The examiners examined: being a defence of The age of reason. : [One line in French from Leibnitz]

The examiners examined: being a defence of The age of reason. : [One line in French from Leibnitz]

Table of contents

Title page

CONTENTS.

THOUGHTS ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

REMARKS ON THE PUBLICATIONS WHICH HAVE APPEARED IN OPPOSITION TO THE AGE OF REASON.

THE AGE OF INFIDELITY, BY A LAYMAN, IS THE NEXT IN THE ORDER OF ATTACK AGAINST THE FATAL BLOW TO FANATICISM AND PRIESTCRAFT, THE AGE OF REASON.

A GUIDE TO REASON, BY SAMUEL STILLWELL, IS THE FOURTH ASSAULT UPON THE "FORTRESS OF DEISM."

THE NEW-YORK REVIEWER, ALIAS, —, ESQUIRE,

VINDICATION OF OUR AUTHOR'S CHARACTER AND WRITINGS, IN ANSWER TO AN ANONYMOUS PUBLICATION IN A PHILADELPHIA PAPER.

THE ADDRESS BY THE REVEREND UZAL OGDEN, RECTOR OF TRINITY CHURCH AT NEWARK, ACCOMPANYING HIS PROPOSALS FOR PRINTING "THE DEIST UNMASKED," "A SHORT METHOD WITH THE DEISTS," &c. Is the last and most violent invective that has yet been published against the immortal work, entitled, "THE AGE OF REASON."

§

§

[Page]

[Page]

THE EXAMINERS EXAMINED; BEING A DEFENCE OF THE AGE OF REASON.

LE TEMS PRESENT EST GROS DE L'AVENIR.

Leibnitz.

NEW-YORK: PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR; AND SOLD BY L. WAYLAND AND J. FELLOWS. 1794.

(Copy-right secured.)

CONTENTS.

[Page]

THOUGHTS on the Christian Religion, PAGE 5

Remarks on the Pamphlet, entitled, the Folly of Reason, PAGE 22

— Mr. Wakefield's Examination, PAGE 25

— The Age of Infidelity, PAGE 51

— The Guide to Reason, PAGE 69

— The New-York Reviewer, PAGE 71

— An Anonymous Publication, PAGE 79

— Reverend Usal Ogden's Address, PAGE 81

THOUGHTS ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

[Page]

RELIGION, in some form or other, seems to have been observed by mankind, in all ages and all parts of the world; and considered as the most noble employment, of the most divine nature, and producing the most benesicial effects to society, of all the objects that ever engaged their attention: although from casual circumstances, and interested motives of individuals, there are as many modes and varieties of worship, as languages or nations on the face of the earth.

Europeans have in general embraced christianity, as contained in the bible, which they call the Word of God, as the only true and infallible system on earth, and which only can lead us to eternal happiness. This bible, we have been taught to believe, is holy, just, perfect, and superior to the human understanding; so sacred, that to doubt or disbelieve it, would entail on us inevitable never-ending misery. This doctrine, being instilled into children by their nurses; and enforced by terror at a riper age, has long been assented to by the [Page] generality of people, who seldom think or inquire for themselves, but are always more or less the dupes of designing men.

But the times are now changing; the privilege of reasoning and believing for ourselves, begins to be exercised—freedom of enquiry abounds; and the natural inherent right of speaking and acting according to the dictates of our own conscience (without injuring society) is happily enjoyed. Consequently, impositions of every kind, superstitious prejudices, and the long worshipped sabrics of civil and religious tyranny, are daily growing into contempt, and in all probability will soon be corn from their foundations, and consigned to that infamous oblivion which they so highly merit.

To come more immediately to the point—the christian religion, as generally practised, presents itself as one of those monuments of ignorance and credulity, which the wisdom of the present generation is probably destined to overthrow, and to substitute a system more simple, more pure, and more agreeable to the dictates of reason. The bible, upon examination, we shall find deficient in many of the virtues that have been ascribed to it. As a human composition, its merits have been greatly over-rated: it is exceeded in sentiment, invention, stile, and every other literary qualification. The obscurity, incredibility and obscenity, so conspicuous in many parts of it, would justly condemn the works of a modern writer. It contains a mixture of inconsistency and contradiction; to call which the word of God, is the highest pitch of extravagance: it is to attribute to the Deity that which any person of common sense would blush to confess himself the author of.

[Page] How are the rights and dignity of human nature [...] sulted, degraded, and trampled upon! how are mankind blinded, deceived, and led away by this system! how is the honor and character of the Almighty affronted by the absurd and impious doctrines it contains! how is the sacred name of God abused and prostituted to the vilest and most execrable purposes, by his pretended worshippers! and all for one simple, evident end, to gratify the pride and avarice of unprincipled, designing men!

But something more than declamation is necessary to support these assertions. I shall therefore give the reasons why I disbelieve the christian system, and all the arguments advanced in its favor.

As to the existing proofs of the divine authority of the bible, whether internal or external, whether the evidence we feel in our own minds on examming it, or the miracles which are said to have attended its propagation, they are of no avail in convincing us of its divine origin: And I do not think, that independent of the prejudices of education, and the power of eloquence, there ever was a reasonable thinking man, who felt a sufficient internal evidence to convince him of the reality of the whole of its doctrines.

With respect to the public proofs exhibited by its founders, we find them no stronger than those in favour of Mahometanism, or perhaps any other system. Mahomet is said to have wrought as many miracles, preached as good doctrine, converted ten times as many followers, and was far more successful in all his enterprizes, however bold or difficult, than Jesus Christ. The christians say, the Mahometan miracles were nothing but impostures; and the Mahometans say, with [Page]as much authority, that the christian miracles were the time.

If the gospel system was so clear, so reasonable, and so powerful, as its advocates assert, what necessity could there have been for miracles to support it? If it had any foundation in reason and nature, there would have been no occasion for mystery, miracle or revelation, to confirm it. A doctrine that is reasonable and true, will appear so to every unprejudiced mind, without the aid of any thing supernatural. Consequently, that system which requires miraculous assistance to establish it, and cannot be proved by human means, is neither reasonable nor true.

Supposing the bible to have been written by divine inspiration, at the times, and by the persons mentioned in it, still it is next to impossible, that it could have been transmitted down to the present time pure and uncontaminated, even if there had been but one nation and one language upon earth. The variety of translations and editions it has passed through in the course of near eighteen hundred years, if it has existed so long, (which I am inclined to disbelieve of many parts) and the continual improvements and alterations in human language, during that period, amount to a presumptive proof that the sense has been unavoidably mistaken, or wilfully perverted. A confirmation of this remark is open to all: Let any one take the trouble of comparing different cop [...]es of the bible, printed in the last and present centuries, or even in the same year, and he will often find a striking disagreement.

Admitting that the bible contains the only doctrine by which we can obtain salvation and everlasting life, which of the numberless professions that have sprung [Page]out of it are we to embrace? One sect tells us that there is no salvation out of the pale of their church. Another tells us, that unless we believe and practise their doctrines, we shall surely be damned. Let us believe therefore, in whatever particular profession we may, we shall be damned according to the principles of the others.

How gracious and beneficent is the christian system! so perfect and pure that it creates so many different, distinct, and opposite denominations of believers; all of them right, infallibly right, in their own opinions, and proving their doctrine by the clear, incontestible authority of divine revelation!

Many, as an excuse for countenancing a doctrine which they confess may not be true, say, that if the christian religion be false, it is still very hurtful to attempt to overturn it; as we have no better guide, and no other method to restrain the passions and regulate the conduct of mankind; as it is the most perfect and beneficial system that could be devised. To determine this, we must look at its effects.

That doctrine which has the greatest tendency to secure our present and future happiness, is the best; it proves itself to be so. That the christian system does not tend to make us happier, may easily be shewn, by tracing its natural operations on the human mind. By it we are led to believe, that we are all miserable and ruined wretches; corrupt and exceedingly wicked from our very birth; naturally sinful, and opposed to the will of God in all our actions, words and thoughts; and so far from deserving the common blessings of life, that if [...]ustice had been done us, we should long since have been cast into endless punishment. Tribulation, [Page]disitess and sore trials, are the common lot of mankind, especially the good. "Whom the Lord loveth be chadeneth." This world, it tells us, is a wretched, tiresome and accursed place; a mere sink of guilt and misery; and all its enjoyments vanity and vexation of spirit. Though by the bye, those who are called sincere and pious christians seem to be as desirous of continu [...] in it, and tasting the good things it affords, as the [...] and worldly-minded sinner. It likewise [...] its followers such a servile fear, and dread of [...] w [...]th of heaven, that they can neither lie down as night, nor rise in the morning, without first attempting, by entreaty, flattery and fair promises, to appease the Divine anger, and persuade the Almighty to permit them to exist in peace. Every accident is a judgment, and a prelude to further punishment. Every misfortune that happens to their neighbours is a warning to them; and they are liable every moment to be cut off by an avenging God, and sent to Hell.

While on the one hand, they represent the Deity as then servant, to assist them on every occasion, averting every ill they bring upon themselves, and extricating them from every difficulty and distress they plunge themselves into. On the other, he is supposed to be a fierce, revengeful tyrant, delighting in cruelty, punishing his creatures for the very sins which he causes them to commit; and creating numberless millions of immortal souls, that could never have offended him, for the express purpose of tormenting them to all eternity. Thus they are generally miserable through life, in meditating on death and its supposed consequences.

The authority of the bible appears still more doubtful from the absurdities and contradictions it contains; [Page]contradictions which all the sophistical ingenuity of reverend divines, with their literal meaning of this text, and spiritual interpretation of that, can never explain or reconcile.

In the very first chapter of the whole volume, containing an account of the creation, we find an inexplicable difficulty. In Genesis i. 27, 28. we are told, that "God created man, male and semale, blessed them, and said unto them," &c. But in ii. 20. we find that "there was not an help meet for Adam:" therefore, ver. 18. "God said, it is not good that man should be alone." And, ver. 22. "he made a woman, and brought her unto the man."

The Almighty, according to many parts of the bible, is a perfect, unchangeable being. In Isaiah, he is said to declare, that he is "not as a man, that he should repent." But in other places we read of his repenting very frequently. He repented that he had made man. Having determined to destroy the Israelites, and having slain seventy thousand of them, he "repented of the evil," and spared the rest. He told Hezekiah that "he should surely die, and not live;" but immediately repented, and gave him fifteen years longer. Jonah prophesied, in his name, that in forty days Nineveh should be overthrown; but the people believing him (though he did not perform his promise) and forsaking their sins, he "repented of the evil that he said he would do unto them, and did it not."

In one place it says, "Our God is a consuming fire;" and in another, "God is love." He is said to be jealous, revengeful and angry with the wicked every day; and pleased again as often at they repent: possessing [Page]all the good and evil qualities of man, that unstable, wicked, miserable, and insignificant worm. Notwithstanding all this, he is perfectly just, wise, immutable, and can never repent.

The christian system, I venture to affirm, has been the cause of more evil in the world, man any other that ever appeared in it. By inculcating a belief that the Deity was a terrible God, an inexer [...]able judge, taking vengeance on all his enemies; its professors, wishing to conform as much as possible to the character and disposition of their God, have in all ages acted with the same spirit, and upon the same principles:

"O [...] strong, unerring hand,

T [...]ny bolts forever throw;

And deal da [...]ation round the land,

On each I [...]udge thy foe."

Inspired with the most vindictive hatred to all who do not subscribe to the principles they profess (who are, according to their faith, enemies; for they say, there is no medium or neutrality, "all who are not for us are against us:") they have never fai [...]ed, in any country, and at all times, when they had the power, to exercise the most cruel and detestable spirit that ever disgraced human nature. Not contented with insulting, oppressing, enslaving and butchering the poor heretics here, but most humanely and charitably condemning them to everlasting torments hereafter.

During the first 320 years of its existence, christianity occasioned the destruction of many millions of mankind. In the first part of this period, the christians were the greatest sufferers; but in the year 312 Maxentius and his army of 200,000, were most of them [Page]drowned in the Tiber, or slain by Constautine, the christian emperor; who, in three great battles, in one of which 100,000 were killed, reduced and put to death Licinus, the deputy emperor of the East; persecuted the Heathens and destroyed their idols, the symbols of their divinities.

In the twelfth and subsequent centuries, millions of Walden [...] [...] protestants were murdered in the south of France. How many millions lost their lives in the mad crusades for the recovery of the Holy Land! In Germany and Flanders, in England, Scotland and Ireland, in South America—But I stop, or "I could a tale unfold, whose lightest word would harrow up the soul," chill the blood with horror, and draw forth curses from the grave against the very name of a religion which has been made the pretext for such cruelties.

