The Three Impostors 11

The Three Impostors 11

15.

 

Christianity having been founded in this way, Jesus Christ wisely

imagined that he could profit by the errors in the politics of Moses,

and render his new law eternal--an undertaking in which he finally

succeeded a little perhaps beyond his expectation. The Hebrew prophets

intended to do honour to Moses, by predicting a successor who should

resemble him--a Messiah great in virtues, powerful in wealth, and

terrible to his enemies. These prophecies, however, produced altogether

a different effect from what they expected; a number of ambitious

demagogues having embraced the opportunity of palming themselves off

for the coming Messiah, which led to those insurrections and civil

convulsions which lasted until the entire destruction of the ancient

republic of the Hebrews. Jesus Christ, more subtle than the prophets

who succeeded Moses, predicted that a man of this description would

appear--the great enemy of God--the favorite of the demons--the

aggregation of all the vices and the cause of all the desolation in

the world. After such a splendid eulogy, one would think that nobody

could resist the temptation of calling himself Antichrist; and I do

not believe that it is possible to discover a secret equal to it for

eternalizing a law, although there can be nothing more fabulous than

what we read of concerning this pretended Antichrist. St. Paul says

that he was a ready born; whence it follows that he must have been

on the watch for the coming of Jesus Christ: nevertheless, more than

sixteen years rolled on after the prediction of the nativity of this

formidable personage, without any one having heard of his appearance. I

acknowledge that some have applied the terms to Ebion and Cerinthus,

two great adversaries of Jesus Christ, whose pretended divinity they

disputed. But if this interpretation be the meaning of the Apostle,

which is far from being credible, the words referred to must point

out a host of Antichrists in all ages--it being impossible that truly

learned men should think of injuring the cause of truth, by declaring

that the history of Jesus Christ was a contemptible fable, [49] and

that his law was nothing but a series of dreams and reveries, which

ignorance had brought in repute, which self-interest had encouraged,

and which tyranny had taken under its especial protection.

 

 

 

§ 16.

 

They pretend, nevertheless, that a religion built upon so weak

foundations is divine and supernatural, as if it were not an

ascertained fact that there is no class of people more fitted to give

currency to the most absurd opinions than women and lunatics. It is

not to be wondered at that Jesus Christ reckoned none of the learned

amongst his followers. He well knew that his law was inconsistent with

common sense; and therefore he always declaimed against the sages,

excluding them from that kingdom into which he admitted the poor

in spirit, the simple and the imbecile. Rational minds ought to be

thankful that they have nothing to do with such insanities.

 

 

 

§ 17.

 

ON THE MORALITY OF JESUS CHRIST.

 

We find nothing more divine in the morality of Jesus Christ than what

can be drawn from the works of ancient authors; for this reason,

perhaps every text in his code of morals is either borrowed from

their's or is an imitation of it. St. Augustine [50] acknowledges that

in one of the so-called heathen writers, he discovered the whole of

the commencement of the gospel according to St. John. We must remark

also, that this apostle was so much accustomed to plunder others,

that he has not scrupled to pillage from the prophets their enigmas

and visions, for the purpose of composing his Apocalypse. Again,

whence arises that agreement between the doctrines of the Old and

New Testament and those of Plato, unless the Rabbis and others who

composed the Jewish scriptures had stolen from that distinguished

man. The account of the creation of the world given in his Timaeus,

is much more satisfactory than that recorded in the book of Genesis;

and it will not do to say that Plato, in his tour through Egypt, had

read the books of the Jews, since, by the confession of St. Augustine,

king Ptolemy had not ordered them to be translated till long after

the philosopher had left the country.

 

The landscape which Socrates describes to Simias (Phæton,) possesses

infinitely more beauty than the Paradise of Eden: and the fable of

the Hermaphrodites [51] is beyond comparison a better invention than

that which we read of in Genesis, where we are told that one of Adam's

ribs was taken from him for the purpose of creating a female out of it.

 

Can any more plausible account of the overthrow of Sodom and

Gomorrah be given, than that it was caused by Phaeton? Is there no

resemblance between the fall of Lucifer and that of Vulcan, or of

the giants struck down by the thunderbolts of Jove. How close the

resemblance between Sampson and Hercules; Elijah and Phaeton; Joseph

and Hypolitus; Nebuchadnezzar and Lycaon; Tantalus and the rich man

in torment; [52] the manna in the wilderness and the ambrosia of the

gods! St. Augustine, [53] St. Cyril, and Theophilactus, compare Jonah

with Hercules, called Trinoctius, because he had been three days and

three nights in the belly of a whale.

