relating to Jesus Christ, and imposed them upon the people as predictions. They wrote certain things, after Jesus Christ's birth, and then pretended that these things were written by prophets hundreds of years previous to his birth. This gives us a pretty idea of the character of the originators and promoters of Christianity. Can such conduct, my Lord, be called honest? Can it be characterized by any other term than that of gross imposition? Yet these are the men out of whose hands we have received the Bible and the Christian religion, and who tell us that these things are of divine origin!

If, my Lord, the originators and promoters of Christianity were capable, as Du Pin tells us they were, of forging the books of the Sibyls, and calling them predictions of Jesus Christ, was it impossible for them to forge other books, such for instance as the (I do not wish to commit blasphemy), and call them also predictions of Jesus Christ? I merely put the question for the reflection of your lordship in your sober moments. To proceed with Du Pin.

"Upon the whole (says he, after reasoning upon the matter) it ought to be looked upon as a thing certain, that the writings of the Sibyls were forged in the second century. But to determine the precise time, and who was the author of them, that we cannot with any assurance do. All that can be asserted as most probable is, that they began to appear in the world about the latter end of the reign of Antoninus Pius."

If Du Pin could not determine with any assurance who the author of the writings of the Sibyls was, I can guess with some assurance what his profession was. The conduct of Bishop Anthimius, and his vision, and grave, and Gospel proceedings, are still in my memory. Who else but men of this profession would have an interest in forging such things? Du Pin proceeds:

"The proof of this (that is to say, of the time when

these writings began to appear in the world) is taken out of the books themselves, in which the impostor plainly discovers the time wherein he lived."

Du Pin here applies the word impostor to this early advocate of the Christian religion. I, my Lord, never dreamed of doing more. He continues :

"For though in the first book he would make us believe that he lived in the time of Noah; [thus pretending that the coming of Christ was predicted at that time] and in the third, that he wrote fifteen hundred years after the foundation of the Grecian Empire, yet he could not forbear declaring in the following books the Emperors' names under whom he flourished."

Du Pin poceeds reasoning upon these writings, and then concludes in the following manner :—

"It is therefore plain from these passages, that the author lived at least in the time of these Princes [meaning Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, aud Lucius Verus. He could not have been of a more modern date, because speaking in the eighth book of the duration of the city of Rome, he says, that it should not last above 948 years, and that after that period it should be utterly destroyed. Now this epocha was completed in the year of Christ 195, from whence it evidently follows, that the author of these books did not write after that time; since he would not have foretold an event, the falsity of which experience would have proved, and consequently it must be said that these books were forged between the year of our Lord 138, and the year 195, about the year 150."

I have thus laid before your lordship, the sentiments of this great writer with regard to the books of the Sibyls. And thus have I given another instance, of the lying and forging character of the early advocates of the Christian religion. Du Pin applies the word impostor to

the man who forged these writings; but do the Fathers of the Church, who made use of these writings, deserve a better character? Is the man who uses the instrument, not as bad as the man who made it? If the Fathers really believed the writings to be prophecies of Jesus Christ, then it would be wrong to apply to them the epithet impostor; for where a man is sincere in the sentiments he propagates, the word impostor does not apply; but who can believe that the Fathers were sincere ? Was Bishop Anthimius, for instance, sincere when he forged St. Matthews Gospel, and after placing it in a grave, gave out that he had been visited in a dream by St. Barnabas, who declared to him the spot where he was buried, and that upon his breast was lying the Gospel of St. Matthew, written with his own hand? Was this man sincere when he saw this Gospel read once every year at Constantinople, and distinguished as the venerable and august copy of St. Barnabas?

I hold it to be impossible, my Lord, to maintain the position, that the Fathers were unacquainted with the fictious character of the writings of the Sibyls. Were they not as well able to detect the imposition as Du Pin? Did they not live in, and near the time of the impostor; and were they, from that circumstance, less able to detect the imposition, than Du Pin who lived fifteen hundred years after that time?

If, my Lord, the Fathers of the Church were conscious of the fictious character of the books of the Sibyls, (and let every one judge from what I have here said) then are they as much deserving of the epithet impostor, as the man who forged those books. They imposed the books upon the people as predictions of Jesus Christ, and if they were not so, and if they knew that they were not so, but forgeries, then they were imposing upon the people, and consequently IMPOSTORS. It remains for you, my Lord, to show that they were not so.

As I informed your lordship before, my object in making these exposures, is to make the people acquainted with the real character of the parties from whom we have received the proposition, that the Christian religion is of divine origin, and the Bible the word of God. For if it can be shown that these parties were men of bad character, that they were guilty of lying and forging, and practising imposition upon the people, then their authority is destroyed; we can have no confidence in them, and consequently their proposition, which I have just named, is not to be believed, at least on their authority; and whether I have, as yet, contributed any thing towards this end, let my readers judge.

I will conclude this Letter by giving your lordship another instance of the lying and forging character of those who tell us that the Bible is the word of God. The passage which I am about to quote, and which contains this instance, is from Du Pin's work, before mentioned, vol. II. ch. VII. sec. II. as follows:

"The books attributed to the Hystaspes and Mercurius Trismegistus, cited likewise by the ancient Fathers, are as spurious as the verses of the Sibyls. We have no remains of Hystaspes, and the author was wholly unknown to the ancient Heathens. But this cannot be said of Mercurius, surnamed Trismegistus, of whom the most ancient Heathen writers have made mention, as one that was an incomparable person, and the inventor of all arts and sciences. He was of Egypt, and the most ancient of all the profane writers, that we have extant: they did not think him to be less ancient than Moses. He wrote, or at least it is said that he wrote 25 or 30 thousand volumes. We have at present, remaining only two dialogues under his name, the one has for its title Pimander, and the other Asclepius, who are the two principal personages in them. The first treats of the will, and the second of the power of God. These are the treatises which the ancient Fathers have cited

to prove the truths of our Holy religion, by the authority of an author so famous as the person under whose name they go. But 'tis certain that they could not be his, for the author of these tracts is a modern platonizing Christian, who argues from the principles of the platonic philosophy, and hath taken out of the Scripture, what he has said concerning the divine logos, or word of God, and concerning the creation of the world."

Leaving your lordship to your own reflections upon this extract, until my next Letter,

I continue respectfully,

Hulme, September 19th 1840.

NOTICE.

C. J. HASLAM.

Having learned, from letters which I have received from various parts of the country, that considerable difficulty exists in obtaining these Letters, I beg to suggest the following means by which parties may obtain them with facility, and that too, immediately upon their publication. Let an individual enclose in a letter post-office stamps to an amount sufficient to clear the postage, and also the price of the Letters which he may want, and I pledge myself to forward the same immediately upon the receipt of his letter. Three Letters for instance, weigh less than an ounce, so that they can be obtained in any part of the country for two pence. Of course those only will adopt this plan, who cannot obtain the Letters by any other means, and whose desire to possess them is sufficient to reduce the consideration of postage, to a matter of no-consideration. Communications will reach me addressed to the Hall of Science, Manchester. C. J. H.

PRINTED BY C. J. HASLAM, HULME