Indeed, it is impossible to calculate the mischief that has attended the christian system since its commencement. But, say its advocates, all this was done by antichrist, or the false church. Which then is the true church? Not that which persecutes. And what church is that? The church of Rome? No: For that, after long struggles, no sooner became established in power, than it persecuted its dissenting sons with all the zeal and barbarity that it had experienced from its enemies. The church of England? No: For although that separated from the church of Rome, and rejected many of the errors and corruptions which had crept into it; yet no sooner was it fully established in Great-Britain, than it very carefully trod over the steps of the mother-church, persecuted Roman catholics, and all dissenters. The puritans who fled to this country for the sake of freedom of conscience and religious liberty, were no [Page]sooner settled than they discovered the same illiberal persecuting spirit, which drove them hither, and persecuted the Quakers in their turn; becoming as corrupt as any of the former churches. Each of them, while they were weak and defenceless, suffered by the murderous hand of its oppressors; and, when become strong and powerful, persecuted and martyred its feebler enemies. And I believe there is not a church in Christendom but would, if it could not convert, most gladly destroy all its opposers; had it that one essential and only necessary quality, power. For they affirm, that the world, with all its blessings, are nothing but temptations to draw them away from their true interest; and that unbelievers of every kind are their natural implacable enemies.

The [...]arnal mind, say they, is enmity to God and his people (themselves) and is in continual opposition to every thing good and heavenly; they must then of necessity wage an eternal war against all who do not acknowledg [...] their system, as the only sure guide to heaven.

The powerful blow which has been aimed at this system of faith by P [...]ine's Age of Reason, has created a general and well-founded alarm. That work, to every bigotted o [...] interested follower of christianity, appears in a dreadful light indeed; as it is a direct attack upon their favorite, their dearly beloved system of gospel faith, which exalts them, in their own opinions, so much above the rest of mankind.

The christian theology [...] so favorable to the pride and vanity of man, that the slightest attempt to overturn it, occasions an universal panic in its supporters, who immediately display all the ensigns of their cause, [Page]the pompous, high-sounding anathemas of scripture, to frighten the bold invader of their aerial territories.— So far they act consistently; for where they have no weapons or defence from nature and reason, fe [...]r and hope, though unfounded and delusive, are the only expedients left. By representing the terrors of their law in the most horrid colours, the wretched victim of their designs cries out in the depth of despair, "Lord, what shall I do to be saved?" The work is then in a certain way of success; the convert gives himself up to the direction of the church in all things, and is ever after the passive tool of its power. These converts are seldom or never made by pure reason and sound argument; for these would never answer the purpose: but the passions, which may be driven by every gale that blows, the fickle and inconstant passions, are so influenced by the power of false eloquence in violent declamations and vehement harrangues, that the calm, even voice of reason is not heard, or is disregarded, amidst the bustle of jarring emotions; and the poor frightened wretch catches hold of the first object that is held out to save him from his fancied perishing and undone condition. Without ever once considering whether the profession they embrace is founded in nature and reason, they confide wholly in the p [...]ty of their spiritual teacher, leave their faith and hope altogether in his hands, and trust entirely upon his promises and power. Their belief he can alter or abolish at pleasure; for what he preaches they must ad [...]er [...] to: what he allows they must profess; what he appro [...]es must be true.

In fact, the christian system has never yet been weighed in the imparti [...] [...] of reason, or received a candid trial in the [...] world. Force, fraud, and [Page]other unfair means have always been necessarily employed for its establishment. Had it been founded on truth, or consistent with common sense, its advocates would never have refused to submit it to reason, and the cool, dispassionate judgment of mankind. But they well knew that it could neverstand the test, and this would be the certain means of its destruction. They therefore boldly and presumptuously tell the world, that it is beyond the reach of human reason, which is not competent to judge rightly of it. They confess that we cannot comprehend a great part of it; but at the same time command us to believe it, though we cannot understand it.

It has been the peculiarly honorable lot of Thomas Paine, the firm advocate of truth, the undaunted champion of reason, and the resolute and unconquerable enemy of tyranny, bigotry and prejudice, to open the door to free and impartial enquiry. He has boldly entered the field himself, and taught the world, that no true system of principles, however sacred they may be held in the public opinion, and however strongly protected and enforced by the terrors of man's vengeance here, and eternal punishment hereafter, is too awful to be canvassed by reason, or too sublime to be comprehended by common sense.

The christian system, as it is not consistent with reason, is declared to be above it; and should be received even if it does not appear clear and intelligible to our human capacities.

This by prohibiting enquiry, effectually prevents detection of falsehood and confirmation of truth. The doctrine is received upon trust, upon the credit of our forefathers; because they taught, or rather said so, we [Page]must implicitly believe so, all the remonstrances of reason and experience to the contrary notwithstanding.

This is certainly a very great absurdity. For there once was a beginning to every system or theory in being; and at that beginning it was necessary to exercise reason as the unerring guide to direct in the choice or rejection thereof. If mankind were not only allowed, but necessitated to weigh every doctrine in [...] [...]fallible balance of reason, at any time, why are we [...]ot entitled to the same privilege at present? Is our reason degenerated? Are our faculties impaired? Or rather are we not far more wise and enlightened than mankind were centuries ago, and much more competent to understand and judge of things than they were? By the practice before mentioned, by that tyranny over the minds of men, which has ever been exercised in despotic states, the grossest falshoods have been forced upon the world for realities, and the most detestable impositions established and maintained in all the strength and vigour of immutable truth.

But these arts, how long soever they may prosper, and by whatever authority they may be supported; though they may call to their aid all the powers of superstition and prejudices of education, and be assisted by the pride and deceit of hypocritical bygots and mercenary tyrants; still must they finally fall, and sink into contemptuous oblivion. The present state of society seems peculiarly adapted to the advancement of truth, and destruction of error. The sun of reason has begun to appear, dispelling the thick and almost impenetrable mists of ignorance and superstition, illuminating the most secret recesses of the mind, and will continue to encrease in splendor, till it shine forth in one clear, unclouded and eternal day.

[Page] The writing; of modern philosophers have served greatly to illuminate the minds of the present generation. I will here quote Pope's beautiful description of that sublime and heavenly religion, which mankind in a state of nature professed, contrasted with that distorted, gloomy religion which has been imposed on mankind by power and fraud.

"Man, like his maker, saw that all was right,

To virtue, in the paths of pleasure, trod,

And own'd a father when he own'd a God.

LOVE all the faith, and all th' allegiance then;

For Nature knew no right divine in men,

No ill could fear in God; and understood

A sov'reign being but a sov'reign good."

"Superstition taught the tyrant awe,

Then shar'd the tyranny, then lent it aid,

And Gods of conq'rors, slaves of subjects made:

She, 'midst the lightning's blaze and thunder's sound,

When rock'd the mountains, and when groan'd the ground,

She taught the weak to bend, the proud to pray,

To pow'r unseen, and mightier far than they:

She, from the rending earth and bursting skies,

Saw Gods deseend, and fiends infernal rise:

Here fix'd the dreadful, there the blest abodes;

Fear made her devils, and weak hope her gods;

Gods partial, changeful, passienate, unjust,

Whose attributes were rage, revenge, or lust;

Such as the souls of cowards might conceive,

And, form'd like tyrants, tyrants would believe.

[Page] Zeal, then, not charity, became the guide,

And hell was built on spite, and heav'n on pride.

Then sacred seem'd th' etherial vault no more;

Altars grew marble then, and reek'd with gore:

Then first the Flamen tasted living food;

Next his grim idol smeer'd with human blood;

With heav'n's own thunders shook the world below,

And play'd the god an engine on his foe."

From an attentive perusal of such liberal, enlightened writers as Pope, Locke, Hume, &c. who were not interested in forcing any unnatural systems upon mankind, whose only aim was the happiness of the human race, and from my own reflections, I have adopted the following creed, which I here submit to the impartial consideration of my fellow-citizens of all denominations.

1. I believe in one God, or first cause, wise, powerful and good; and too far above the influence of human actions to be affected by any thing that can be done on earth.

2. I believe in the equality of men by nature (though so different by accident) the universal power of conscience, and the unerring authority of natural reason.

3. I believe the whole duty of man is comprised in this one great republican principle—do just as you would be done unto.—My reasons for believing thus are, in the first place, that this first cause is wise and powerful beyond our conception, is clearly evinced in the wonderful formation and disposition of nature, exhibited in every thing that we have any perception of. That he is good, the whole creation proves; for we find nothing made but what is useful, beneficial, and conducive to the happiness of the whole. And that he is too far above the reach of human actions to be affected [Page]by any thing that can be done on earth, is inferred from nature, reason and experience: for the only idea that we can form of the Deity is, that he is a perfect, unchangeable being; and if we suppose that he so particularly notices the conduct of mankind as to be differently affected by their different actions, we must allow that he is an imperfect, changeable being, liable to be pleased or vexed at the mere will and pleasure of his creatures, and dependent upon the whim and caprice of man.

In the second place, it appears from the experience of mankind in all ages, that Nature, in the creation of man, acts impartially and equally; but leaves his talents, disposition, &c. to be regulated by mere accidental circumstances. That conscience has an universal power, is evident from the dislike and abhorrence, with which all mankind look upon actions that tend to the injury of society. And not to believe in the unerring authority of natural reason, would be to accuse the Deity of injustice for not creating us capable of distinguishing good from evil, and then punishing us for the evil we commit.

In the third place, that the whole duty of man is comprised in this one great republican principle, "Do as you would be done unto," has appeared so notorious to the world in all ages, that it has been universally agreed upon, as the unerring rule of action, and the basis of happiness: by the observing of which there can be neither oppression, deceit, or injustice of any kind. The duty of man is his interest; his interest is to make himself happy; and the surest and best way of doing this is to promote the prosperity of the whole.

[Page] Finally, that system of religion which contradicts itself, cannot be wholly true.—That which is not consistent with reason, or agreeable to the order of nature, must be false, as different from the will of the Deity, displayed in all his works:—And, that which tends to promote discord, pride and deceit, is prejudicial to society, and ought to be discountenanced and opposed by every good man.

REMARKS ON THE PUBLICATIONS WHICH HAVE APPEARED IN OPPOSITION TO THE AGE OF REASON.

[Page]

THE first attack, the author very wisely entitled "The Folly of Reason," which, as the title indicates, is a mere catch-penny performance, and was probably written from no other than mercenary views: argument and reason are rejected, and declamation and bare assertion substituted in their place.

With respect to the real merit of the piece, it would be an insult on common sense to suppose it worthy a serious consideration. But as the advocates of the doctrine it attempts to support are in such need of assistance, that they eagerly catch at every appearance of reason or argument in their favor, and deceive themselves with the idea of importance in that which really possesses none; some remarks, to remove the feeble impressions made by this pamphlet, and shew the absurdity [Page]of the principles it is intended to establish, may therefore not be unnecessary.

The ludicrous absurdity of the title, is so evident to every reader of common sense, that I shall not insult his understanding by commenting upon it. It is, however, very curious, that the author should attempt, by the power of his share of reason, to prove the folly and insufficiency of all reason. If reason, as he asserts, is weak and deceitful, it is what I never suspected before; though I must confess, he goes as far to prove it, not by argument, but example, as any writer I ever met with.

The "bigotry of a deist," which he mentions in his first sentence, is an entire new expression; and as it is an inconsistent one, it cannot apply to Mr. Paine or any one else. Bigotry signifies [...]anaticism, blind zeal or superstition; of which neither Mr. Paine, nor any other deist can be accused.

In the next sentence he observes, "To, doubt the truth of the scriptures at this day is truly alarming." I cannot see why it should be alarming at this or any other day, or that it is alarming or dangerous at all: for we know that there is now, and always have been, men of the greatest eminence, who have both doubted and denied the truth of them, and that without any evil consequences following. The author proceeds, "A jargon of logic [...] pla [...]ing upon the passions, not the reason of men, [...]onfess is calculated more to draw them from the practice of every moral duty, than to instilinto their minds either morality or brotherly love." A gar [...]n of l [...]gic, playing upon the passions, not the reason of men, never did o [...] could exi [...]t, but in his imagination —another newly coined expression.

[Page] As for the succeeding paragraphs, to page 11, they either mean nothing, or their meaning is unknown to any but the writer: we will therefore pass on to take notice of what he intends as arguments to prove the truth of the bible, from page 11 to 20. His first observation is, that "The marks and tokens whereby to judge at all times of the truth of a revelation, is the credibility of the person who brings it." On the contrary, the only marks to judge of the truth of a story are, the credibility and reasonableness of the matter, and the evidences brought to prove it.

He says, "That God would suffer a book that pretends to such marks of truth and authority, to make its way so long, &c. is not only highly impropable, but in the nature of the thing, plainly impossible." But I say it is both probable and possible. For has not the Turkish Alcoran, which the christians affirm to be false and wicked, existed for a time nearly as long as our bible; notwithstanding all the opposition it met with, and in spite of all the power and policy of christendom; so that it is now as fully believed and more uniformly adheared to than the christian faith?

He asserts, that "the bible contains nothing poor, mean, or superfluous." If, as he attempts to prove, reason is incompetent to determine the matter, he has no right to make the assertion. At any rate, he has no more authority for saying this, than I have for saying the contrary. And had the author been endowed with a common share of understanding, he would have been convinced that it contain [...] much poorness, meanness, and superfluity: that there are many parts of it highly indecent, perfectly obscene, and by their obscurity and unintelligibility truly superfluous. Many chapters in [Page]the bible, by being read in churches, have raised the blush of modesty on the cheek of innocence; shamed the virtuous matron, and disgusted every man of sense and decency. I could point out many passages which no reasonable parent would suffer his children to read, and which if contained in any other book, would banish it from polished society.

