Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

1 KINGS.

RUTH.

GENESIS.

13

thirty years after the same event, Nero, to quell the rumour of his own guilt, charged certain persons with setting fire to Rome, and had them put to death with horrid cruelties; and that these persons were called Christians from "Christ, who suffered death in the reign of Tiberius, under his procurator, Pontius Pilate"-why should I doubt that the religion had its origin from the veritable person thus clearly pointed out? How could a merely imaginary existence be credited by Tacitus, who lived so near to the time? And (if he reports a fact) how could numbers be found in Rome believing in Christ within thirty years after his crucifixion, if the crucifixion of such a person had never occurred?

If Pliny the Younger wrote to the Emperor Trajan, also about seventy years after Christ's death, describing the spread of the Christian religion to be so great in his government of Pontus and Bithynia, that 'many of every age and of both sexes,' in the cities, villages, and open country, professed it, insomuch that it became difficult to sell the victims for Pagan sacrifice in the markets; and if he described the manners of the Christians in such terms as almost to realise the portraiture drawn of them in their own early writings, why should I doubt the Gospel account of the origin of the religion? How came it to spread so successfully thus early, if it were not grounded on some fact or facts?

I have never heard these questions answered satisfactorily: I do not expect to hear them answered. Simply premising that I shall use the terms Matthew,' 'Mark,' 'Luke,' and 'John,' to avoid confusion, I now beg your attention to our critical enquiry into the real nature of the history of the Birth and Childhood of Jesus, as related in the Gospels.

Matthew and Luke only, give us narratives of Christ's birth and early life. Mark simply mentions Mary as the Mother of Jesus, and John mentions Joseph as his father: both Mark and John begin their history with John the Baptist, except that the fourth Evangelist has a remarkable face concerning Christ's spiritual and divine nature, which we shall have to refer to at a future stage of our inquiry.

pre

1. We have a Genealogy given by Matthew, and another by Luke. Let us begin at 'Abraham' with Matthew, reverse the order followed by Luke, and trace the genealogy also from 'Abraham,' according to him, making use also of the genealogies in the Old Testament, until we come to Zerubbabel, and note the result, in the following table :-

LUKE.
Abraham

CHRONICLES.

[blocks in formation]

MATTHEW.
Abraham
Isaac

Isaac

Jacob

Jacob

Jacob

Jacob

Judah

Judah

Judas

Juda

Pharez

Pharez

Pharez

Pharez

Hezron

Hezron

Esrom

Esrom

Ram

Ram

Aram

Aram

Amminadab

Amminadab

Aminadab

Aminadab

Nashon

Nashon

Naason

Naason

Salmon

Salma

Salmon

Salmon

Boaz

Boaz

Booz

Booz

Obed

Obed

Obed

Obed

Jesse

Jesse

Jesse

Jesse

David

David

David

David

Solomon
Rehoboam
Abijam

Solomon

Solomon

Nathan

Rehoboam

Roboam

Mattatha

Abia

Abia

Menan

Asa

Asa

Asa

Melea

Jehosaphat

Jehosaphat

Josaphat

Eliakim

[blocks in formation]

The first thing which strikes us in Matthew's list is the omission of three names found in the lists from Kings and Chronicles, 'Ahaziah, Joash, Amariah.' This was, doubtless, done by Matthew for 'reasons sufficiently fanciful,' expressed by him in the 17th verse of his 1st chapter

"So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations."

In order to make out his second series of fourteen (beginning with Solomon and ending with Joachim) he was compelled to omit three names found in the Old Testament lists. Our prevailing notions of plenary inspiration' are thus shaken in the outset. A New Testament writer differs from the Old, seemingly out of a merely 'fanciful' regard to curiously comparative numbers!

