Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

The attempts which are now making to reform the morals, in various parts of New England, demand the hearty co-operation of all who desire the present or future happiness of their fellow creatures. No time is to be lost in halting between two opinions. If it has not been already proved, that present enjoyment, and happy prospects of the future, are on the side of strict morality and strict religion, it is in vain to expect that any question in morals will ever be settled. Let every friend of his country, of posterity, of his own children, join his efforts to those of the patriotic and benevolent already engaged in promoting public and private virtue and suppressing vice.

While adverting to united exertions in the cause of truth and righteousness, we desire to call the attention of our readers to the utility and necessity of religious magazines, permanently established and liberally patronized. How many of the great charities which have adorned the present times would never have been originated without periodical works of this description? How many others would have languished and failed, without the same support? As the first step towards any extensive and united efforts, it is necessary that those, who are called upon to co-operate, should know what is to be done, and what is doing, in the religious world. They should be informed of the means, the hopes and prospects, the duties and encouragements, which claim their particular consideration. But all this can be done in no other way so effectually as in the manner here specified. Let it be remembered, that the establishment of any useful magazine is not justly regarded as a temporary and inconsiderable expedient to subserve the present interests of a party; but as the erection of an engine whose power may be incalculably beneficial; as the opening of a fountain whose salutary streams may long continue to refresh the thirsty pilgrim, and cover the earth with verdure.

Among the duties, which devolve on writers for religious pub. lications, those which relate to the treatment of adversaries are probably the most difficult. As we have never yet learnt from Scripture, experience, or observation, that all the different schemes of religion have an equal claim to be treated with deference and respect, we cannot hesitate to believe, that many pernicious errors actually exist in this country; errors which materially affect the very foundations of Christian doctrine; errors which, if cordially embraced, must prove fatal to the souls of men. Nor can we hesitate to believe, that these errors are zealously propagated from the press and the pulpit; and that, in some instances, men set apart, as the guides of their fellow sinners in the way to heaven, lead them in the downward road to perdition. How are writers and preachers of this class to be treated? is the question. The rules which have appeared to us most important, and altogether defensible, are briefly as follows:

First; it should be regarded as a fundamental canon, not to judge more unfavorably of any religious doctrine, than the Scriptures authorize and require us to judge. We allow no human

authority in matters of faith. What the word of God condemns, it is the duty of Christians to condemn; but nothing more. We are no advocates for drawing the bonds of fellowship closer than God has drawn them; or for inventing stricter rules of conduct than He has given. In construing the Scriptures, and searching after their genuine meaning, the utmost candor, fairness, and reverence, are to be exhibited; but when that meaning is satisfactorily ascertained, it is too serious a thing to be yielded out of complaisance, or concealed from view for fear of reproach and obloquy. It is to be avowed, proclaimed, and defended, with all possible zeal.

Secondly; in controversies with the enemies of the truth, the law of love is never to be transgressed. Christ has made it the duty of his followers to love all men. A real and earnest desire of the present and future good of an opponent is perfectly consistent with the persuasion that he is in extreme error, and in the way to ruin. Indeed, the fact that any human being is in such error, ought to awaken a desire that he may be delivered from it, and will uniformly do so, in hearts under the permanent influence of religion. To ascertain whether a writer is really possessed of this benevolent regard to his adversaries, whom he apprehends, at the same time, to be the adversaries of the truth, let him answer to his own satisfaction the following questions. If the person whom I am now particularly opposing were my brother; had we been educated together in a father's house; or were he a son, whose salvation had been near my heart ever since his birth; should I not soften the expressions which offer themselves to my pen? If I answer in the affirmative, is it because, in the case supposed, my natural affection is stronger, than, in the real case, my benevolent regard to an immortal being? Should I be able to read what I am writing to my opponent in private, without feeling the slightest disposition to anger on the one hand, or the slightest degree of compunction on the other? If not; Why? Am I able to say, with a solemn reference to God, the Judge of all, and to the day of final retribution; This page was written in love to mankind?

If all writers would faithfully pursue inquiries of this kind, it is manifest that the race of Warburtons and Belshams would soon become extinct.

Thirdly; ridicule should be admitted with extreme caution in religious controversy, if admitted at all. Were it not, that the Scriptures have sanctioned the use of ridicule, we should doubt whether it ought not to be interdicted altogether. Sanctioned as it is, however, by the highest authority, it is doubtless intended, on certain rare occasions, to answer the most important purposes. But it is so liable to perversion, and can so easily be pressed into any cause, while the temptations to use it unnecessarily, and even improperly, are so frequent, that prudence seems to dictate the course here recommended. It is certainly very far from being an instructive spectacle, to behold sinners, hastening to the judgment, busily employed in holding up each other to public laughter and scorn. To prevent mistake, however, it ought to be observed,

that such is the character of error, so frequent are its inconsistencies, and so glaring its absurdities, that a simple statement of a writer's own doctrines will sometimes produce the same effect as the most powerful strain of ridicule.

Another difficulty which editors of periodical publications experience, is that of suiting the tastes and wishes of different classes of their readers. The attempt to please all would be ridiculous. But we shall not cease to labor that our work may be as extensively useful, as it shall be within the limits of our means to render it. While we shall pay a respectful attention to intimations from any of our patrons, with regard to practicable improvements in our work, we must request them likewise to pay a similar attention to what they may presume to be the wishes of other patrons. We would always encourage the utmost fredoom in suggesting such improvements as will make the Panoplist more conducive to the purposes for which it is published-the promotion of useful knowledge and undefiled religion.