Page 20. "Now it is just the same in the choice of religion, as in the choice of a condition of life." In one sense, this is perfectly true: for of the great variety of conditions in human life, it is sometimes very difficult to determine which would be the best for an individual to adopt. And in religion, there being an almost innumerable number of different sects, each one declaring itself to be superior to all the rest; it is not easy to discover which we ought to embrace as the most excellent.—That we must be solely directed by reason in the choice of a condition in life, I believe no person will pretend to deny. If, then, as our author asserts, the cases are exactly similar, we must also be guided by reason in the choice of a religion.

WE now come to the "Examination of the Age of Reason, by Gilbert Wakefield, late Fellow of Jesus College; which, we are led to suppose, must be a powerful and unanswerable refutation of Mr. Paine's work, since the author received his education at Cambridge University, and in Jesus College; and if we may credit what he intimates in the motto, one who has "drank deep of the Pierian spring;" while Mr. Paine has only taken "shallow draughts."

[Page] He begins his "Examination" with an encomium on Mr. Paine and his writings, and, after allowing the Age of Reason that merit which he or any other new-fangled reformer cannot deprive it of, informs us what were his motives for combating so great a writer.

In pages 6 and 7, he observes, "the time is come when all our opinions must be tried at the touch-stone of severe enquiry; and, if the Jewish and Christian revelations cannot support themselves against the batteries of their assailants, in the estimation of capable and disinterested judges, the out-posts must be abandoned, and a retreat secured to the fortresses of Deism, already occupied by the patriarchs of old, and the illustrious philosophres of later times." I confess it is a proof of his candor when he calls the Jewish and Christian revelations only out-posts, while he acknowledges Deism as the fortress, occupied by the patriarchs of old, and the illustrious philosophers of later times; though it is not much in favor of the cause he is engaged in, but rather a good argument against it.

By the patriarchs of old, I understand the ancient fathers, or heads of families, tribes and nations, wise and experienced men, honorable and upright judges of the land. If Deism was the fortress which they occupied, as the most reasonable and just foundation on which to place their confidence, in opposition to the Jewish and Christian revelations, which were believed principally by the mean and ignorant—it is certainly a very strong reason why we should withhold our belief from it, at least untill we are convinced of its truth by our own reason; and if the illustrious philosophers of later times, who must be allowed to be the most learned, and unprejudiced of mankind; and who, it is presumed, [Page]would not adopt any system of such magnitude without the most mature deliberation and perfect satisfaction thereon; if these men preferred the principles of Deism to the doctrines or revealed religion, it is a consideration which ought to sink deep in every thinking mind, particularly when we reflect that these philosophers, free from the influence of vulgar prejudices and popular opinions, had the advantage of all the writings which preceded them, on which to found their opinion.

Mr. Wakefield seems to be confident that the Jewish and Christian revelations are pefectly consistent with each other, and that no person can acknowledge the authority of the one without believing in the other.— But if he will take the trouble of reading David Levy's answer to Dr. Priestly's letters to the Jews, he will find that they do not quite agree with each other; which would most certainly be the case, if they were both the words of an unchangeable God. In fact, Mr. Levy makes it appear evident, that the two testaments or covenants, are not only inconsistent with each other, but are so notoriously contradictory, that they cannot both be true. Our author himself has not by far so firm a belief in the old testament as in the new; indeed, some of the miraculous stories in it he discredits entirely; but according to Levy, he ought to believe every part of the old, and consider the new only as an appendix or confirmation of it.

He shortly after observes, "The creed of christian churches, which acknowledges Jesus Christ also to be God, and the Holy Ghost to be God, is a fundamental violation of all theology; a doctrine alike unknown to the Heathens and Jews, and contemplated with abhorrence by the followers of Moses from its first propagation [Page]to this very day: a doctrine, inconsistent with the plainest declarations of Christ himself and his apostles; a doctrine, which no human testimony whatever could render credible; a doctrine, which will happily prove a mill-stone to all political establishments of christianity." All this may be allowed to be true, excepting that it is a doctrine, inconsistent with the plainest declarations of the apostles; for we find the Godhead of Jesus Christ strictly agreeable to scripture, according to the writings of the apostles. Which belief is adopted as the foundation of almost every church in Christendom. He must then admit that article as consistent with scripture, or reject those passages which contain it: and if he rejects one part which he does not believe, why may not all the world likewise refuse their assent to those parts which they cannot comprehend or believe? Or has he the sole privilege of adopting and rejecting whatever portion of the bible he may think proper? The doctrine of the Trinity is certainly found in the christian revelation; and as it is a fundamental article of their faith, if false, it must overturn the whole system.

The next article of Mr. Paine's creed, our author proceeds, in pages 8 and 9, to corroborate and confirm, by some judicious and just remarks on civil privileges and titular distinctions; in which he contradicts the doctrine of that infinite inequality among mankind, predestinated from eternity, so often repeated in scripture, saps the foundation of the christian religion, and strengthens our disbelief of it.

The succeeding article of Mr. Paine's belief, or rather disbelief, he likewise confirms, and calls the Athamasian and Nicene creeds, a "monstrous farrago of ab [...]urdities and contradictions;" declaring that "some [Page]articles of the Apostles' creed, which may be found in the liturgies of established churches, are certainly not written in the book of life." In this we agree with him; although we do not suppose that he possesses that perfect and true knowledge of the doctrines contained in the scriptures, which can render him capable of removing all the doubts, reconciling all the contradictions, and explaining all the difficulties we find in it.

The professors of christianity, generally hold, that if we reject one part of the bible, we must the whole; for it is all of equal authority and importance: And if our author refuses his consent to the doctrines of the Trinity, predestination, &c. which it certainly contains, he must consequently doubt of the whole; or believe only such parts as his interest or opinion may incline him. To this privilege he is no more entitled than any other man. And if every one has a right, as he undoubtedly has, of not believing any part which appears doubtful to him, the whole bible, at least the doctrinal part of it, may appear false or dubious to different persons, and its credit be thereby entirely destroyed; leaving it a matter of indifference to every one to believe or disbelieve as he may think most to his advantage.

The remainder of this and the following page, contains farthen quotations from Mr. Paine, illustrated and enforced with much more good sense and liberality than is to be found in the remainder of the work; giving him credit for justness of remark, conciseness and pregnancy of expression, manly sense, dignified morality, and simple, but energetic language. Indeed, so far it [Page]seems to have been intended as the elougium of an enraptured friend, rather than the efforts of a violent and conceited adversary.

But he can confine himself to propriety and candor no longer; and we accordingly find him, in page 13, breaking out into the most pointed and ill-founded opposition. He asserts, that "the system of Jesus Christ, proceeds upon the supposition, that the way of God is open to every man alike; as might be proved by many passages of the christian scriptures." That this can be proved by them, in a certain degree, may be true; as they can be brought to prove, if their authority is good, almost any notion that ever entered the imagination of man. But we find them declaring, "that there is no other name under heaven, by which a man can be saved, but by Jesus Christ." How this leaves the way of God open to every man alike, I cannot conceive; for it expressly lays this down as the only way, and prohibits our ever enjoying spiritual, or even temporal happiness in any other.

In the next sentence, he adds, "What the Jews and Christians maintain in behalf of their religious systems is that their founders delivered to mankind rational sentiments of the divine nature, of his existence, and his providential government of the world." This statement, to use his own language, is frivolous and erroneous in the extreme: for their sentiments of the existence of the divine nature, and his government of the world, are not only very absurd and incons [...]tent with reason, but a great part of them couched in mysterious and unintelligible terms, and incomprehensible, on their own principles, by any who are not immediately inspired from Heaven. Indeed, they declare [Page]them to be beyond the reach of human reason; the wisdom of the world, say they, is foolishness to the doctrine of Christ, and the prophets.

With respect to his long string of indubitable positions, as he calls them, concerning the antiquity and excellence of the writings of the Jews, little need be said. For we cannot be convinced that they were written at the times and by the persons which they are said to be. The book of Job, for instance, one of the best in the old testament, is attributed by divines to various authors; some suppose Moses wrote it, while he tended his father-in-law's sheep in the land of Midian; others imagine it to be the work of Job himself; and others think it was witten by Elihu the Buzite; while no person can be certain that it was the production of either. And how can he inform us, that the Jewish writers did not profit by the works of the Greek and Roman moralists, instead of the contrary? or in short, whether the christian faith was not, according to Mr. Paine (which in all probability is the case) built with the same materials, and founded upon the ruins of the ancient system of heathen mythology?

Mr. Paine's observations on the word revelation, our critic says, in page 16, are inacurate, sallacious and inconclusive; and proceeds to prove his assersion by what he calls "a rational and unexceptionable representation of the point in question."

Were the Jews at that time, or is he at present, fully acquainted with all the laws and operations of nature? Is he possessed of that infinite wisdom which comprehends every property, power and quality of the whole creation? Can his purblind eye, at one view, discern [Page]all the improvements and discoveries that may hereafter be made in every art and science? If so, then is he capable of determining what are supernatural proofs of a revelation. But, says he, "Whether such a display were in reality made in the case before us, is not now the question." Why is it not? If a display of supernatural agency was necessary to prove the authority of the Jewish revelation, why is it not likewise to the christian? For if there was an absolute necessity for this display to support the doctrine of Moses; then without that agency it was not entitled to belief. Consequently, if the christian faith was not attended by something supernatural, mankind could not be expected to believe it. And if there was once a necessity for miracles to confirm the doctrine of the gospel, I can see no reason why there is not at the present time. We find, in the scriptures, that when Jesus sent out his disciples to preach the gospel to the world, he gave them power to raise the dead, heal the sick, cast out devils, and cure the blind, deaf and dumb, to convince mankind of the truth of their doctrines. But we see nothing of the kind in the ministers of the gospel (at this day) to prove their divine mission: though in the bible the doctrine with its proofs are related as inseparably connected together. And if they preach it without exhibiting its proofs, how can we believe them? We must conclude that the preacher and his doctrine are both without authority; as hearsay is all the evidence we have of their authenticity. Indeed, as in the early ages of christianity, we hear of frequent instances of miracles being performed by low, illiterate persons, by which they have obtained the honorable appellation of saints, so among the most ignorant and superstitious nations of the present [Page]sent age, the reli [...]s of some of these deified saints are said to perform wonderful cures, and other supernatural feats. Whether the miracles wrought by the former, are entitled to a greater degree of credit than those performed by the latter, every one can judge for himself. It is worthy of note, however, that these miraculous performances, whenever exhibited in support of any other cause, are called by christians, artificial deceptions or diabolical cheats.

In answer to Mr. Paine's observation, that "visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice," Mr. Wakefield bluntly asserts, "Nothing in reality can be more feeble and inefficient than this objection."

That for the sins of fathers their children, whether innocent or guilty, should suffer punishment, is a principle contrary to reason, justice, and the laws of every well governed nation. It is a maxim of moral polity, that it is better that an hundred guilty should escape, than one innocent should suffer: but according to the foregoing doctrine, an indiscriminate punishment falls alike upon the innocent and the guilty.

The difficulties concerning the immaculate conception of Jesus, our author "concedes to the Deist, for his own part, in all their force, as pertinent in themselves, and of serious significancy to those whom they may [...]ncern. This, says he, constitutes no essential article of my creed, [...]d certainly rests on much weaker evidence than any other important fact of all the gospels." The evidence of the divine authority of the scriptures, I always thought was the same for one part as for any other: at any rate, I cannot see that it is [Page]weaker in this instance than any where else; and should suppose, if there was any difference, it should be in favor of this particular circumstance; as the prophets, who, it is said, so often foretold his coming, mentioned as one of the most important proofs of his authority, that "a virgin should conceive and bear a son."

But I certainly agree with our author in believing the story not sufficiently authenticated to be entitled to a place in my creed. At the same time, as we have the same evidence for this that we have for every other part of the bible, viz. hearsay; it is full as worthy of belief as any other miraculous story related in it.

Of Mr. Paine's remarks on the character of Jesus Christ, and the morality which he preached, he says, (page 20) "The former part is excellent; the latter was never surpassed in ignorance and absurdity." He did not consider his examination in the light that many do, or he would not have made this last assertion.

"To say, moreover, of the Christian system merely, that it has not been exceeded by any system ancient or modern, is such a misconception as candor will choose to impute, not to malignant disparagement, but to an ignorance rather of the philosophical systems of antiquity, and the comparative merits of evangelical morality."

Our author wishes to make it appear, that to say merely that it has not been exceeded by any, he considers as a malignant disparagement of a system, which in his own opinion is a jumble of truth, falshood, purity and absurdity: for in the very preceding page he will not admit one of its fundamental doctrines into his [Page]creed. Or he means that it is an ignoront disparagement of the philosophical systems of antiquity, to suppose the christian system equal to them; the ambiguous manner in which he expresses himself rendering it uncertain what his real meaning is.

