Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

ed.*

We have before observed that the arkite worship once prevailed in Britain. One of the Scottish ifles retains its Egyptian name, Buto. Another, Arran, fignifies the ark. Mona, and Menai its Frith, are probably variations of Men-Ai, the land of Menu, or Noah. Probably Argyle in Scotland, received its name from Argh Al, the god of the ark. The Scots have a wild tradition that they are defcended from Erc, the son of Scota. Scota is the ark. Scuth or Scudh, or, when latinized, Scota, fignifies in the Celtick dialect, a fhip.

the worshippers of the ark. By the day on which Noah embarkdegrees, however, the two great fuperftitions were blended. Noah and the fun were worshipped together, and often confidered as the fame; fo were the moon and the ark. Early the Chaldeans were famous for their aftronomical obfervations, and they contrived fo to marshal the stars, as to reprefent on the sphere the principal events of the deluge. Some of these we have mentioned. Others occur. From the brilliant conftellation of Orion, Nimrod still overlooks the affairs of mortals, encountering the arkite bull; that is, making an attack on the worfhip of Noah, to introduce that of the heavenly luminaries. The great conftellation of the Dragon was another memorial of the deluge, infcribed on the sphere. According to Aratus, the Dragon or ferpent was Jupiter, who was Noah. This was not very unlike the urbanity of more modern days in the names of the Julium and Georgium Sidus.

The two faces and four eyes of Janus reprefented the double view of Noah into the old and new world. According to the poets, Venus rofe from the fea, She was the ark of Noah: and hence the dove was faid to be her favourite. From her being the ark perfonified, Venus was called Arfinoe, and Baris-Noe, that is, the ark of Noah, and Hippodamia, the arkite mother.*

Plutarch relates that Ofiris, which is another name of Noah, was a husbandman, a legiflator, and zealous advocate for the worship of the gods. Typhon, or the fea, confpired against him, and compelled him to enter an ark on the feventeenth of Athyr,

Strab: Voss: Hesych:

The ruins of a very ancient temple in Ireland, have the exact form of a galley. The name of the temple fignifies, "the remains of the only ship." A portable fhrine or ark was ufed by the ancient, idolatrous Irish; it was denominated, the ark of the covenant. Ireland was, perhaps, called Erinnus in honour of Aran-Nus, the ark of Noah. The Irish once called their principal marine deity, Mann, and had a romantick legend of his prefiding over the Ifle of Man.

According to Tacitus, the Goths were acquainted with the hiftory of Noah. They venerated Zuifto, or Adam, who, according to their traditions, fprang from the earth; they alfo venerated Mannus, who had three fons. Through Hindoftan the fame perfonage was revered under the name of Menu; in Egypt he was called Menes, and attended by the fymbolical bull. He with feven other Menies was fuppofed to have fucceeded "ten lords of created beings, eminent in holiness."

• Faber.

gypt. Rhadamanthus fignifies the god of the lordly ark.

These were probably the ten generations in the line of Seth. The ancient Germans facrificed to I- The city of Corinth derived its fis; a fhip formed the fymbolical name from the worship of Cor, the part of their worship. The two fun. It was founded by the fymbols, the bull and ferpent were Aletes, faid by Sanchoniathon to equally familiar in the North of be the children of Chronus, the Europe, in Greece, Italy, and E- fcriptural Noah. So the two gypt. The Egyptians observed great Rajah families of Hindooftwo annual feftivals in honour of tan, ftyled themfelves Surya-Bans Ofiris; one to perpetuate the re- and Chandra-Bans, or children of membrance of his enclosure in the the fun and moon. In Peru, the ark; in the celebration of this, fame notion prevailed; the Yncas they placed his ftatue in an ark. boafted of their defcent from the The other was a commemoration fun and moon; or from Noah and of his deliverance. According to According to the ark, who were worshipped Paufanius, Ofiris with Semole, with the fun and moon. was enclosed in an ark, and thrown into the fea. Another tradition reprefents Perfeus, placing his daughter with her child in an ark, and cafting them into the fea. Noah was worshipped under the name of Pan. Herodotus fays he was the most ancient of the eight gods of Egypt. Diodorus Siculus informs us, he was the fame as Serapis, Ofiris, Dionufus, Pluto, Ammon, and Jupiter. By Livy and Macrobius, he is denominated Inuus and Junus, from his connexion with the dove, Juneh. By the Egyptians he was worshipped under the name of Mendes or Men-Deva, the divine Noah. When in danger from the ocean, he is faid to have affumed the form of a monster, a goat and a fifh; hence Pan was elteemed fynonymous with Cetus, a fea monfter.