But Luke's list presents a still greater difficulty. He makes Salathiel (the father of Zorobabel according to Ezra, but the grandfather according to Chronicles) descend from David through nineteen generations (beginning with Nathan and ending with Neri), all of which have different names to the eighteen generations in Kings and Chronicles (beginning with Solomon and ending with Jehoiachin); and, of course, are utterly unlike the fifteen names of Matthew. It is in vain to say that each of the eighteen persons in Kings and Chronicles might have two names, and Luke may have given their surnames. Test this scheme of explanation, and it is destroyed as soon as you commence for we know from the Hebrew history that Solomon and Nathan are two distinct historical personages-the one being the magnificent king who succeeded David, and the other the prophet who reproved him for a crime. How could Salathiel be descended both from Solomon and Nathan, and also through two entirely different lines of eighteen or nineteen persons? The varying numbers, 19, 18, 15the varying names-produce in us again the conviction that these records are not those of 'plenary inspiration.

And if such difficulties meet us here, what shall we say when we proceed to compare Luke with Matthew, in tracing the genealogy from Zorobabel to 'Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus?' We cannot compare the Gospel accounts here with the Old Testament-for the names of all the sons of Zerubbabel, and all their descendants (as given in 1st Chron. iii. 19), are utterly unlike the names in Matthew and Luke. Matthew's list is composed of the following eleven names:

"Zorobabel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Zadoc, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, Joseph."

Luke's list is composed of the following twenty names:

"Zorobabel, Rhesa, Joanna, Juda, Joseph, Semei, Matthias, Maath, Nagge, Esli, Naum, Amos, Mattathias, Joseph, Janna, Melchi, Levi, Matthat, Heli, Joseph."

Here the scheme of surnames fails again, because of the difference of numbers; and that both these can be genealogies of Joseph is impossible. Commentators have perceived this so clearly that they have presented enquirers with various hypotheses to solve the difficulty. Augustine conjectured that Joseph was an adopted son, and that one Evangelist gave the name of his real, and the other that of his adopted father. Julius Africanus supposed that a Levirate marriage had taken place between the parents or Joseph, and that the one genealogy belonged to the natural, the other to the legal, father of Joseph. But the most favourite hypothesis is that one genealogy is that of Joseph and the other that of Mary.

Yet, if we demand which is the genealogy of Mary, we receive different answers-some replying 'Matthew's;' others, 'Luke's.' And the replies are as diverse, if we put questions respecting the hypotheses of Augustine and Julius Africanus. But setting aside the fact that both Matthew and Luke profess to give the genealogy of Joseph, suppose we were to admit that one of the genealogies is really that of Mary, albeit Joseph's name is inserted in accordance with some peculiar Jewish custom, as it is allegedwhat shall we do with the difficulty of Salathiel's contradictory descent from Nathan and Solomon?

Lastly, why have we either one or two genealogies of Joseph, if Joseph were not the actual father of Christ? How could Christ be descended from David through Joseph, if the latter were not Christ's father? The account of the miraculous conception cannot have been written by either of the writers of these genealogies. And yet, neither can we admit either genealogy as historical; for on every scheme of interpretation we are involved in difficulties; and it is not credible, as Strauss observes, that the pedigree of an obscure family, like that of Joseph, extending through so long a series of generations, should have been preserved during all the confusion of the exile, and the disturbed period that followed.

The source of these genealogies is evidently mythical. According to the legendary belief of the people of Palestine, founded on the writings of their ancient bards or prophets, the Messiah could only spring from David:

"When therefore," proceeds the intelligent Strauss, "a Galilean, whose lineage was utterly unknown, and of whom consequently no one could prove that he was not descended from David, had acquired the reputation of being the Messiah, what more natural than that tradition should, under different forms, have early ascribed to him a Davidical descent, and that genealogical tables, corresponding with this tradition should have been formed? which, however, as they were constructed upon no certain data, would necessarily exhibit such differences and contradictions as we find actually existing between the genealogies in Matthew and Luke.