Our author's next sentence, page 21, contains a caution, to avoid that very line of conduct which he has himself so fully practised. "I wish those heavenly maxims of Solon and the son of Sirach, know thyself, and understand first, and then rebuke; were more deeply impressed on the hearts and memories of us all."

"Jesus Christ wrote no account of himself," says Mr. Paine; to which our author replies, "to this argument against the resurrection of Jesus, various [...]nswers might be instituted: but I shall confine myself to one only, which appears to my mind incapable of confutation upon any principle of philosophy or experience: and will indeed admit of no dispute, but upon positions subversive of all historical testimony whatsoever, and introductory of universal scepticism."

"The numerous circumstances interspersed through the gospel narratives and in the acts of the apostles, appertaining to the geography of countries, the positions of rivers, towns and cities, &c. &c. with a vast multiplicity of detached occurrences and facts, not necessary to be specified at large, challenge (to speak with moderation) as large a portion of credibility to th [...]se books, considered in the light of historical testimonies, as can be claimed for any writings whatever, received as genuine, and equally ancient and multi [...]a [...]ion. Now no mean presumption arises in favor of the most extraordinary transactions also, blended in the same texture [Page]of narrative by history of so credible a character with respect to the rest of their relations: but, when these extraordinary facts are found to have so intimate an incorporation with the common and unsuspicious occurrences of these histories so as to admit of no detachment, but to stand or fall with the main body of these compositions; I cannot see how any historical probability of the authenticity of these extraordinary events can rise higher than in such an instance."

This is one of the most absurd and ridiculous arguments that could possibly enter the imagination of man. Because the framers of a story, to give it the appearance of probability, have artfully interspersed through the whole some historical and geographical facts, which cannot be controverted; our author pretends that every part is equally entitled to our fullest belief. Suppose that Mr. Paine had asserted, that he was in Luxembourg, Paris, on the 27th of January, 1794, as he certainly was; mentioning several important circumstances that occured there at that time; and conclude with declaring that an angel appeared to him, took the pen from his hand, and wrote every word of the Age of Reason. This story then, according to Mr. Wakefield's reasoning, would be undoubtedly true: the miraculous part of it would admit of no detachment, but must stand or fall with the main body of the relation; and as the historical and geographical facts could not be denied, the whole must be established as divine and infallible truth. If this be just reasoning, it is what was never known before; and our author may congratulate himself on the honor of a discovery of the highest consequence to the literary and thinking world: for at this rate, the Arabian Night's entertainment, [Page]Robinson Crusoe, and every tale or novel in being, would be confirmed as indubitable realities.

But he proceeds to "unfold the purport of this reasoning," by informing us, at great length, that many disciples suffered martyrdom in desence of what they declared they had seen and heard. And what does it all amount to? Have not multitudes of Jews, Mahometans, and every other national sect on earth, suffered martyrdom with as much zeal and constancy as ever the apostles or any other christians did? That they were incapable of being deceived respecting the angels, miracles, or wonders which they might suppose they saw and heard, no person will contend. Animal magnetism, pretended ghosts and witches, not to mention whole nations being deceived by false Christs, prophetic gypsies, and wonder-working conjurers, are sufficient to shew the extent to which the human mind may be imposed upon.

To Mr. Paine's observations on the demonstration of the resurrection, our author makes this remark; "Not a thousandth part of the people in Great-Britain saw Lunardi go up from the Art [...]lery Ground in a balloon; but the superior impulse to any possible action of my mind, who saw him, in consequence of that event, does not exceed the impulse to a similar action on the mind of another who did not see him, by an evancscent infinitesimal of efficacy." The meaning of which I suppose to be, that as the people of Great-Britain believed in the assension of Lunardi, though they did not see him go up; so all mankind should believe in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ, though they were not eye-witnesses of the fact. But the cases are not at all s [...]ilar: the one is a thing possible and veprobable; [Page]but the other is impossible. The generality of people in Great-Britain and every other country, have seen globes of cloth, paper, or something else of the nature of a balloon, ascend; which would convince them that the thing was possible, and therefore entitled to some degree of credibility. Even the most ignorant cook, that sees a potlid raised by the steam of boiling water, must be convinced of the probability of the fact. Whereas no man living ever faw a person rise from perfect death, fly in the air, or any thing of the kind ever performed; and therefore cannot believe the story without ocular conviction of its truth. He next takes much pains to convince us, that the Jews were at that time a vicious and corrupt people; and not at all likely to believe in the authority and doctrines of Jesus; even so depraved that it would have been next to a miracle if they had accepted his mission. He labours hard to establish this proposition, by compairing Mr. Paine and his rights of man to Jesus and his preaching; both suffering, one in effigy, the other in reality, by the very people for whose happiness they were laboring. Observing, "upon the whole, we find no difficulty in declaring, that what has astonished Mr. Paine so long, should astonish him no longer; as no species of reasoning is more common and more legitimate, than that which proves the truth of a circumstance from the evidence of corrupt and interested witnesses, who assert it is false." If Mr. Wakefield can clearly prove to us, that the Jews were at that time so corrupt and interested that few, very few, and those mean and ignorant, were prevailed upon to believe a doctrine, which, though opposed and persecuted by the nation in general, was still undoubtedly true, and confirmed by many real miracles; [Page]if he can convince us of this, he may then hold the rejection of the gospel by the Jews as no good argument against its reality. But how is he to do this? We have only his hardy assersion for it; and it [...]ould be the height of absurdity to let that outweigh or destroy the credibility of a whole nation.

Mr. Paine next appears to our author, in page 32, in his observations on the story of the devil and his angels, as a tumid and hypertragical declaimer; although he cannot avoid agreeing with him on the subject, which he likewise illustrates by several learned and (in his opinion) conclusive remarks. But it seems, before he had finished his paragraph, that he perceived he was confirming instead of confuting his antagonist. He therefore, recollecting which side of the question he had engaged to support, exclaims, "Alas! our deist fancied himself in stout combat with genuine christianity, whilst he was buffeting a mere phantum of ignorance and superstition! So easy is declamation against folly!"

"These books, beginning with Genesis, and ending with Revelations (which, by the bye, is a book of riddles, that requires a revelation to explain it) are, we are told, the word of God," says Mr. Paine; to which our author replies,

"The vindicator, who occupies himself in the confutation of such unsupported and dogmatical assertions, is not much more excusable than the ignoramus, who has the audacity to produce them." Here, because he has no othe [...] subterfuge at hand, he instantly converts the "sagacious, plain, sensible Thomas Paine" into an audacious ignoramus, and impudently endeavors to expose the absurdity of his calling the Apocrypha the [Page]word of God, when it is evident that he intended no such thing; for he says expressly, that they were voted to be doubtful. What a miserable situation must our redoubtable champion be in, when he is under the wretched necessity of attacking theideal spectres of his ownimagination, instead of the real and substantial arguments of his opponent. We find also, that he passes over the most important and influential parts of Mr. Paine's reasoning, and dwells upon those only which he fondly imagines he can oppose or ridicule, with at least some appearance of confidence and success.

Mr. Paine says, "When the church mythologists established their system, they collected all the writings they could find, and managed them as they pleased."

This, Mr. Wakefield boldly asserts, page 36, "is an undigested and inaccurate statement of the case;" and after giving us several more of his assertions and opinions, comes off exultingly with, "What need of circumstantial detail in repelling the objections of men, who really knew just nothing of the subject, and satisfy their reason and philosophy by peremptory asseveration only, unilluminated by one single ray of information on the topic in dispute?" By such pitiful evasions, such unsounded insinuations, and such impertinent questions, is our profound author to "vindicate his saith in christianity upon principles truly rational and unambiguously explicit, or relinquish it altogether." He continues, "It were most easy to enlarge on this subject; but more has been said already, than such desultory and unsubstantiated allegations have any reason to expect:" Yes, truly; and more than any thing else could have [Page]reason toexpect, from any but the most conceited pedant; and more than can possibly reflect the least degree of credit on either his cause, his heart, or his head. "And I shall only add, from a multitude of cogent instances, with reference to one branch of evidence of the first moment, that a comparison of the 28th chapter of Deutoronomy caly, with the subsequent and present state of the Israelitish nation, must flash conviction, I should think, upon any mind, not totally prejudiced and perverted, in favor of the prophetical pretensions of the scriptures: for that the book of Dueteronomy was composed posterior to those events, what effrontery even of unlearned deism, if it hazard the assertion, will undertake to prove?" It may perhaps be as hard to prove that it was written posterior to those events, as the contrary. But the more time that elapses since the writing of it, renders the probability of its not coming to us unchanged and mistranslated, the greater. And at any rate, it cannot be held up as an argument in favor of the divine authority of the new testament: for by the appearance of Christ on earth, we are told, the law, by which these curses were entailed on the Jews, was abolished. Indeed it reduces that nation to a most unhappy dilemma: for if they do not continue to perform the injunctions of this law, all the curses of Pardora's box are heaped on their devoted heads; and if they do not embrace the doctrines of the gospel, that repeals this law, they are to be damned to all eternity. These sufferings too, when sustained by the Jews for an adhereance to their saith, were the just judgments of God, for disobedience as prophesied in the scriptures; but when born by the christians, were cruel and unjust [Page]persecutions, instigated by the devil, in opposition to the divine will.

Our author next attacks Mr. Paine's definition of the word revelation, with as much courage and fierceness as though he would annihilate the whole system of deism with one stroke. He calls it "not only the essence, but the quintessence, of all weakness and absurdity:" at the same time tacitly acknowledging it to be just, and answering all the purpose for which it was intended; by the following confession, "The greater part of the bible-history contains simply a narrative of the political occurrences, the Jews; and the transactions recorded are, therefore, to be considered in the same light with those of all other histories; namely, as aggravated and disguised in a thousand instances by passing through the mediam of national partiality."

"Aggravated and disguised in a thousand instances!" A very candid and important confession, Mr. Wakefield; and if you can only point out to us which these thousand instances are, we will perhaps allow the remainder a little more credit than we can the whole, before we are satisfied in that particular.

His next acknowledgment is, "I agree with Thomas Paine, that the account of the creation, with which the book of Cenesis opens, has all the appearance of being a tradition, which the Israelites had among them before they came into Egypt; and after their departure from that country, they put it at the head of their history, without telling, as it is most probable that they did not know, how they came by it." Another very important concession. And if the scripture account of the creation, is nothing more than a tradition (and all nations have their disserent traditions) what becomes [Page]comes of the credibility of the story of original sin, Adam's damning all mankind by eating an apple, &c? It must certainly fall to the ground, together with the necessity of a mediator to repair the loss, and every other doctrine founded on this tradition.

"But, says he, what majesty of sentiment, what a dignified simplicity of expression, characterizes the Mosaic account of the creation of the world!" In the name of common sense, what has majesty of sentiment, or dignified simplicity of expression to do with the truth or falshood of a story? Truth is truth, without the assistance of artificial support: and all the majestic sentiments, and dignified expressions that were ever invented, cannot make a false story true.

"To all that occurs comprehending any objections to the Jewish institution, a very satisfactory answer has, if I mistake not, been already given." Yes, truly: if no other answer can be found, what has been already given, is sufficient to satisfy us of the propriety of the objections.

Mr. Paine says, "why it has been called the Mosaic acconnt of the creation, I am at a loss to conceive.— Moses, I believe, was too good a judge of such subjects to put his name to that account. He had been educated among the Egyptians, who were a people as well skilled in science, and particularly in astronomy, as any people of their day." To which Mr. W. answers: "All this may be literally true: but a palpable [...]truth is implied in it; that the Egyptians were really a learned and scientific people: whereas their [...] stronomy was just nothing at all. If not, produce me your youchers to this fact, from existing [Page]monuments or ancient testimony." To what purpose is it whether the Egyptians were really at that time a learned people or not? How can the discussion of this subject affect the point in question? and yet our author takes up near two pages in endeavoring to prove this uninteresting and impertinent assertion; or rather to display his extraordinary knowledge of ancient history.

Mr. Paine observes, "If we permit ourselves to conceive right ideas of things, we must necessarily affix the idea, not only of unchangeableness, but of the utter impossibility of any change taking place, by any means or accident whatever, in that which we would honor with the name of the word of God; and therefore the word of God cannot exist in any written or human language."

To which our author replies, first, by asking "What can be more frivolous, or unworthy of a man of sense?" then giving us his ideas of a revelation, and finally by endeavoring to prove that we believe the Jewish and christian revelations as fully as we do that Michael Angelo, planned the fabric of St. Peter's at Rome, and Sir Christopher Wren, that of St. Paul's in London.