The three fabulous fates, the three furies, and the three judges of hell, were connected with the myfteries of the ark. The furies were called Erinnues, a word derived from Aron-Nus, the ark of Noah. The fates were denomi. nated, P' Area, the ark. The judges were the three fons of Noah. Minos was the Menu of Hindoftan, and the Menes of E

In Armenia, according to Nicolaus Damafcenus, a tradition had conftantly prevailed that fome ancient perfonage had been conveyed in an ark to the fummit of mount Baris or Lubar; a city there bore the name of Cabira, in which was a temple of the arkite moon, called Pharnaum, or the ark of the ocean. This fuperftition flourished in the time of Strabo. We have the authority of Palephatus, that Pegafus, the winged horfe of Bellerophon was an ark or long fhip. Bellero phon, therefore, muft have been Noah. The Greeks defignated a temple and ship by the fame word. At Tarfufa, tradition of the del uge prevailed. It afferted that the Tauric mountains were first vifible when the waters fubfided, at the feet of which stood the city Tarfus; hence it was called Polis Terfia, or the city of dryness; afterward it was called Tarfus. The river Araxes in this country, received its name in honour of Arach, the Ark. The island of Naxus received its name in honour of Nuach-Zeus, the god Noah.

We have remarked that certain cups of the ancients had an allu fion to the ark. We now add..

that most of the Greek names for drinking veffels were defignated by names applicable to fhips. Some of them were called Carchefia from a word fignifying the illuftrious ark; others were called Menes, a name frequently given to Noah. They were often adorned with the figure of a dove; fometimes they were dedicated to Bacchus or Noah, to Venus or the ark. The Babylonians called the most ancient Ogyges or Noah, Gallus, and hence from their attachment to the rites of the deluge, a nation, who once overfpread the greater part of Europe, was called Celta, Galatæ, Galli, Gauls, or Gaels, all which were from the fame original word, Galim, the waves of the fea. Hence the people in whofe country Noah quitted the ark, called a fhip gallerie, and hence the priests of Cybele were called Galli or Arkites. In the rites of Cybele and Ifis, a pine tree was formed into a canoe, and in it was placed the image of a man. In the myfteries of Proferpine and Ceres, a wooden figure of a virgin was hewailed for forty days. The ark was fometimes reprefented as a virgin, and its fymbol was a beautiful woman. For forty days the waters of the flood increafed.

After all this evidence, is there a man who denies the deluge of Noah, who ridicules it as a fable of the Jews, as a tale repeated by Chriftians?

Could a traveller on the fourth of July glance an eye from Maine to Georgia; in the morning could hear the artillery of every thip and fortrefs; the bells of every town and village; could he aftertvards fee the proceffions form, the churches thronged, and hear ten thousand addreffes of gratitude for independence; could he hear

the orators relate the number of the agents concerned, the caufe and iffue of the event; could he fee the drinking veffels of the feftal board, adorned with emblems of national independence, and prefidents drawn with the far famed declaration in their hands; could he fee islands, mountains, cities and countries named in commemoration of the glorious day, what would be faid of his underftanding, what of his fenfelefs depravity, thould he deny there ever was a declaration of indepeudence? All this is diminutive and unimpreffive evidence, compared with the evidence of the flood? Look from pole to pole; in every continent, and almost every confiderable nation, in fome era of their history we find, for fub. ftance, all thefe evidences of the general deluge. The temples, the altars, the priests of religion; the names of the islands, mountains, cities, and countries of the world, proclaim the truth of Noah's flood. Is not the historical information of those, who deny it, notwithstanding their proud claims, as contracted as their profeffion of religion is hypocritical and impious? Is not their acquaintance with antiquity as fuperficial, as their knowledge of religion is trifling and vain ?

PHILO.

For the Panoplist. MATTHEW'S AND LUKE'S GENEALOGIES.

THE following attempt to show that thefe genealogies furnish no argument against inspiration, but a ftrong argument against Socinianifm, is fubmitted to the editors of the Panoplift.

Matthew plainly gives the genealogy of Jofeph, the reputed father of Jefus. At the fame time

he clearly intimates that Jefus was not the real fon of Jofeph. For inftead of continuing the phrafeology, which he had ufed all along, and faying, Jofeph begat Jefus, he fays, "Jofeph, the husband of Mary, of whom Jefus was born." The fame is intimated in Luke iii. 23. "Jefus, being, as was fuppofed, the fon of Jofeph." If we a dopt the opinion of a wellknown critick, the original words, which we render, as was suppofed, rather fignify, referring to this genealogy as it was legally fettled, or found on

record.

If it be asked, what purpose then is answered, while giving the genealogy of Jefus Chrift, by introducing Jofeph, if Jofeph were not the real father of Jefus? We reply; Jofeph was the oldeft furviving branch of David's pofterity; and it was understood, that by marrying Mary, after he knew the miraculous conception of Jefus, he adopted Jefus for his fon, and fo railed him to the dignity and privileges of David's heir. Matthew does not call Jofeph the father of Jefus, but the husband of his moth er; and fo proves the title, which Jefus acquired to the kingdom of Ifrael through his adoption.

