LETTER VIII.

TO THE BISHOP OF EXETER:

CONTAINING

MATERIALS FOR DECIDING THE QUESTION,

WHETHER OR NOT

THE BIBLE IS THE WORD OF GOD?

BY C. J. HASLAM. *

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR, HULME, MANCHESTER.

MY LORD,

Price one Penny.

Our first subject is the extract from Du Pin, with which I closed my last Letter, respecting the lying and forging of the early advocates of the Christian religion. It appears from that extract, that certain advocates of the Christian religion forged certain writings, and ascribed those writings to a celebrated writer of antiquity, named Trismegistus, that is to say, they affixed his name to them, pretending that he was the author of them; and the Fathers used these writings for the purpose of proving "the truths of our Holy religion. Trismegistus was a character of great eminence, and the pious men, who were active in promoting Christianity, imagined that if they had his authority in favour of their

religion, it would be of immense service to their cause. They therefore, in obedience to the impulse of their excessive piety, forged the writings in question, and affixed his name to them. And these, says Du Pin, were used by the Fathers "to prove the truths of our Holy religion."

The "truths of our Holy religion," it appears, required the aid of forgery and falsehood to support them. Although those "truths" had proceeded from the mind of the Deity, they were so wanting in momentum that it required the authority of a Heathen to give them power and effect amongst the people. What weak and meager things divine truths must be ! The Fathers, no doubt, made many converts, by the authority of this cele brated Heathen writer: true and genuine converts to the "truths of our Holy religion. This, I suppose, is to be taken as a sample, of the virtue and piety of the Fathers of the Church.

What other character, my Lord, can be given to the Fathers, than downright impostors? Is he who deceives, and imposes upon others, not an impostor? And were the Fathers not of this description? Did they not, according to the testimony of Du Pin, impose upon the people as genuine writings, the Sibylline Oracles, and other forged productions? Did they not deceive people by these writings, and gain converts in virtue of them? What other character then can be given them than that which I have named? Impostors they were, my Lord, in the fullest sense of the word, if the testimony of Du Pin is to be depended upon, and he is one of your highest authorities.

Would it be illogical, my Lord, to reason upon this subject in the following manner ?

The divine character of the Bible and the Christian religion rests upon the authority of the Fathers; the Fathers, according to facts related by Du Pin, were im

postors; therefore the divine character of the Bible and the Christian religion rests upon the authority of impostors.

I by no means mean to say that it is logical to reason in this manner; I merely ask your lordship the question, not being a proficient in logic myself.

I shall now proceed with more instances of the lying and forging character of those who tell us that the Bible is the word of God. The following passage I take from the work of Du Pin, vol. II. ch. VII. sec. III.

"There is no need of showing the falsity of a Letter attributed to Lentulus, written to the Senate and people of Rome concerning the actions of Jesus Christ, since the forgery of it is self evident. They make Lentulus to write it in the quality of Governor of Jerusalem, though he never had that employ. It is directed to the Senate and people of Rome, whereas after the Commonwealth was changed into a Monarchy, the Governors usually wrote to the Emperors. That which is contained in that Letter is ridiculous: Therein is a mean and contemptible description of the person of Jesus Christ; therein it is said that our Saviour had light coloured hair, long and loose after the mode of the Nazarenes. The style wherein it is written does not suit with the purity and politeness of Augustus' time: in a word, not one of the an cients hath made mention of that Letter."

Another instance, my Lord, of the piety and horality of the early advocates of the Christian religion. Here the pious men who were engaged in promoting Christ tianity, forged a Letter bearing testimony to the miracles of Jesus Christ, and ascribed that Letter to Lentulus ; that is to say, as in the case before cited, they affixed his name to it, pretending that he was the author of it; and the Fathers used this Letter for the purpose of proying the "truths of our Holy religion. What lovers of truth these Fathers must have been! So deeply in love

were they with truth, that they forged lies for the purpose of promoting it. They told lies for the purpose of promoting truth. Forgery and falsehood seem to be the foundation on which "our Holy religion" rests. 10 9982

"

Du Pin is rather obscure where he says, in the above cited passage, Therein is a mean and contemptible description of the person of Jesus Christ; therein it is said that our Saviour had light coloured hair, long and loose after the mode of the Nazarenes. Because, it would seem, Jesus Christ was described as having light coloured hair, long and loose after the mode of the Nazarenes, therefore it was a mean and contemptible description of our Saviour. I was not aware before that meanness or contemptibleness attached themselves either to light hair or black hair, long hair or short. Jesus, I imagine, must have had hair of some sort, if he had not wool, and what less mean and contemptible is black hair than light, short hair than long ? This however is of no consequence.

7100

I shall now cite a passage from Du Pin relating to the alleged Letter of Pilate to Tiberius, concerning the miracles of Jesus Christ; and although Du Pin does not tell us in direct terms that that Letter is a forgery, he says quite enough to satisfy our minds that it is so. The passage is to be found in his work before mentioned, vol. II. ch. VII. sec. III. as follows:

off The Letter of Pilate to Tiberius, upon the subject of the miracles of Jesus Christ, seems to be more authentic. For Tertullian, in his Apologetic, relates that Tiberius having understood what miracles Jesus Christ had wrought in Palestine, which were so many evidences of his divinity, made the report thereof to the Senate, and proposed the ranking him among the Gods; but that the Senate rejected the proposal, and yet Tiberius continued in the same mind, and prohibited the persecuting of the Christians. A little after the same author adds, "that

Pilate, a Christian in his heart, sent Tiberius word of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Eusebius in the second book of his Ecclesiastical History, ch. II. cites, this passage of Tertullian, and explaining more at large how Tiberius came to hear of Jesus Christ, says that Pilate (according to the custom of the Governors of provinces, who were obliged to send the Emperors an account of what happened most remarkable in their province) sent Tiberius an account of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, assuring him that he had heard of a great many miracles which he had wrought; and that there were a great many people who looked upon him as a God, since his being raised from the dead.

"We have in the Orthodoxographa next to the epistle of Lentulus, a Letter attributed to Pilate as written to Tiberius, which contains the same things; but it is dif ficult to determine whether this Letter was extant in Eusebius's time, or whether it was not forged since from his narration. Let this be how it will, there are several learned men who question the genuineness of this history, which has very little probability at the bottom of it. For how is it likely that Pilate should write such things to Tiberius of a man, whom he himself had condemned to death? And though he might have done this, yet is it probable that Tiberius should have proposed to the Senate the placing of such a man in the number of the Gods upon the bare relation of a Governor? And if he had proposed any such thing, who can imagine but that the Senate would have submitted to it? Wherefore, though we cannot absolutely charge this narration with falsehood, yet it may at least pass for a doubtful piece."od

Such are the sentiments of Du Pin in relation to the Letter of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius, which the Fathers have so often referred to, "to prove the truths of our Holy religion". It cannot absolutely be said, that that Letter is a forgery, yet, at the least, it is a doubtful piece. And the history, says he, respecting it, as nar,