Well may we ask, "What can be more frivolous, and unworthy a man of sense?" The comparison here introduced, is as fallacious and improper as can possibly be conceived. For whoever sees the fabries of St. Peter's and St. Paul's, must be convinced, that they were planned by Michael Angelo, Christopher Wren, or some other persons; as there is no other way by which they possibly could have been in existence; and we likewise see, that fabries are planned every day. But if Mr. Wakefield can convince us, that there was no [Page]other way than a revelation from heaven by which the Jewish and Christian systems of religion could have been in existence; and that such revelations are common, and occur every day; then will we allow the comparison to be just, and the inferences he draws from it reasonable. As this is impossible, we must conclude, that the cases are entirely dissimilar, the similitude false, and the whole argument absurd and inconclusive.

On Mr. Paine's observing, "The event that served more than any other to break the first link in this long chain of despotic ignorance, is that known by the name of the reformation of Luther." Mr. Wakefield advances as an argument, "Surely it forms no mean presumption in favor of the reasonableness of revelation, that the restoration of science and the rectification of religion, should be congenial and contemporary; that the beams of knowledge should dispel the damps and darkness of ignorant superstition, but contribute illumination and vigour to the sincere gospel of Jesus Christ."

Whether the reformation of science did really contribute illumination and vigour to the gospel of Jesus Christ, is a point not clearly established; and whether, if a complete and unlimited restoration of science had taken place, the christian system would not have been wholly rejected, might be insisted on, with much more reason than many of his assertions. But one plain, undeniable position, of the same nature with our author's, will sufficiently overbalance the weight of his argument: as we may assert, with equal confidence, that it is no mean presumption in favor of the reasonableness of deism, and the unreasonableness of divine revelation, [Page]that the restoration of civil and religious liberty, and the rejection of all revealed religion, in France, should be congenial and contemporary; that the beams of knowledge should dispel the damps and darkness of ignorant superstition and hereditary despotism, but add illumination, vigour and confirmation, to the sincere and unerring religion of nature, and revive the Age of Reason and deism.

The most distinguislied mathematicians (mathematics, according to the latter part of this same paragraph, has no connection with religion: what does it signify, then, that distinguished mathematicians believe the christian revelation ?) and philosophers of our own country, Baron, Boyle, Newton, Locke, Barrow and Hartley, have been the firmest believers of the christian revelation." To which may be opposed as many distinguished names on the other side of the question: The greatest philosophers, and most virtuous of their country, Voltaire, Rousseau, Pope, Bolinbroke, Hume, Franklin and Paine, have been the firmest disbelievers of the christian revelation.

We will here further illustrate the absurdity of Mr. W's reasoning, in his strictures upon Mr. P's remanksupon revelation. Mr. P. endeavors to prove that "the historical and annectdotal part of the bible, which is almost the whole of it, is not within the meaning and compass of the word revelation, and therefore is not the word of God." He observes, "Revelation is a communication of something, which the person, to whom that thing is revealed, did not know before. For if I have done a thing, or seen it done, it needs no revelation to tell me I have done it, or seen it, nor to enable me to tell it, or to write it." To which Mr. W. replies, "so then, not only the professors of philosophy at the highest places of education, [Page]but every dame, that teaches the born-book in a country village, communicates, it seems, a revelation!" This remark is certainly beneath the sense of Mr. Wakefield, if I relate what I have done, or seen done, it is no revelation, it requires no immediate inspiration from heaven to enable me to tell it.

Mr. Paine's dissmission is clear and pertinent; and to predend that it necessarily follows from his position that every thing told to a person, which he did not know before, is a revelation, is the height of sophistry. Nothing but a puerile habit of syllogistic disputation (which Mr. Wakefield probably acquired at Jesus' College) could have betrayed him into so weak an argument. It is not unlike the fyllogism of the mouse and cheese, noticed by Senea. "Two legged animals eat cheese, a mouse is not a two legged animal, therefore a mouse does not eat cheese." "Away with these childish follies!"

Mr. Paine makes some very just remarks upon the impropriety of obliging boys, at this day, to waste their genius and time in delving over the dear languages; observing that the reason which once operated in favor of these studies now cease to exist, since all the ancient authors of note are translated into modern languages; which have received every improvement necessary to embellish them. To which Mr. W. makes the following clownish reply, "all have not that sensibility of perception, and that elegance of taste, which is necessary to a relish of the inimitable beauties of ancient composition. I may be, for example, a delicate bird, delighted in strawberries and the choicest fruits—Thomas Paine, a crow; who prefers a feast on carrion and putressence." For shame, Mr. Wakefield, did you learn to make such [Page]comparisons at Jesus' College! Mr. Paine then because he prefers reading modern authors, and the translation of the ancients, in modern languages, is a crow, and likes to feast on matter which that bird is peculiarly fond of. While yourself who are delighted with treasuring up Greek and Hebrew, in order to astonish your parishioners with your vast learning, and to convince them of your divine mission, are to be sure a very delicate bird indeed. You pay a very great compliment to the ancients at the expence of the moderns; and, perhaps, when some part of your composition in this reply are taken into consideration with a considerable degree of propriety.

With respect to the beauties of composition, it is the height of absurdity to suppose that a person, not thoroughly versed in ancient languages (which is rarely the case) can discover so many beauties in the original, as would be communicated to him in a good translation. Besides is it prudent to be so prodigal of time, since human life is reduced to so short a period, as to spend seven or eight years in searching for beauties in dead languages? The idea is opposed to the reason of the present age.

His last observation on his opponent is, "Mr. Paine descants with a tolerable share of merriment, in the conclusion of his pamphlet, respecting Jonah and the Whale, which my stomach also feels an equal indisposition to ingurgitate." O what blasphemy! to disbelieve a plan, unequivocal, and uncontradicted scripture account, wrote by the prophet himself, who centainly must have been the best competent judge of the affair! To doubt the word of an inspired prophet! Why, Mr. Wakefield, you may as well suspect the truth of every part of the bible, which you find not confirmed by the [Page]testimony of ancient profane history and your own weak fallible reason.

"It is not unlike a tale that I lately heard, which many will think not inferior to that before us in symptoms of credibility. A negro boy falls overboard, and is swallowed by a shark; which though is immediately taken, and carefully opened, by the sailorse. But how great was their admiration and delight to discover little Caesar, perched on a tubercle of the purtenance, dispatching his bread and cheese in perfect composure and safety." Blasphemy, horrid blasphemy again! Not content with flatly denying the authority of the most holy scriptures, he here even ridicules them, and tells us an evident barefaced fiction, intimating that it is full as worthy of credit as the story of Jonah and the Whale!!

This last expression, perched on a tubercle of the purtenance, with his "evanscent infinitesimal of efficacy," and several others, independent of the general complection of the work, and his latin notes, so industriously interspersed through it; must certainly convince us, that he is, without sufficient sense to conceal, or judgment to disguise it, a vain, conceited, boasting pedant; not attending so much to argument as to pomposity, truth as to affected sublimity, or reason as to sophistry and declamation.

"I have now, says he, finished my remarks on this pamphlet of Thomas Paine; which has been extended thus far, more in deference to the deserved celebrity of the name, than the powers of the disputant; nor am I conscious to myself of eluding any difficulty, or shrinking from the terrors of a single argument, in the course of this examination. To the best of my ability, a con [...]ise [Page]answer to every objection (excepting some that we perfectly agreed in, he should have said) not completely puerile, has been specifically given, or is virtually included in the course of these observations."

This opinion, with which he seems to be so highly pleased, as it is probable that few will coincide with him in, we leave to his quiet and happy enjoyment. And, after wishing him better motives, and a better cause for the display of his zeal; commending him for his generous and godlike sentiment of "love, peace and liberty, without distinction, to the whole human race;" and returning him thanks for the assistance he has rendered the cause of reason and justice; we bid Mr. Wakefield, the enthusiastic disciple of [...]

THE AGE OF INFIDELITY, BY A LAYMAN, IS THE NEXT IN THE ORDER OF ATTACK AGAINST THE FATAL BLOW TO FANATICISM AND PRIESTCRAFT, THE AGE OF REASON.

[Page]

FROM the polemic abilities of this writer, and his thorough knowledge of all the arguments for and against the tenets he professes, we are inclined to believe that he here appears under false colours, being really a gentleman of the cloth: perhaps some may think a pious fraud in this case justifiable; we only suggest it to put the reader on his guard against the artful reasoning of a person who may think himself interested in supporting the present impositions.

As many of the errors in this paraphlet have been animadverted upon in our reply to Mr. Wakefield, and as a minute examination of it would far exceed our intended limits, we shall only notice the most prominent absurdities that appear on a cursary review of the work.

[Page] The author commences thus, "In an age like this, it is no wonder that infidelity has its champions. The genuine gospel of Christ is a system too pure and divine to meet the cordial approbation of men of vicious hearts and corrupt principles; and such have hitherto composed the majority of mankind."

With respect to the morality which Christ preached, infidels, or the disbelievers in revelation, acknowledge its purity, and observe it often more scrupulously, than those who make so great pretentions to piety. But they contend that it required no divine nature to teach such doctrine, as many, whom christians call heathens, have taught and practised the same.

And they conceive that there can be neither virtue nor vice, in believing or disbelieving any particular speculative opinion. Virtue and vice consist in actions, and not in creeds.

The latter part of the passage cited above, contains a severe censure upon the majority of mankind, which they by no means merit. Every one who is the least conversant in society, and will credit his own experience, instead of the gloomy lessons of his nurse; and those who are interested to deceive him, will attest to the fallacy and illiberality of this aspersion. From constantly viewing human nature upon the dark side, from hearing it continually fulminated from the pulpit, that man is prone to evil, as the sparks sly upward, has arisen this illfounded opinion.

We have been taught to believe that mankind were by nature depraved, at enmity with God and one another, and if it were in their power would hurl the omnipotent from his throne.

[Page] How ungenerous, how wicked the deception! meet your fellow creature in any part of the globe, and (religious and political prejudices apart) he greets you as his brother, takes part in your sufferings, and sooths your afflictions.

To false systems of education, and not to evil dispositions in human nature, are owing the calamities of mankind. The doctrine of total depravity has perhaps a greater tendency to viciate the morals of mankind than any sentiment that has ever been propagated. Tell a man that you know him to be a rogue, and you inspire him with a propensity to cheat you.

"To compare," says the Layman, "the propagation of Mahomet's system with that of Judaism or christianity, is weak and unjust in the extreme. Mahomet wrought no miracles, delivered no predictions: but, on the contrary, founded his dominion on the sword. There is therefore no comparison."

This is the assertion of a bigoted christian; let us hear what the votaries of Mahomet have to say on the other side of the question. "They affirm that he fed the hungry, cured the sick, and raised the dead, and that both animate and inanimate nature were equally subject to the apostle of God. A mysterious animal, the Borak, conveyed him from the temple of Mecca to that of Jerusalem: with his companion Gabriel, he successively ascended the seven heavens and received and repaid the salutations of the patriarchs, the prophets, and the angels, in their respective mansions. Beyond the seventh heavens, Mahomet alone was permitted to proceed; he passed the veil of unity, approached within two bow-shots of the throne, and felt a cold that pierced him to the heart, when his shoulder was touched [Page]by the hand of God. After this familiar though important conversation, he again descended to Jerusalom, remounted the Borak, and returned to Mecca." *

These miracles a musulman believes with as much assurance, as a Jew, or christian, the extraordinary exploits related in the old and new testament. And why not with the same colour of reason? "In all religions the life of the founder supplies the silence of his written revelation: the sayings of Mahomet were so many lessons of truth; his actions so many examples of virtue.

"The inspiration of the Hebrew prophets, of the apostles and evangelists of Christ, might not be incompatible with the exercise of their reason and memory; and the diversity of their genius is strongly marked in the style and composition of the books of the old and new testament. But Mahomet was content with a character, more humble, yet more sublime, of a simple editor: the substance of the Koran, according to himself or his disciples, is uncreated and eternal; subsis [...]ing in the essence of the deity, inscribed with a pen of light on the table of his everlasting decrees. A paper copy in a volume of silk and gems, was brought down to the lowest heaven by the Angel Gabriel, who, under the Jewish economy, had indeed been dispatched on the most important errands; and this trusty messenger successively revealed the chapters and verses to the Arabian prophet."

Since Mr. Layman has introduced Mahomet, we will make a brief statement of the causes which led to his [Page]establishment; and take notice of some of the most important creeds and precepts enjoined in the Koran; by which we shall be enabled to judge whether that religion and it; founder have merited all the abuse which has been so liberally bestowed upon them by christian writers. This we shall do by citing several detached passages from an author of undoubted respectability.