Luke teaches us the natural de fcent of Jefus; that is, he gives us his genealogy by his mother's fide. Mary was undoubtedly the daughter of Heli. Because the is called fo by the Talmud; and chiefly because we otherwife have no true genealogy of Chrift, but only two different views of the line of Jofeph, his reputed father. But this would not prove that Jefus was properly of the feed of Abraham and of the boufs of David. The omiffion of Mary's name in this genealogy is easily accounted for. The families of women were not enrolled under their own names,

but under the names of their hufbands. And this account was copied out, according to the custom of the Jews, from their authentick records, under the husband's name.

In Luke iii. 23, the words, fon of Heli, applied to Jofeph, need not imply any more, than that Jofeph was Heli's fen in law, or fon by marriage with his daughter Mary.

The apparent difficulty, here confidered, conftitutes one of the objections of deifts against the bible; and this is one of the instances, in which their objections fpring from a mind, greatly needing instruction.

This genealogy is very impor tant, as it shows that the innumerable prophecies, which fpeak of Chrift as the feed of the woman, the defcendant of Abraham, and the offfpring of David, are all fulfilled in Jefus of Nazareth. CRITO.

For the Panoplist. OBSERVATIONS ON MYSTERIES. It has been juftly remarked, that he, who refufes a mystery, because he cannot understand it, will be as ready to flight a precept, because he does not like it." In either cafe the difficulty exifts, not in the object, but in the mind. It is the fruit of human pride and perverfenefs. It arifes from a reluctance to pay homage to fupe rior wisdom and authority, and from a difpofition to reduce every thing to the level of our own faculties and inclinations. If any truth is clear, it is this, that a revelation from heaven must be expected to contain many things myfterious and incomprehenfible. Thefe attributes are prominent in all the other productions of the Deity. How natural then, that they should constitute a principal

characteristick of his writtenword! it is God himself, who fpeaks to Especially, when it is confider- me, or any one on his part. Af. ed, that the grand defign of reve- ter this, I am no more astonished, lation is to place before our eyes that there are three diftinct persons the INCOMPREHENSIBLE JEHOVAH, in one divine effence; one God, and and to relieve apoftate, guilty yet a Father, a Son, and a Holy creatures in a cafe, where all their Ghost. After this, I am no more faculties are confounded, all their aftonifhed, that God forefees all fpeculations unfatisfactory, and ev- without forcing any; permits fin ery refource fails. Humbly and without forcing the finner; orgratefully to receive every difcov. dains free and intelligent creatures ery of this kind is one of the high- to fuch and fuch ends, yet witheft acts of reason. Where we are out deftroying their intelligence, well affured, that infinite intelli- or their liberty. After this, I am gence addreffes us, the most im- no more aftonished, that the jus plicit faith is the most rational. tice of God required a fatisfaction, Nor are any more diftant from the proportional to his greatnefs, that character of true philofophers, his own love hath provided that than those who prefume to try ev. fatisfaction, and that God, from ery revealed truth by the standard the abundance of his compaffion, of their own limited faculties, and defigned the mystery of an incarbelieve nothing, which they can nate God; a mystery, which annot fully comprehend and explain. gels admire, while skepticks opThis fubject has been forcibly il- pofe; a mystery, which abforbs luftrated by Saurin in his fermon human reafon, but which fills all on the omniprefence of God. It heaven with fongs of praise; a will be to confult at once the rea- mystery, which is the Great MYSder's profit and delight, to pre- TERY, by excellence, (1 Tim. iii. fent him the remarks of this elo- 16,) but the greatness of which quent writer. To all, who perufe nothing fhould make us reject, them, the appeal may be fafely fince religion propofes it, as the made, whether they be not equal- grand effort of the wisdom of the ly the dictates of fober reafon and incomprehenfible God, and comfublime piety equally worthy mands us to receive it on the testi of the philofopher and the Chrif- mony of the incomprehenfible God himself. Either religion must tell us nothing about God, or what it tells us must be beyond our capac. ities; and, in difcovering even the borders of this immenfe ocean, it muft needs exhibit a vast extent, in which our feeble eyes are lost. But what furprises me, what ftumbles me, what frightens me, is to fee a diminutive creature, a contemptible man, a little ray of light glimmering through a few feeble organs, controvert a point with the Supreme Being, oppofe that Intelligence, who fits at the helm of the world; queftion, what he

tian.

"I freely grant," fays he, "that had I confulted my own reafon only, I could not have difcovered fome mysteries of the gospel. Nevertheless, when I think on the immentity of God, when I caft my eyes on that vaft ocean, when I confider that immenfe All, nothing aftonithes me, nothing ftumbles me, nothing feems to me inalmiffible, how incomprehenfible foever it may be. When the fubject is divine, I am ready to believe all, to admit all, to receive all; provided I be convinced, that

« AnteriorContinua »