'If, in conclusion, it be asked, what historical result is to be deduced from these genealogies? we reply: a conviction, (arrived at also from other sources,) that Jesus, either in his own person, or through his disciples, acting upon minds strongly imbued with Jewish notions and expectations, left among his followers so firm a conviction of his Messiahship, that they did not hesitate to attribute to him the prophetical characteristic of Davidical descent, and more than one pen was put in action, in order, by means of a genealogy which should authenticate that descent, to justify his recognition as the Messiah."

2. The 'Miraculous Conception,' being the next point in the narratives, now claims our investigation. Here, again, let us compare the supposed Matthew and Luke, and see if there be an accordance in their relations.

(To be continued in next number.)

IMPROVABILITY OF GOVERNMENTS.-Who will be hardy enough to assert that a better constitution is not attainable than any which has hitherto appeared? Is the limit of human wisdom to be estimated, in the science of politics alone, by the extent of its present attainments? Is the most sublime and difficult of all arts-the improvement of the social order, the alleviation of the miseries of the civil condition of man-to be alone stationary, amid the rapid progress of every other art, liberal and vulgar, to perfection? Where would be the atrocious guilt of a grand experiment, to ascertain the portion of freedom and happiness that can be created by political institutions.-Sir James Mackintosh.

ADVERTISEMENTS.

[ocr errors]

NOW READY,
1850,

ITS WOMEN, MEN, AND MANNERS.

On the First of February will be published,
THE CHURCH OF HUMANITY in Christ and all good
names: which Church will ultimately contain the
Universal RELIGION of Human Nature.

The following Penny Pamphlets are by the same
Author.

THE FOUR Ps., (P. P. P. P.) Third Edition. DAVID'S SLING at Priestcraft Goliath. Second Edition.

SHAMS, Dedicated to the Queen. Second Edition.

London: W. STRANGE, and of all booksellers and newsmen by ordering.

THE

THE DEMOCRATIC REVIEW of BRITISH and
FOREIGN POLITICS, HISTORY, and
LITERATURE.

Edited by G. JULIAN HARNEY.
The Democratic Review is now published by Mr.
JAMES WATSON, 3, Queen's Head-passage, Paternos-
ter-row, London. Arrangements have been made
to ensure the publication of each number in ample
time to reach all parts of the United Kingdom, (if
ordered by the local booksellers,) by the first day of
each month.

Improvements-both political and literary-were commenced in the number for January, 1850, which includes in its contents the first of a course of HISTORICAL LECTURES from the pen of that inimitable writer and Champion of Labour,

LOUIS BLANC.

ALSO

LETTERS FROM FRANCE AND GERMANY, reviewing the progress of events in those countries and the Continent generally, particularly as regards the movement for Democratic and Social

Reform.

Just Published, No. 8, for January, 1850.

CONTENTS:

I. The Editor's Letter to the Working Classes.—
Liberty of the Press.

2. Newspaper Stamp Abolition Committee.
3. The Infamous "Times."

4. The French Exiles.

5. Pictures of the Poor.

THE PEOPLE;

A WEEKLY PERIODICAL, PRICE ONE PENNY,
BY JOSEPH BARKER.

THE PEOPLE is thoroughly Democratic. It is, in fact, Republican. It strikes at the life of all Hereditary and Class Legislation; it striks at the heart both of Monarchy and Aristocracy. It aims at the thorough and universal emancipation of humanity. It does these openly, boldly, and zealously. It has besides, of late, become the counsellor of intending Emigrants. Mr. Barker has been in America, and is giving his readers the result of his travels and observations there. It is, besides, the Herald and Advocate of Reform in general. It pleads for Progress and Improvement in all things. It seeks to promote the free and full development of the whole human being and of the whole human family. Teetotalism, Phonography, and Phrenology, Reform in Theology, Dietetics, and the Healing Art, all share its aid. It is a wholesale and universal Reformer.

It is published by JAMES WATSON, 3, Queen's Head Passage, Paternoster Row, London; and ABEL HEYWOOD, Oldham-street, Manchester; and may be had of all liberal booksellers.