 

The river which Daniel speaks of in chap. vii, v. 10, of his

Prophecies, is palpably drawn from that Pyriphlegethon to which

Plato alludes in his dialogue on the immortality of the soul. The

idea of "Original Sin" is taken from the account of Pandora's box;

and the interrupted sacrifices of Isaac and of Jephtha's daughter are

borrowed from that Iphigenia, in whose room a hind was offered up. What

we read of concerning Lot and his wife, is nearly the same as that

which fabulous history informs us occurred to Bancis and Philemon. The

histories of Perseus and of Bellerophon are the foundation of Michael

and the demon whom he vanquished. In short, it is abundantly manifest

that the authors of the scriptures have copied the works of Hesiod,

Homer, and some other ancient writers, almost word for word.

 

 

 

§ 18.

 

With respect to Jesus Christ himself, Celsus, by appealing to his

opponent Origen, shows that he had taken some of his most approved

apothegms from Plato--Such as this: "It is easier for a camel to go

through the eye of a needle, than a rich man to enter into the kingdom

of God." [54] It was owing to the sect of the Pharisees, to which he

belonged, that his followers believed in the immortality of the soul,

the resurrection, and the torments of hell; and also in the greater

part of his morality, [55] the whole of which I find in Epictetus,

Epicures, and a few others. This last mentioned philosopher was

referred to by St. Jerome, as a man whose virtues ought to put the

best Christians to the blush; and whose mode of life was so temperate

that a morsel of cheese, with bread and water constituted his highest

repast. Leading a life so frugal, this philosopher, heathen as he

was, declared that it was far better to be unfortunate and gifted

with reason, than to be rich and opulent without it; adding, that

wealth and wisdom were rarely found united in the same individual,

and that it was impossible to enjoy happiness or contentment unless

our conduct were guided by prudence, justice and honesty, which are

the qualities whence flow all true and lasting enjoyments.

 

As to Epictetus, I do not believe that there ever existed a man,

not even excepting Jesus Christ, more firm, more self-denying,

more equable, or who at any time gave forth to the world a more

sublime system of morality. Were it not that I should exceed the

limits which I have prescribed to myself in this treatise, I could

recount many beautiful traits in his character; but the reader must be

contented with one example. When a slave to Epaphroditus, a captain of

Nero's guards, his master took the brutal fancy to writhe his limbs,

Epictetus, perceiving that it gave the monster satisfaction, said with

a smile, that he saw clearly that the joke would not end until he had

broken one of them, which happened accordingly. The philosopher with

the same equanimity and the same smile, merely said, "Did I not tell

you that you would certainly break the limb?" Where is there on record

another instance of like firmness? How would Jesus Christ have acted

in the circumstances?--he who wept and trembled at the least alarm,

and who in his last moments exhibited a pusillanimity altogether

contemptible, and which was never shown by the martyrs for his faith.

 

If the work which Arian wrote concerning the life and death of our

philosopher had been preserved, I have no doubt that we would have

been in possession of many more examples of his equanimity than we

have at present. I know that the priests will speak of the example

which I have instanced, as they speak of the virtues of philosophic

minds in general, and assert that it is based on vanity, and that

it is by no means what it appears to be; but I know also, that those

people are accustomed to speak ex cathedra whatever suits their purpose

and to think they sufficiently earn the money which is given them for

instructing the people, by declaiming against every man who knows what

sober reason and real virtue are. Nothing in the world can be less in

congruity with the actions of these superstitious men who decry them,

than the manner of the truly learned. The former, having studied for

no other end than to obtain a place to give them bread, become vain,

and congratulate themselves when they have obtained it, as if they had

arrived at the state of perfection; whereas it is nothing else to them

than a state of idleness, pride, voluptuousness, and licentiousness,--a

condition in which the great majority of them hold in no respect

whatever the maxims of that religion which they profess. But we will

leave these men, who have not the remotest conception of real virtue,

and examine the evidences for the divinity of their master.

 

 

 

§ 19.

 

Having considered the politics and the morality of Jesus Christ,

wherein we find nothing so useful or so sublime as we find in the

writings of the ancients, let us now consider if the reputation which

he acquired after his death be a proof of his divinity.

 

The generality of mankind are so much accustomed to what is irrational,

that it is astonishing to find people endeavouring to draw a rational

inference from their conduct. Experience teaches us that they are

always running after shadows, and that they neither do nor say anything

betokening common sense. These fanatical notions on which they found

their belief will always be in vogue, in spite of the efforts of the

learned who have invariably set themselves against them. So rooted are

their follies that they had rather be crammed with them to repletion

than make any effort to be rid of them.

 

It was to no purpose that Moses boasted that he was the interpreter

of God, and attempted to prove his mission and his authority by

extraordinary signs. If he absented himself for a short time (as he

did occasionally, to hold conference with the Divinity, by his account,

and as in like manner did Numa Pompilius and many other legislators),

it was only to find on his return strong traces of the worship of the

gods whom the Hebrew people had seen in Egypt. It was in vain that

he had led them for forty years through the desert, that they might

lose recollection of the divinities which they had left behind. They

had not forgot them, and they always wished for some visible symbol

to precede them, which, if they had got, they would have worshipped

obstinately, at the risk of being exposed to extreme cruelty.