of Jerusalem, but 1800 years have since elapsed, and neither he nor the preliminary signs which were to announce him, have yet appeared. If these predictions did not proceed from him, the Evangelists have taken the liberty of putting into the mouth of Christ, words and announcements which Christ never uttered."* Mr. Greg, whose object is to show that the Gospels are the fabrications of some unknown writers,† in the next paragraph proceeds to prove this point, remarking in his way that as the three Gospels in which the above predictions occur are allowed to have been written between the year 65 and 72 A.D., or during the war which ended in the destruction of Jerusalem, they were, therefore, written during and after the event which they predict; Vespasian entering Galilee, which was the commencement of the war, in the year A.D. 67, and taking the Jewish capital in the autumn of A.D. 70. In treating of the "limits of apostolic wisdom and authority," Mr. Greg writes :-" Our second position was that the Apostles held some opinions which we know to be erroneous. It is essential not to overstate the case. They held several opinions which we believe to be erroneous, but only one which, as it related to a matter of fact, we know to have been erroneous. They unanimously and unquestionably believed and taught that the End of the World was at hand, and would arrive in the lifetime of the then existing generation. On this point there appears to have been no hesitation in their individual minds, nor any difference of opinion among them." The writer here cites "the passages of the apostolic writings which most strongly express, or most clearly imply, this conviction," all which passages will be found, with many others, in section v. of this chapter. Then he adds;-"We may well conceive that this strong conviction must, in men like the Apostles, have been something far beyond a mere abstract or speculative opinion. In fact it modified their whole tone of thought and feeling;-and could not fail to do so. The firm and living faith that a few years would bring the second coming of their Lord in his glory and the fearful termination of all earthly things,—when 'the heavens should be gathered together as a scroll, and the elements should melt with fervent heat;'-and that many among them should be still alive, and should witness these awful occurrences, with human eyes, and should join their glorified Master without passing through the portals of the grave-could not exist in their minds without producing not only a profound contempt for all the pomps and distinctions of the world, but an utter carelessness for the future interests of mankind, for posterity, even for kindred, without indeed distorting all the just proportions of those scenes of nature and society, in the midst of which their lot was cast.§— Creed of Christendom, pp. 123, 124. But if the Gospels are unreliable fabrications, attributing to Jesus words which he never uttered, this divests Christianity of its claim to Divine origin, as thoroughly as if Jesus had uttered false predictions. Both lead us inevitably to the same conclusion. This strong argument was overlooked in the second chapter of this Essay, where it should have been observed that if Christ's predictions referred to the destruction of Jerusalem, it is most strange that the Evangelists, who, according to Christian chronologers themselves, were in the act of writing them, at least during the time Jerusalem was being besieged if not after it was captured, do not say a single word about the exact fulfilment of these predictions before their eyes. They take notice of the fulfilment of Christ's prophecies regarding his death, resurrection, and other things. In the age of the Apostles it required not a little time to write a book the size of one of the Gospels. § See Natural History of Enthusiasm, sec. v. pp. 100, 101. If the world and all its mighty and far-stretching interests-if the earth and its infinite and ever-varying beauties-if the sky and its myriads of midnight glories-were indeed to be finally swept away in the time and the presence of the existing actors in the busy scene of life;-where was the use of forming any new ties of kindred or affection, which must terminate so suddenly and so soon? Why give a moment's thought to the arts which embellish life, the amenities which adorn it, the sciences which smooth it or prolong it, or the knowledge which enriches and dignifies its course ?— Marriage, children, wealth, power, astronomy, philosophy, poetry-what were they to men who knew that ten or twenty years would transplant, not only themselves, but the whole race of man, to a world where all would be forgotten, and would leave the earth-the scene of these things-a destroyed and blackened chaos? To this conviction may be traced St. Paul's confused and contradictory notions on the subject of marriage. And this conviction, teeming with such immense and dangerous consequences, and held by all the Apostles, was, we now know, wholly incorrect and unfounded. Next to the resurrection of Christ, there was probably no doctrine which they held so undoubtingly, or preached so dogmatically, as this, with regard to which they were totally in error. If, then, they were so misinformed, or mistaken, on a point having so immediate and powerful a bearing upon practical life, with what confidence can we trust them on matters of deeper speculation ?”* The Rev. Mr. Stanley, in his Commentary on Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians, (2 vols. Oxford) shows, that by the expression-" We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed," &c. (1 Cor. xv. 51, 52.) the Apostle means-we shall not all sleep the sleep of death; thereby showing the expectation of Christ's advent during the then existent generation.