"It is the boast of the Jewish apologists, that while the learned nations of antiquity were deluded by the fables of polytheism, their simple ancestors of Palestine preserved the knowledge and worship of the true God. The moral attributes of Jehovah may not easily be reconciled with the standard of human virtue: his metaphysical qualities are darkly expressed; but each page of the Pentateuch and the Prophets is an evidence of his power: the unity of his name is inscribed on the first table of the law; and his sanctuary was never defiled by any visible image of the invisible essence. After the ruin of the temple, the faith of the Hebrew exiles was purified, fixed, and enlightened, by the spiritual devotion of the synagogue. But the children of Israel had ceased to be a people; and the religions of the world were guilty, at least in the eyes of the prophet, of giving sons, or daughters, or companions, to the supreme God. In the rude idolatry of the Arabs, the crime is manifest and audacious: the Sabians are poorly excused by the pre-eminence of the first p [...] net, or intelligence in their celestial hierarchy; and in the Magian system the conflict of the two principles betrays the imperfection of the conqueror. The christians of the seventh century had insensibly relapsed into a semblance of paganism; their public and private [Page]vows were addressed to the relics and images that disgraced the temples of the East: the throne of the Almighty was darkened by a cloud of martyrs, and saints, and angels, the objects of popular veneration; and the Collyridian heretics, who flourished in the fruitful soil of Arabia, invested the Virgin Mary with the name and honors of a goddess. The mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation appear to contradict the principle of the divine unity. In their obvious fense, they introduce three equal Deities, and transform the man Jesus into the substance of the son of God: an orthodox commentary will satisfy only a believing mind; intemperate curiosity and zeal had torn the veil of the sanctuary; and each of the Oriental sects was eager to confess that all except themselves, deserved the reproach of idolatry and polytheism. The creed of Mahomet is free from suspicion or ambiguity; and the Koran is a glorious testimony to the unity of God. The prophet of Mecca rejected the worship of idols and men, of stars and planets, on the rational principle that whatever rises must set, that whatever is born must die, that whatever is corruptible must decay and perish. In the author of the universe, his rational enthusiasm confessed and adored an infinite and eternal being, without form or place, without issue or similitude, present to our most secret thoughts, existing by the necessity of his own nature, and deriving from himself all moral and intellectual perfection. These sublime truths, thus anounced in the language of the prophet, are firmly held by his disciples, and defined with metaphysical precision by the interpreters of the Koran. A philosophic theist might subscribe the popular [Page]creed of the Mahometans: a creed too sublime perhaps for our present faculties.

"The first principle of reason and revelation was confirmed by the voice of Mahomet: his proselytes, from India to Morocco, are distinguished by the name of Unitarians; and the danger of idolatry has been prevented by the interdiction of images.

"The God of nature has written his existence on all his works, and his law in the heart of man. To restore the knowledge of the one and the practice of the other, has been the real or pretended aim of the prophets of every age: the liberality of Mahometallowed to his predecessors the same credit which he claimed for himself; and the chain of inspiration was pro [...]onged from the fall of Adam to the promulgation of the Koran. During that period, some rays of prophetic light had been imparted to one hundred and twenty-four thousand of the elect, discriminated by their respective measure of virtue and grace; three hundred and thirteen apostles were sent with a special commission to recal their country from idolatry and vice; one hundred and four volumes have been dictated by the holy spirit; and six legislators of transcendent brightness have announced to mankind the six successive revelations of various rites, but of one immutable religion.

"During six hundred years the gospel was the way of truth and salvation; but the christians insensibly forgot both the laws and the example of their founder; and Mahomet was instructed by the Gnostics to accuse the church, as well as the synagogue, of corrupting the integrity of the sacred text. The piety of Moses and of Christ rejoiced in the assurance of a future prophet, [Page]more illustrious than themselves: the evangelic promise of the Paraclete or. Holy Ghost, was prefigured in the name, and accomplished in the person of Mahomet, the greatest and the last of the apostles of God.

"The polytheist is oppressed and distracted by the variety of superstition: a thousand rights of Egyptian origin were interwoven with the essence of the Mosaic law: and the spirit of the gospel had evaporated in the pageantry of the church. The prophet of Mecca was tempted by prejudice, or policy, or patriotism, to sanctify the rites of the Arabians, and the custom of visiting the holy stone of the Caaba. But the precepts of Mahomet himself inculcate a more simple and rational piety: prayer, fasting, and alms, are the religious duties of a musulman; and he is encouraged to hope, that prayer will carry him half way to God, fasting will bring him to the door of his palace, and alms will gain him admittance.

"Cleanliness is the key of prayer: the frequent lustration of the hands, the face, and the body, which was practised of old by the Arabs, is solemnly enjoined by the Koran.

"Every spot for the service of God is equally pure: the Mahometans indifferently pray in their chamber or in the street. As a distinction from the Jews and christians, the Friday in each week is set apart for the useful institution of public worship: the people are assembled in the mosch and the imam: some respectable elder ascends the pulpit, to begin the prayer and pronounce the sermon. But the Mahometan religion is destitute of priesthood or sacrifice; and the independent spirit of fanaticism looks down with contempt on the [Page]ministers and the slaves of superstition. The voluntary penance of the ascetics, the torment and glory of their lives, was odious to a prophet who censured in his companions a rash vow of abstaining from flesh, and women, and sleep; and firmly declared, that he would suffer no monks in his religion.

"The interdiction of wine, peculiar to some orders of priests or hermits, is converted by Mahomet alone into a positive and general law; and a considerable portion of the globe has abjured, at his command, the use of that salutary, though dangerous liquor. These painful restraints are, doubtless, infringed by the libertine and eluded by the hypocrite; but the legislator, by whom they are enacted, cannot surely be accused of alluring his proselytes by the indulgence of their sensual appetites. The charity of the Mahometans descends to the animal creation; and the Koran repeatedly inculcates, not as a merit, but as a strict and indispensable duty, the relief of the indigent and unfortunate. Mahomet, perhaps, is the only lawgiver who has defined the precise measure of charity: the standard may vary with the degree and nature of property, as it consists either in money, in corn or cattle, in fruits or merchandise; but the musulman does not accomplish the law, unless he bestows a tenth of his revenue; and if his conscience accuses him of fraud or extortion, the tenth, under the idea of restitution, is enlarged to a fifth. Benevolence is the foundation of justice, since we are forbid to injure those whom we are bound to assist. A prophet may reveal the secrets of heaven and of futurity; but in his moral precepts he can only repeat the lessons of our own hearts."

[Page] Many more extracts, to the same purpose, from this author, who refers to the Koran to shew that these excellent precepts are enjoined in that work, and religiously observed by musulmen, might be made, but we think those already adduced are amply sufficient to prove to every unbiassed mind, that the Mahometan establishment was undoubtedly a very great improvement upon the Jewish and christian systems. The unity of God is uniformly adhered to, and the great principles of morality, the soul of all religion, is severely inculcated in every chapter of the Koran. Even admitting that the Mahometan religion owed its establishment, in a great measure, to the sword, that circumstance can by no means abridge its merits. We expect that the government of the French republic will be established by the sword, but it cannot from thence be infered that it will not be equal or superior to any government on earth. The truth is the Mahometan and Christian religion owe their existence to persecution. Mahomet and his followers were persecuted by the surrounding zelots of former establishments; and, when sufficiently strong, they very wisely, as all other sects would do, put their confidence in the ultimo ratio regis. Perhaps the sole reason that the Shaking Quakers have not made more proselytes in this country, is because no notice has been taken of them, but they have been left to work out their own salvation.

The writer thinks his remarks, in the preceding parts of this work, will clear him from the least suspicion of being an advocate for the Mahometan system, with all its absurdities. No, he wishes to expunge the superfluities annexed to all religions, and to establish the pure religion of nature, which alone can ever become [Page]universal, and which would dissolve those national prejudices by whose influence monarchs have deluged the world in blood. He wishes to convince christians of the impolicy of fostering prejudices by means of which they have experienced so much contempt and cruelty, from those of an opposite persuasion. What but religious bigotry could induce the Algerines to treat christians with such barbarity? They consider infidels to their religion intitled to no mercy. The same cause has occasioned the commission of equal or superior cruelties by christians, particularly under the denomination of Roman Catholics.

Perhaps these acts of inhumanity cannot be fairly justified from either of the sources on which these respective religions are founded; but as both consider all, who are not of their way of thinking, as enemies to God, it is a presumption that man, as his instrument, has a right to avenge his cause.

We will now return to our christian friend the Layman, and resume our subject.

Passing over matters of inferior moment, we come to his commentary on Moses' account of the fall. Here we think, he has injured his cause by attempting to elucidate this misterious subject. People were in the habit of reading the story in the allegorical, bible style, without attending to its absurdities; but the moment you translate it into plain English, it becomes too trifling, too insignificant for a school-boy not to ridicule. It belittles the character of the Deity, and to credit it is degrading to his creture, man.

That this idea of heriditary original sin was engendered in the flighty imagination of fanatics, must appear [Page]evident, when we reflect on the wisdom and goodness of God; consequently that man stands in the same situation he ever did, and will be accountable only for his own actions.

He concludes this article thus, "If the reader continues dissatisfied, let him try if he can find or invent any more rational hypothesis to account for the introduction of moral evil into our world."

As this is a subject of the utmost importance, and as we wish not to incur the imputation of endeavoring to pull down one theory, without substituting another, we offer the following observations for the consideration of the reader.

The internal evidence of man's free agency must be clear to all who reflect on the operation of their own mind: Were this not the case there could be no accountability on his part for the commission of evil. That man is created with propensities in favor of virtue universal experience proves; and that he possesses the capability of doing evil necessarily results from his free agency. This is undoubtedly a more noble mode of existence than to have been created mere passive machines. The greatest difficulty, that occurs, is to reconcile free agency with the pre-science of Deity. Doct. Beattie, in his essay on truth, is perfectly satisfactory to the writer on this subject. He observes, it will be universally admitted that there are some things which the Deity cannot do; He cannot deceive, he cannot commit evil; these actions are contrary to the nature of a just and holy being, and therefore impossible.

Neither is it more derogatory to the character of the Deity, to say, there are some things which he cannot [Page]know; He has made man a free agent, and therefore cannot foreknow the actions he will commit, the one is inconsistent with the other.

It will be objected to this hypothesis, that the Deity, by thus circumscribing himself, would be liable to have all his plans frustrated by the will of his creatures. What can man, that insignificant speck in the creation, do towards frustrating the great plans of the omnipotent! He may, if he happens to be a monarch, excite wars, and thus occasion the murder of millions of his fellow men. But can this affect the schemes of the Almighty? certainly not; for these things take place, and to suppose God the instigator of cruelties, is in the highest degree impious.

By the doctrine of necessity the great author of nature is disgraced by an imputed partiality to his children; a partiality which doomed from all eternity, certain individuals to everlasting happiness, and others to as durable a punishment. Every action, says the Predestinarian, must have been just as it was. It was utterly impossible that Nero should not murder his mother—that Richard should not massacre his friends and family.—It was not the will of the man, but the decree of heaven that directed the blow; and the pious Samaritan had no more merit from his virtue, than the most rapacious assassin.

Mr. Paine observes, that "the commandments contain some good moral precepts; it is however necessary to except the declaration which says, that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children. It is contrary to every principle of moral justice." To which our critic replies, "The innocent never suffer for the guilty, except in such temporal calamities as necessarily [Page]result from their parents crimes; as when the possigacy of one generation involves the next in poverty, or the like." What latitude he means to give to this phrase, or the like, is uncertain. It is clear however that the sin of our first parents can bear no resemblance to the circumstance he has adduced. Neither can we see any similitude in the trifling, childish fault of Ham; which, if it can be called a crime, deserved, and would have received from a sober man of sense, nothing more than a gentle reprimand.

The inhuman curse pronounced upon Canaan, and his posterity, by his unnatural grand-father, when in a state of intoxication (by being credited as the word of God) has perhaps been productive of evil, sufficient to over-ballance the good effects attending the introduction of the christian religion.

It has tended to make a considerable portion of the human species miserable. Christians have the effrontery to quote this curse, in justification of a traffic, which the benevolent mind contemplates with abhorrence. Good God, how is thy name perverted to gratify the most execrable purposes of avarice and ambition!

"The old testament history," says the Laym [...], "Is unquestionably the most ancient history in the world; and gives the only account of the earliest ages which has the least pretensions to probability." It is we believe generally granted that the Chinese date their history much farther back than the account of the creation, as recorded in the old testament; but whether the one or the other have any pretensions to probability is, in our opinion, what the Layman is incompetent to determine.

[Page] "The sacred writers, like other historians, are answerable only for facts, not for their morality. If the Jewish history is strained with blood and cruelty, so is that of all other nations." Very true, but other historians do not pretend that God commanded those cruelties which they relate; this constitutes a very material difference. It is but of little consequence at this day to know whether the Jews actually went into the land of Canaan, and committed all the barbarities upon the innocent inhabitants, which their history relates. But it is of the utmost importance, in order that we gain just ideas of the Deity, to know whether he absolutely headed the Jews, as his chosen people, and commanded them to distress another part of his creation with all the miseries of a most cruel, vindictive war. The human mind, unprejudiced by education, shrinks with horror at the idea of calling such histories the word of a just and merciful God.

We shall now cite a passage from our critic as a proof of his candour and credibility, "An evil spirit of God came upon Saul, and he prophesied," he says, "is taken from the book of Thomas Paine, whose and whose only is the text and comment." If he means that "an evil spirit of God," is found in the Age of Reason, it is false. And if he intends to say, "An evil spirit from God, &c." is taken from the book of Thomas Paine, he is so far right; but that it is found in him only, is not true: for in 1st Samuel, xviii, 10. "And it came to pass, on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house." See also chap. xvi. ver. 14, 15.

