　reason　and　religion：　and　a

step　to　right　or　left　might　place　him　within　the　gripe　of　the　priests

of　the　superstition；　a　blood　thirsty　race；　as　cruel　and　remorseless

as　the　being　whom　they　represented　as　the　family　God　of　Abraham；　of

Isaac　and　of　Jacob；　and　the　local　God　of　Israel。　　They　were

constantly　laying　snares；　too；　to　entangle　him　in　the　web　of　the　law。

He　was　justifiable；　therefore；　in　avoiding　these　by　evasions；　by

sophisms；　by　misconstructions　and　misapplications　of　scraps　of　the

prophets；　and　in　defending　himself　with　these　their　own　weapons；　as

sufficient；　_ad　homines_；　at　least。　　That　Jesus　did　not　mean　to

impose　himself　on　mankind　as　the　son　of　God；　physically　speaking；　I

have　been　convinced　by　the　writings　of　men　more　learned　than　myself

in　that　lore。　　But　that　he　might　conscientiously　believe　himself

inspired　from　above；　is　very　possible。　　The　whole　religion　of　the

Jews；　inculcated　on　him　from　his　infancy；　was　founded　in　the　belief

of　divine　inspiration。　　The　fumes　of　the　most　disordered　imaginations

were　recorded　in　their　religious　code；　as　special　communications　of

the　Deity；　and　as　it　could　not　but　happen　that；　in　the　course　of

ages；　events　would　now　and　then　turn　up　to　which　some　of　these　vague

rhapsodies　might　be　accommodated　by　the　aid　of　allegories；　figures；

types；　and　other　tricks　upon　words；　they　have　not　only　preserved

their　credit　with　the　Jews　of　all　subsequent　times；　but　are　the

foundation　of　much　of　the　religions　of　those　who　have　schismatised

from　them。　　Elevated　by　the　enthusiasm　of　a　warm　and　pure　heart；

conscious　of　the　high　strains　of　an　eloquence　which　had　not　been

taught　him；　he　might　readily　mistake　the　coruscations　of　his　own　fine

genius　for　inspirations　of　an　higher　order。　　This　belief　carried；

therefore；　no　more　personal　imputation；　than　the　belief　of　Socrates；

that　himself　was　under　the　care　and　admonitions　of　a　guardian　Daemon。

And　how　many　of　our　wisest　men　still　believe　in　the　reality　of　these

inspirations；　while　perfectly　sane　on　all　other　subjects。　　Excusing；

therefore；　on　these　considerations；　those　passages　in　the　gospels

which　seem　to　bear　marks　of　weakness　in　Jesus；　ascribing　to　him　what

alone　is　consistent　with　the　great　and　pure　character　of　which　the

same　writings　furnish　proofs；　and　to　their　proper　authors　their　own

trivialities　and　imbecilities；　I　think　myself　authorised　to　conclude

the　purity　and　distinction　of　his　character；　in　opposition　to　the

impostures　which　those　authors　would　fix　upon　him；　and　that　the

postulate　of　my　former　letter　is　no　more