— Similar extracts might be made from Professor Jowith's Commentaries on the Galatians, and others of Paul's Epistles; the works of Dr. Donaldson, late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, on Christian Orthodoxy, recently published; the works of the Rev. Badon Powell, and of other eminent divines in the Church of England; and still in larger proportion among the Congregational Dissenters. But we must pass on to notice others. Mr. Gibbon, whose narration of facts-substantiated by unquestionable authorities-has not yet been detected in a single instance to be erroneous, states that "in the primitive Church, the influence of truth was very powerfully strengthened by an opinion which, however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, has not been found agreeable to experience. It was universally believed that the end of the world and the kingdom of heaven were at hand. The near approach of this wonderful event had been predicted by the Apostles; the tradition of it was preserved by their earliest disciples, and those who understood, in their literal sense, the discourses of Christ himself, were obliged to expect the second and glorious coming of the Son of man in the clouds before that generation was totally extinguished, which had beheld his humble condition upon earth, and which might still be witness of the calamities of the Jews under Vespasian or Hadrian. The revolution of seventeen centuries has instructed us not to press too closely the mysterious language of prophecy and revelation; but * Creed of Christendom, pp. 182, 183. as long as for wise purposes this error was permitted to subsist in the Church, it was productive of the most salutary effects on the faith and practice of Christians who lived in the awful expectation of that moment, when the globe itself and all the various races of mankind should tremble at the presence of their divine Judge Mr. Gibbon then proceeds to notice that the doctrine of the Millenium was closely connected with the second coming of Christ. This doctrine was in fact identical with that of the end of the world, the final judgment, and the establishment of the kingdom of heaven; having been suggested, as already observed, by the ancient Jewish notion of a Golden Age. Dr. Priestley, in his History of the Corruption of Christianity,† informs us that "it was the opinion of most of the early Fathers that the world would be destroyed by fire, and also that all men were to pass through this fire, that the good would be purified by it, and the wicked consumed. The former part of this doctrine they might learn from the apostle Peter; but it does not clearly appear whence they derived the latter part of it." "The Gnostics are said to have maintained that the greatest part of mankind would be annihilated at the day of judgment; which was probably the same thing that was meant by those who said that they would be consumed in the fire that was to destroy the world." Dr. Whitby and Dr. Mosheim, like others who write for the benefit of Christianity rather than for that of simple truth, find it more convenient to designate the doctrine of the near approach of the day of judgment by the palliative term "Millenium." The latter says that long before this period (the middle of the third century,) an opinion had prevailed that Christ was to come and reign a thousand years among men, before the entire and final dissolution of the world."+ And the former informs us that "the Fathers who adopted the doctrine of the Millenium received it from the traditions and notions of the Jews; but that this error will not invalidate their authority in any thing delivered by them, as witnesses of what they had seen, or declared to have been the practice of the Church of Christ." To say that they received this erroneous doctrine from the Jews is only another mode of saying that they received it from the Jewish apostles; for none but those of the Jews who were Christians would admit that Christ would have the honour to reign over them for a thousand years. A vast number of other eminent writers might be cited who, either directly or indirectly, make similar admissions. The citations already made, however, are amply sufficient to substantiate the position advanced in this section-namely, that Christ predicted the near approach of the End of the World and the Final Judgment, and that the Apostles and the Fathers, constantly taught that these dread events were close at hand, are neither newly discovered facts brought forward for the first time in this work, nor Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chap. xv. sec. 2. Vol. 1. p. 411. It is difficult to conceive what could have induced such a man as Dr. Priestley to write two large octavo volumes which have the tendency to persuade the world that Christianity has been corrupted. He does not show that Christianity was ever purer than during the centuries of which he treats. He must well know that it was never so refined and pure as in the age he wrote. Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. cent. III. part ii. chap. iii. sec. 12. facts supported only by slight evidence. It is, however, to be observed that although these facts are almost generally admitted, yet they have never had their due weight in reference to their bearing on the question of the Divine origin of Christianity. Once they have the consideration to which they are entitled, on this point, the pretensions of the Christian religion to a heavenly origin, vanish as a necessary consequence,-a consequence never dwelt upon, but rather studiously evaded, by those divines whose candour compels them to admit the facts themselves. CHAPTER V. 195 THE INFERENCES DIRECTLY DEDUCIBLE FROM THE FOREGOING ESTABLISHED END SECTION I.-THE PROPHET OF NAZARETH NEITHER A DEITY NOR IN SUPERNATURAL COMMUNICATION WITH THE DEITY.-REPRESENTED HIMSELF AS A DIVINE BEING.DOUBTFUL WHETHER HE BELIEVED HE WAS ANYTHING MORE THAN A FALLIBLE MAN. The first inference which every thinking mind would naturally draw from these facts is, that the Prophet of Nazareth could not be a divine person, or be influenced by the Deity, in his words and actions, and more especially, in the act of delivering the predictions in question. For, as already observed, it is absurd and even blasphemous to suppose that God was either unable to predict truly, or disposed to predict falsely. The latter would imply that the Supreme Being is capable of an immoral act, and the former that he is limited in knowledge. The human mind revolts against entertaining either supposition of God. It is incompatible with any true notion of the Deity to imagine him liable to any imperfection whatever. Indeed, the mind of man is not capable of conceiving the existence of God in any other manner than as a perfect Being. This will be admitted on all hands, so that scarcely any proof is required in order to show the inevitability of the inference. The Prophet of Nazareth, therefore, not being a Divine personage,-in other words not being a God.-it becomes an important question, in reference to the character of Christianity, whether he was influenced by God. To say that he was, is to say that God influenced one of his creatures so as to make him impose upon the world that which was not true, which is precisely the same as to say that God himself did so impose upon the world; or in other words, upon his creatures. For, a person thus influenced by God would be passive,-would be no other than |