"The old testament was that of God in his ancient character, as God of Israel; the new is that of Je [...] [Page]Christ, our Redeemer and Mediator." To suppose that the immutable God, who has existed from all eternity the same, and who undoubtedly regards with equal care all his creatures, should have two characters, one his ancient, peculiar to him as God of the Jews, the other his modern, as God of christians, is supremely ridiculous; and shews to what extent of folly the human mind may be carried, when reason, that best gift of God to man, is superseded by blind faith, and fanatic zeal.

Our critic says, that Mr. Paine has committed a mistake in supposing that the Devil flew away with Jesus Christ. He thinks it most probable that he took him "by the proper way of the stairs, to the highest part of the temple." The scripture however says, "The Devil taketh him up, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple." But we consider it of the most sovereign indifference, by what way he is supposed to have taken him. The whole story, that a fallen Angel, who had made a rebellion in heaven, for which he had been confined in hell, should, after this, tempt the Supreme Being to fall down and worship him, offering, at the same time, to give him all the kingdoms of the earth, which the Deity certainly must know he had no just claim to, is too contemptible for ridicule.

Speaking of the Trinity, our critic observes the manner in which the Three are One, or the One is Three, is still a mystery, for it is not known, and perhaps never will be. But we "know as much as is necessary for us to know," and have therefore no business to push our enquiries farther.

This is the dernier resort of the devotees to systems, indefensible by reason—They shroud themselves in a [Page]cloud of mystery, and exclaim, "Far hence! far hence ye profane! the ground whereon ye tread is holy— here lie the secrets of the trade.—As the professors of the doctrine of the Trinity acknowledge a renunciation of reason, it would be in vain to attempt by the force of [...]on to convince them of its absurdity.

The christian mythology, says Mr. P. has five Deities: there is God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, the God Providence and the Goddess Nature," "O shame on common sense and condour! not only to misrepresent the doctrine of the Trinity, but to make christians worshippers of the Goddess Nature! to say nothing of the absurdity of making a God of Providence." We submit Mr. Paine's defence on this article, to the candor of the reader. Is it not a common expression, to say, Providence governs the assairs of men? Nature has made nothing in vain? Whether any thing is meant by these phrases, is best known to those who use them.

"It is allowed on all hands that Jesus Christ did pretend to work miracles." This is not granted: for, as Mr. Paine says, Jesus Christ wrote no account of himself. The proof of his pretending to work miracles rests upon hearsay evidence only. All the inferences therefore from this position are of no effect.

Our Layman concludes thus "I shall take leave of the reader with observing from the close of the pamphlet before us, the sum total of all the discoveries of modern philosophy in religion—Namely, that by reducing all religion to one single article, the belief of a God, it cuts off every improvement in divine knowledge from the days of Adam—throws us back into the darkest ages of heathenism, levels us in this respect with the most [Page]illiterate barbarians, and all the comfort it leaves us, as to futurity, is, that "the power that gave us existence is able to contin [...]e it."

It would be difficult to calculate all the improvements in divine knowledge that have been made from the days of Adam to the present time. So various and contradictory have been the inventions of mankind on this subject. "They have annihilated the Supreme Being as much as was in their power: they have sometimes made him a globe of fire; sometimes an ox, sometimes a tree, sometimes a man, sometimes a king. They have created God in their own image. They have made him capricious, avaricious, cruel, implacable. They have confined him in heaven as in a palace, and have only invited him on earth to solicit in their favor for tythes, riches, honors, pleasures and power. The real priest of the Supreme Being is nature; his temple the universe, his worship virtue, his festivals the joy of a great people assembled in his presence to unite in the mild bonds of universal fraternity, and to present to him the homage of pure and sensible hearts."

The greatest improvement that now remains to be made in divine knowledge is to revive again the simple religion of our first parents, the immediate workmanship of God. An improvement of this kind, as all others have experienced before, will undoubtedly meet with opposition from the bigoted, the we [...]k, and from those whose interest it is to continue the present impositions. "To invite man to the pure worship of the Supreme Being, is to aim a fatal blow at fanaticism—All fictions will disappear before truth, and all follies fall before reason. Unconstrained, unpersecuted, all sects must unite in the universal religion of nature."

Notes

*

This n [...]cturnal journey is circumstantially related by Abulseda; and by Ganier who declares, from the zealous Aljunnabi, that to deny this journey, is to disbelieve the Koran.

↵

A GUIDE TO REASON, BY SAMUEL STILLWELL, IS THE FOURTH ASSAULT UPON THE "FORTRESS OF DEISM."

[Page]

THIS production may be considered as a genuine sister of the Folly of Reason. For, as in that work, the beliefs of the author assume the place of argument. The greatest merit of this pamphlet is the appearance of a good intention in the writer.

Mr. S. first tells us that "The Age of Reason," is, in his opinion, the offspring of ignorance concerning the scriptures, though he does not point out in what particular instance this ignorance appears.

The reading of Mr. S. has been so much confined to Holy Writ, that he supposes Mr. Paine entirely indebted to that work for these phrases, "doing justice," and "loving mercy."

He asserts, "It is not found in all the bible, that God punishes the children for their father's sins, the children being innocent;" Whereas frequent instances of this kind are mentioned in that book: for example, in Joshua [Page]vii. 24, 26. we find that for the sin of Acham, the son of Zorah, himself, his sons, daughters, oxen, asses, sheep, tent, and all that he had, were burnt.

Mr. S. says, that within the circle of his acquaintance, he has known an instance of a Jew's embracing the christian religion, and therefore he "flatly denies" Mr. Paine's impious assertion that the Jews never credited the story concerning the birth of Christ.

Our author informs us that the practice of "signing wills in the presence of two or three witnesse [...]," is "an example we take from the bible." Which he thinks ought to establish the authenticity of the scriptures.

He says, "The Lord of the Universe, in order to teach mankind their duty to God and their fellow-creatures, in a way the most easy to their comprehension, condescends to impregnate the womb of a virgin."

Why there was any necessity of an example of this kind, from the Lord of the Universe, to teach mankind their duty, is best known to the author of the "Guide to Reason."

Our knowing one concludes with this wholesome advice "Know thyself. If you learn this you will see how consistent the bible is with your condition, and how consistent the laws of our country are to our well-being."—According to the good old doctrine of nonresistance and passive obedience.

As these salutary consequences cannot follow to the inhabitants of many parts of Europe, from knowing themselves, we conclude "The Guide to Reason" was intended and calculated for the small circle of the author's acquaintance, with a particular reference to his Jew-Christian.

THE NEW-YORK REVIEWER, ALIAS, —, ESQUIRE,

[Page]

IS the next who inlists under the banners of superstition and folly to combat "the Age of Reason."—He observes, "The present period of revolutions has given birth to a book, called the Age of Reason. However remarkable the age may be for the reason of nations or individuals, Mr. Paine's head is certainly turned, and with him the present age is the age of insanity."

In an age, when what has heretofore been considered as the dreams of philosophers are about to be acco [...] plished, when the establishment of civil and religious liberty, throughout the European world, wears a pleasing aspect, when degraded man is reassuming his place in the scale of existence, and prejudices are vanishing before the eye of reason, to call this the age of insanity, betrays a want of discernment or a design to mislead.

He observes, that, Mr. Paine has reserved this work for an advanced period of his life—or as Lord Kaime says of his sketches, "it is the child of his gray hairs." As Kaime's sketches of man is a work of very great merit, [Page]the comparison here instituted is highly favorable to our author.

He continues, "However unfortunate it is, the fact is undeniable, that men, during the decays of old age and the failure of intellectual faculties, constantly think themselves growing wiser." Upon another occasion, when descanting upon the French revolution, wishing to depreciate the merits of those, whose policy and heroism have confounded the combined world, by representing them as young, inexperienced madmen, he observes, "In all ages of the world young men have thought old men to be fools: and in all ages, old men have known young men to be fools." So, we see, this gentleman's sentiments can vibrate to either side of a question, as best suits the particular point, he may wish to establish.

"Mr. Paine admits a revelation, a word of God, and this is the creation we behold. He goes on to describe this word of God; gives a short account of the solar system, and by the familiar and even vulgar manner of explaining it, it is evident he wrote his Age of Reason for common readers in France and America." Certainly; Mr. Paine, that universal friend of mankind, writes for the world, he does not wish to have his works adapted solely to those who assume the appellation of learned, and whose knowledge frequently consists in a long catalogue of hard, tecnical terms.—None but pedants will condemn his writings on this account.

As the remaining passages of the Age of Reason, which are noticed by the Reviewer, have been vindicated in the course of this work, we pass on to his general remarks upon the effects of this publication. "Certain it is, that the tendency of such books, which [Page]are industriously circulated by certain democrats, is to level Jesus Christ, as well as the monarchies of the earth. We trust however that the body of the people in America have too much good sense to be deceived, and that they will not exchange good laws, freedom and a pure religion, for the principles of anarchy, and infidelity,"

Passing over this important discovery and the frightful manner in which it is announced to the public, we notice the base insinuation by which the author intended to prejudice the minds of the vulgar against democrats; as tho' they were the only people in the world who had any thing to do with the Age of Reason; as tho' they were all infidels and anarchists. Are religious opinions, in this, or any other country, a criterion by which to determine political sentiments? Is infidelity or deism a sure sign of a democrat? Will any man of character hazard this assertion? On the contrary, it is a notorious fact that the men of letters and information in France (the clergy not excepted) were almost universally deists, before the revolution. It is also notorious that the most strenuous supporters of the British government, are at this moment deists; notwithstanding their hypocritical pretentions for continuing the present religious war against the infidels of France. And even the New-York Reviewer himself has been heretofore known to be on the side of natural religion, altho' he now so zealously joins chorus with the weak and designing against the Age of Reason.

In America strong religious prejudices have been cultivated in the minds of the people; which has rendered circumspection on this point very necessary for [Page]those who were seeking for places of office. These prejudices, altho' carefully fostered by certain illiberal writers, are fast wearing away. And the doors to honor and power will soon be open to all sects alike.

With respect to "good laws" and "freedom," what have they to do with this subject? Are not deists as peaceable members of society, and have they not as just ideas of freedom, as any other sect? And as to "pure religion" the deists, in this point, have certainly the advantage: their religion being perfectly pure, simple and unmixed, its professors believing in one God only; whereas the christian religion is very complex, its votaries acknowledging a God, consisting of three persons, one of whom is part man.

Thus does this soi desant, Esquire, determine the merits of all performances, by his scale of politics. If they clash in the least with this, they are immediately declared to be Antifederal, Democratical, Jacobinical, Anarchial, &c. &c. This kind of abracadabra may have a tendency to amuse the ignorant and weak, but with the sensible part of the community can have no effect.

This same Reviewer, in his eulogium on a work tending to establish "the genuineness and authenticity of the new testament," commences with the following remarks:

"At a time, when a false philosophy and false liberty are attempting to break down all the barriers which wisdom, divine and human, has raised to guard the moral and social state of man from the violence of turbulent passions; when Jacobinism in religion and in politics, is aiming to level all authority, human and ditine; to place the young and uniformed above [Page]the venerable sage, and raise the throne of a capricious reason on the ruins of christianity; it gives us peculiar pleasure to find able champions of our faith among the distinguished leterati of our own country."

He might as well tell us of Jacobinism in husbandry, architecture or navigation, as in religion, the subjects have no connection. We are furprised that this critic has not noticed the Telegraphe, late discovered in France, and condemned it as a Jacobinical invention. We are persuaded that were he acquainted with the political sentiments of Mr. Herschel, and found them favorable to the French revolution, he would convert his planet into a member of the Jacobin club.

Thus are all improvements in moral and natural philosophy, in the arts and sciences, liable to be arraigned as Jacobinical inovations. Reason, which was evidently intended by the Creator, as a guide to our actions, is set down as "capricious" and incompetent to the purpose. We must follow blindly the systems, which chance or design has adopted, because it is most for the convenience of the few, who live upon the credulity of the many.

"We trust, however, that the body of people in America, have too much good sense to be deceived, and that they will not exchange" their reason for arbitrary systems, contrary to it, and which of course disgrace it.

Our Reviewer, at the close of his observations on the pamphlet under consideration, introduces a new idea respecting the mode of worship instituted in France, which he thinks of great importance, and seems much pleased at having been the first to make the discovery.

"The French have abolished christianity, and renewed the mythology of the ancient Greeks and Romans, by [Page]erecting certain virtues, as justice, truth, patriotism, &c. into divinities to be worshipped, and actually instituting festivals and erecting temples in honor of these visionary, metaphysical, undefined deities. This was the precise origin of the pagan idolatry—the foundation on which the whole system of ancient mythology was erected; and out of which grew all its absurdities and corruptions. This idea seems not to have been started in America; but it is just.

We are willing to give our critic all the honor of having started this idea, and are convinced that he is still alone in the [...]: For, when we read the decree of the convention, respecting national festivals, we are persuaded that no other person has ever entertained so whimsical a notion.