On the First of February, 1850, will appear,
Price 6d, No. 1 of

THE PEOPLE'S REVIEW:

DEVOTED TO PROGRESS.

(Excelsior.)

EDITED BY FRIENDS IN COUNCIL.

Though the People have long been stirred with the

been issued at a price which they could compass. spirit of improvement, no Literary Magazine has The few have their critical Monthlies and Quarterlies, while the many, who more need it, have no such Guide to Books. The People's Review purposes to supply the deficiency, and in this day of many Books to indicate which are the useful ones.

A person reading twelve hours every day, would be able to read only one-fortieth part of the new books issued every year, exclusive of newspapers. To trace a short path through this labyrinth, and to relieve the ever multiplying class of thinkers from

6. The History of Socialism.-A course of Lec- the difficulty which Hobbes felt when he said 'If I

tures by Louis Blanc. Lecture 1.

7. The Hungarian Struggle. Part 4.

8. Poetry: The Song of the Cossack."-"Fallen Hungary."

9. Literature: "Works of Rabelais."-"Brand's Popular Antiquities."

10. Letter from France.

11. Letter from Germany.

12. Political Postscript.

FORTY PAGES (in a coloured wrapper), PRICE
THREEPENCE.

London: Published by J. Watson, 3, Queen's Head-passage, Paternoster-row.

should read as much as my neighbours I should be as ignorant as they are,' is the aim of the People's Review.

That elongated genius, 'Bob Thin,' will make his obeisance in the first number, intending to have

TWENTY-SIX CUTS AT THE TIMES!

London: C. Mitchell, Red Lion-court, Fleet-st.

London Printed by WILLIAM HORSELL, 190, High
Holborn; and Published by JAMES WATSON, 3,
Queen's Head Passage, Paternoster Row.

OR, UNFETTERED THINKER AND PLAIN SPEAKER FOR
TRUTH, FREEDOM, AND PROGRESS.

"AND though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple! Who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter?"-Milton's Areopagitica.

No. 2 Vol. I.] FOR THE WEEK ENDING SATURDAY, JANUARY 12, 1850. [Price One Penny.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

MY LORD,-You, and those who are associated with you, have it in your power to lead a successful struggle for the greatest and most imperative of reforms: that on which the real amelioration of our institutions, and of the condition of the People, depends. The new party whom you have joined still hold forth the narrow banner of Household Suffrage; while you, and a few others, declare you would prefer to hoist, at once, the flag of Manhood Franchise. There is a crook and a mystery in this procedure, which all the voluble attempts to make it look fair or politic, can never clear from doubt and suspicion in the minds of working men. They do not understand, nor ever can be made to believe, how men can say one thing and do another,—have an avowed and a reserved purpose, and yet be fully and fairly entitled to confidence. They have made no secret of their own purposes, for years; but, in asking for the franchise defined in the People's Charter, have always put forth their views, broadly, respecting the progressive reforms to be effected by obtaining that franchise, and thereby creating a House of Commons which should really represent the People. They have dared to maintain their convictions to their detriment-some by loss of employ, and others by imprisonment; and they cannot comprehend the virtue of that cautious respectability which marks so many middle-class reformers,-nor the due consistency of men like yourself, in abetting the equivocal enterprize of these same hesitating patriots.

To a mind like yours,-stored with a deep acquaintance with history, and enlarged by observation of mankind in various countries, this doubt and suspicion of working-men cannot seem strange and unreasonable. Policy and stratagem may win admiration for a leader among statesmen; but the confidence and enthusiasm of a whole people can never be so won: justice, and all that justice demands, must be openly and unreservedly advocated, or the many cannot be moved. The people the English people above all others (and your lordship knows this well, from your sound knowledge of their history) do not understand stratagem: they disdain to acquire a knowledge of it, and have ever proceeded openly and manfully in their opposition to privileged power.

Working men do not throng to the banner which the new party have un

« AnteriorContinuar »