We are sorry that our subscription list will not warrant the enlargement proposed in our number for March. By the use of a smaller type in a part of the work, there will be room for some additional matter. The contemplated enlargement will still be kept in view; and will be adopted whenever an increased patronage shall authorize the additional expense. The war has so impeded transportation by water, that we fear a serious diminution of subscribers from that cause alone.

As many of our subscribers number the volumes of the Panoplist from the beginning, without making the distinction of the new series, it will be most convenient that the same mode be universally adopted. We shall therefore designate this volume as the ninth, instead of the sixth of the new series.

We conclude with beseeching the God of all grace to make our feeble efforts in some measure successful, and to impart the know!edge and love of the truth to all mankind.

[blocks in formation]

The Ark;

Thamanim; which in the ancient

The Mountain, on which it language of Armenia siguiñes

rested;

The Dove; and

The Raven.

It will not be in my power, and indeed it must in the nature of the case be very 'difficult, to arrange them in a perspicuous order.

1. I shall recite some testimonies concerning the family of Noah.

The original gods of Egypt were held to be eight; the Odeas, celebrated by antiquity. Of

these Pan was the eldest.

The Cabiri, the principal priests of heathen antiquity, are said by Damasis, as quoted by Phoitus, to have been the sons of Saduc; the just man: the appellation, given by Moses to Noah. They are said to have been three; and to have been the authors of all useful science and

arts.

Sanchoniathon also says, They were the offspring of the just man; and that they lived in the time of Barith: a Hebrew word signifying an Ark.

They are said to have been the first, who built a ship; to have been the first husbandmen; to have built a city; and in it to have consecrated Λείψανα Ποντε; what was left by the ocean: i. e. what the Deluge had spared.

These priests are said to have been priests of Theba: another Hebrew word, signifying an Ark. Diodorus Siculus says, They were universally esteemed the offspring of the Ocean, according to the traditions of the ancients.

Ebn Patricius says, "After the family of Noah left the Ark, they built a city, which they called

Eight; and which, according to him, means, We are eight."

Elmasinus calls the city the place which Noah built, when he came out of the Ark.

William de Rubruquis says, "There are two mountains on which the Armenians say the ark, mentioned by Moses, rested; and a little town, named Cemainun, (eight) which, they say, was built, and so named, by the persons, who came out of the Ārk. This is plain from the name, which signifies eight. They call the mountain (that is, one of these mountains,) the Mother of the world."

Moses Chonorensis says, that this town is held in great reverence by the Armenians; who say, that it is the oldest town in the world, and was built, immediately after the Deluge, by Noah.

The same writer informs us, that the Armenians furnish us, by their Poems, a far more copious account of ancient things, than any other nation.

From these sources this respectable writer extensively derived, it would seem, his own accounts of antiquity.

Galanus says, The natives say concerning this town, that its true name is Nachib-shivan; which means the first place of descent, agreeably to Josephus.

Berosus says, That in this place the patriarch gave instructions to his children, and vanished from the sight of men.

According to Epiphanius, the family of Noah remained here during five generations, or six hundred and fifty-nine years.

In Genesis x, 25 it is said

[ocr errors]

that the earth was divided in the days of Peleg, the fifth generation from Noah.

In the retreat of the Argonauts, it is said, that Minyae retired from mount Caucasus to the remotest part of the earth. Ararat is a part of the great chain of Caucasus. Armenia, also, was anciently called Armeni, and Arminni: i. e. Aram Minni; and by Jeremiah, Ararat Minni. Jer. li, 27.

Mankind, it is said, first dwelt in the region of the Minyae, at the bottom of mount Baris, the mountain of the Ark; the Ararat of Moses.

Callimachus says, "The Kronides, (i. e. the sons of Kronus, Saturn, or Noah) determined, or set out, by lot the several regions of the world."

Homer makes Neptune, the son of Saturn, say, that his broth ers parted the world into three shares, and that each obtained by lot his own share.

Plato says, "The gods i. e. the three sons of Saturn, obtained the dominion of the whole earth according to their different allotments; and without contention took possession of their provinces by a fair lot."

The Greeks called Japhet, or Japetus, the first of men; and to express the highest antiquity of any thing said, proverbially, that it was older than Japhet.

That Ham settled in Africa is evident because,

First; Hammon was worshipped as a god by the Egyptians; and had temples erected to him. Secondly; Because cities, places, and people, were named from him. In Egypt the great city Diospolis, or the city of Jupiter, is called Amon, or Ham

on-No, by the prophets Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Nahum. In Arabia, were the river Ammon, the promontory Ammonium, and the people Ammonii. In Africa was the city Ammonia.

Alexander Polyhistor, who lived in Egypt under Ptolemy Lathyrus, testifies that all Africa was called Ammonia; and that it was so called from the god Ammon. Lucan also says, that Ammon was the god of Ethiopians, Arabians, and Indians.

Plutarch calls Egypt Chemia from Cham. The Copts, as Bochart testifies, call Egypt to this day Chomi. The Arabians, also, call Cairo Misr, from Misr the father of the Misraim.

It is hardly necessary to observe, that Ham was Jupiter, and was worshipped under the name of Jupiter Ammon: or that the temple, erected to him, was discovered by Hornemann in the year 1798, at Sirvah: about three hundred miles west by south of Cairo.

2. Testimonies concerning the Ark.

The principal Tartars, or Tatars, declare themselves to be descended from Turk, i. e. Turgoma (Togarmah) the son of Japhet, the son of Noah; who was saved from the Deluge in the Ark, on the mountain of Baris, or the Ark. The Turks were originally called by themselves Turcomans. You will remember, that not a small number of testimonies concerning the Ark have been already mentioned; being too intimately interwoven with other testimonies to be separated.

The word λagra used by Plutarch, Alexander Polyhistor, Nicolaus Damascenus, and 7 heo

« ForrigeFortsæt »