The convention, after hearing a lengthy report on the subject of national festivals, which particularly enforces the belief of the unity of God, decreed as follows:

1. "The French people acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being, and the immortality of the soul.

2. They acknowledge that a worship worthy of the Supreme Being, is to practise the duties of men, and they class among these duties, the detestation of treachery and tyranny; the punishment of tyrants and traitors; the succouring of the unfortunate; respect for the weakness of men—the defending the oppressed; the doing to others all the good we are capable of; and injuring no one.

3. They will institute festivals to recal men to the remembrance of the divinity, and to the dignity of their being.

[Page] 4. The names of the Festivals shall be taken from events the most glorious in our Revolution, from virtues the most cherished and the most useful to man, and which have produced the greatest benefits of his nature.

5. The French Republic will celebrate every year, the Festivals of the 14th of July, 1789; * 10th of August, 1792; † 21st of January, 1793; ⁴ and 31st of May, 1793. §

6. They will celebrate on the days of Decadi, the Festivals which follow:

To the Supreme Being, and to Nature.—To the Human Race.—To the French People.—To the Benefactors of Mankind.—To the Martyrs of Liberty.—To Liberty and Equality.—To the Liberty of the world. —To the love of Country.—To the hatred of Tyrants and Traitors.—To Truth.—To Justice.—To Chastity. —To Glory and Immortality.—To Friendship.—To Frugality.—To Courage.—To Fidelity.—To Heroism. —To Disinterestedness.—To Stoicism.—To Conjugal Fait [...]—To Paternal Love.—To Maternal Tenderness. —To F [...]al Piety.—To Infancy.—To Youth.—To Manhood.—To Old Age.—To Misfortune.—To Agriculture.—To Industry.—To our Fathers.—To Posterity."

[Page] According to this new idea of the Reviewer, all these festivals must be transformed into deities, for each one is as fair a candidate as the others. That this chimerrical idea should ever be realized, in the present improved stage of society, is impossible; it must therefore depend upon a second inundation of Europe, by the Goths and Vandals.

Finally, Does this shortsighted, partial Reviewer, in his zeal for supporting ancient systems, hope to arrest the investigating spirit of the present age—does he expect to stop the revolutionary principles, which are pervading almost all parts of the globe—and can he wish to continue those religious prejudices that have already deluged the world in blood?—Humanity revolts at the idea!—and philosophy and reason look down with contempt upon such feeble essays to check their progress.

Notes

*

Taking of the Bastile.

↵

†

Execution of the S [...]ss-guards.

↵

4

‡ Execution of Louis XVI.

↵

§

Meeting of the National Convention, and Decree for the eternal abolition of monarchy in France.

↵

VINDICATION OF OUR AUTHOR'S CHARACTER AND WRITINGS, IN ANSWER TO AN ANONYMOUS PUBLICATION IN A PHILADELPHIA PAPER.

[Page]

NOTWITHSTANDING the illiberal writer, in your evening paper of Monday, upon the Age of Reason and Thomas Paine, scarcely deserves notice, he shall not pass without some observations from one who is intimately acquainted with that excellent writer, and his works, which will be read and admired when this defamer, will be consigned to contempt and oblivion: And I am not a little surprized, that such a jargon of seandal, falshood and abuse, against one of our best and most valuable Patriots, should find admittance in an American paper.

He says "this Pamphlet, the Age of Reason, has been thrown on the public, as a bastard is laid in the streets, without a typographic dad, or mam, to claim the brat, with an intention to justify the title;" this is an impudent and a foolish falshood, for Mr. Paine avows the brat and has given his name to it.

Mankind have from the first of time been going on in improvement, and of consequence it is to be supposed, that by "the fag end of the 18th century," subjects will be more thoroughly discussed, and better understood, than they were at the fag end of the 17th.

Instead of then proceeding to make his strictures upon the book, he stops to give you the history of its author, which is a mixture of misrepresentation, and falshood. Mr. Paine was known in England both as a Patriot and a writer, before he came to America, his publication in behalf of the inferior officers of the Revenue, gained him great credit, and many friends, though it [Page]cost him his place; * it was for that and not for the deficiency in his accounts, for he had none, being only a surveyor, that a vile and corrupt government displaced him, and it was Dr. Franklin himself who was the cause of his coming to this country. The last ten lines of this paragraph contain as audacious an untruth, as ever insulted the public; † the truth is Mr. Paine published the second part of the Rights of Man in London, and remained many months after in that city. He was then elected a member of the National Convention for two places, he chose to represent Calais, and a deputation was sent to Dover, where he embarked publiely at noon day, and the same deputation accompanied him to Paris, where he took his seat.

It is true his same went before him; it is true he continued his hatred of Kings and tyrants, yet he voted against the death of Louis 16th—but his intimacy with Brissot who translated and read his speeches, and who has since been executed for conspiracy, and treason, was the cause of his arrestation, and of his being confined in the palace of Luxembourgh in Paris, and not in the Castle of Luxembourgh which I suppose this writer would have us understand; the remainder of this paragraph is too contemptible for notice.

Upon the whole, these dastardly attacks upon Mr. Paine's political character, can do him little harm among a people who remember his exertions in the cause of Liberty, and the good effects they produced.

Notes

*

This must mean only a News-paper publication, as Mr. Paine expressly declares that the work entitled, Common Sense, was the first book he ever published.

↵

†

The passage alluded to is as follows: "It appears moreover that the people of England did not relish his opinions, quite as well as he expected; and that for one of his last pieces, as destructive to the peace and happiness of their country, they threatened our knight-errant with such serious vengeance that, to avaid a trip to Botany-bay, he fled over to France, as a less dangerous voyage."

↵

THE ADDRESS BY THE REVEREND UZAL OGDEN, RECTOR OF TRINITY CHURCH AT NEWARK, ACCOMPANYING HIS PROPOSALS FOR PRINTING "THE DEIST UNMASKED," "A SHORT METHOD WITH THE DEISTS," &c. Is the last and most violent invective that has yet been published against the immortal work, entitled, "THE AGE OF REASON."

[Page]

OUR Reverend Divine, after quoting several detached passages from Holy Writ, as a charm against the powers of reason, commences his address as follows:

"Unpleasing is the office to expose an individual to public obloquy on account of the impropriety of his conduct. The interests, however, of virtue and religion; the good of human society, and various other particulars, often render such a measure, not only justifiable but necessary."

Here we observe, this apostle of "virtue and religion," instead of confuting "the Age of Reason," proposes to traduce the character of its author.

If the advocates of the christian religion are reduced to this expedient, it is a shrewd sign that they suspect the weakness and fallacy of the arguments which are adduced in support of it. How can "impropriety of conduct," alter the eternal principles of truth, established in the "Age of Reason?" The sentiments, advanced in that work, must stand or fall by their own intrinsic merits.

"Mr. Paine during the American Revolution, by his patriotic writings and services, justly obtained our [Page]esteem and applause."—Were we as uncharitable as our opponent, we might here observe, that this praise comes from a suspected quarter; as a certain order in America were almost universally opposed to our Revolution, and of course to the writings of Thomas Paine on that subject. Indeed many parts of this address tend to confirm our suspicions on this point.

"And it was hoped, he having returned to Europe, that we should ever have had occasion to have revered his name." Why a person who "by his patriotic writings and services," had justly merited so much "esteem and applause," in America, could not have still been "revered," in this country, without returning to Europe, is best known to the learned gentleman who makes this remark.

— "to persuade us to renounce the divine system of christianity, which alo [...]e can dignify and bless human nature, and to embrace his fallacious, gloomy and uncomfortable scheme of deism." That the christian religion dignifies human nature, is an idea that exists only in the flighty imagination of its zealous votaries. —It substitutes a man, in the place of the Supreme Being, and directs us to rest in him all our hope of future [...].—This, instead of dig [...]fying [...] nature, is to the last degree degrading [...].—An exception may be made of a small portion of the human species, who are reputed, by this religion, to hold a commission, immediately from the Almighty to preach salvation to mankind, upon this condition, that they acknowledge the founder of christianity to be the son of God, and that they are his embassadors, and are worthy to be reverenced as such:—These it dignifies at the expence of the degradation of their followers.

— "it becomes a duty, that the unwary may be preserved from seduction, to divest this deistical enthusiast and incendiary of his mask, and to exhibit him in his genuine character."

It is impossible to apply language more improperly than is expressed in the passage before us. Where is the [Page]man on earth, that has appeared more open, more candid, more intriped and persevering in the cause of humanity, than Thomas Paine? We defy this immaculate prelate to name the man.—Has he not personally, at the [...]k of his life, led the way to the annihilation of prejudices and impositions, in church and state, which have disgraced and afflicted human nature for ages?— Has he not openly put his name to the "Rights of Man," and "the Age of Reason?" To accuse him then of wearing a mask is the height of presumption and folly. Be assured, sir, that it is impossible to palm upon the Americans, a masked incendiary, as the "genuine character," of Thomas Paine; and that whoever attempts it, will do it, at the expence of their veracity and reputation.

Why should deism be the constant theme of abuse for bigots of all other persuasions? Have not its professors an equal right to the free enjoyment of their religious principles? Are they not as honest members of society, as any other sect? And have they not consisted of men of the first respectability for talents and probity, in every enlightened country?—Let the opposers of deism prove that its doctrine tends to destroy the peace and happiness of society.—Let them prove that the eternal principles of truth can, consistent with the character of its author, have this effect, then will we renounce our ten [...]ts, and subscribe to their "gloomy uncomfortable scheme," of a crucified Saviour.

Knowledge is spread abroad;—the shackles of superstition are broken—mankind have began to reflect—the idea of the awfulness of the subject, and the profanity of doubting the authenticity of the scriptures, will now frighten none but children and dotards.—If the truth of christianity cannot be defended by fair reasoning, it ought not, and cannot be supported in a country, where freedom of speech and writing is allowed. At least, if it cannot be made to appear that it has a better effect on society than deism, the system, with the fables that gave rise to it, must sail, and be no more heard of, except [Page]as we now relate the stories of witches, to shew the credulity and ignorance of former ages.

That a religion, which naturally excites so much enthusiasm—which has caused so many cruel wars, and consequent misery to mankind, will not, upon fair investigation, be thought preferable in effects to the mild, unpassionate religion of nature, is evident. We therefore expect the gradual rise of deism upon the ruins of the christian system, and advise all sectaries to prepare their minds for this event.

Deism will consequently introduce modes of worship consistent with the character of reasonable beings.

Temples of reason will succeed temples of superstition; lectures on moral philosophy and other useful subjects will then be delivered from the pulpit. Mankind will be taught, that to be happy, and to make each other so here, is their only duty: and that this will insure their eternal happiness hereafter. This doctrine will take place of faith, mistery, miracle, and prophecy: And thus a seventh part of the time be profitably, and agrecably spent, which is now sacrificed at the shrine of bigotry and folly.

Many of the clergy, no doubt, would give their hearty assent for the introduction of this system; but it would not answer their purpose to propose it: the reformation must be gradually effected by enlightening the minds of the people.

We shall omit any farther remarks till the appearance of Mr. Ogden's proposed publication.

To conclude, the writer solemnly declares, that the happiness of mankind are his views, in wishing to propagate deism; he has the charity to believe that christians are in general influenced by the same motives: He wishes not to persecute, nor wound the feelings of any, but to convince by fair argumentation.

CAIRA.

Information about this book

Title statement

The examiners examined: being a defence of The age of reason. : [One line in French from Leibnitz]

Palmer, Elihu, 1764-1806.

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI :

Date

2011-05.

ID [DLPS]

N20543

ID [TCP]

N20543

ID [STC]

Evans 26954

ID [NOTIS]

APY5027

ID [IMAGE-SET]

26954

ID [EVANS-CITATION]

99032183

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early American Imprints, 1639-1800 ; no. 26954.

Notes

(Evans-TCP ; no. N20543)

Transcribed from: (Readex Archive of Americana ; Early American Imprints, series I ; image set 26954)

Images scanned from Readex microprint and microform: (Early American imprints. First series ; no. 26954)

Source

— The examiners examined: being a defence of The age of reason. : [One line in French from Leibnitz], Palmer, Elihu, 1764-1806..

Extent

84 p. ; 19 cm. (12mo)

Printed for the author; and sold by L. Wayland and J. Fellows.,. New-York: :: --1794.-- (Copy-right secured.). (Attributed to Elihu Palmer in the Dictionary of American biography.) (Error in paging: p. 37 misnumbered 57.) (Thoughts on the Christian religion -- Remarks on the publications which have appeared in oppostion [sic] to The age of reason -- The age of infidelity, by a layman, is the next in the order of attack against the fatal blow to fanaticism and priestcraft, The age of reason -- A guide to reason, by Samuel Stillwell, is the fourth assault upon the "fortress of deism." -- The New-York reviewer -- Vindication of our author's character and writings, in answer to an anonymous publication in a Philadelphia paper -- The address by the Reverend Uzal Ogden ... acompanying his proposals for printing "The deist unmasked," ... is the last and most violent invective that has yet been published against the immortal work, entitled, "The age of reason.")

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.