« السابقةمتابعة »
often been proved so. He had yet failed to prove his proposition of the hyman origin of the Bible, and had given good proofs of its superhuman origin. Mr. Grant complained that his opponent had jumbled up Judaism with Christianity, and that his attacks had been confined to the Old Testament, as if the Gospels did not form a part of the Bible. He remarked that although infidels ridiculed the Bible, and pretended to prove its human origin, if they acknowledged a revelation from God to man, they must believe in the Bible. They would never believe in the Koran, the Shaster, or the book of the Mormons; and they knew of no other book than the Bible which could be considered a revelation from God. He then dwelt for some time on the adaptability of the Bible to man's capacity, by its great truths being made known in language that all could understand. The Bible, he continued, did not profess to teach the sciences. A person might say it was opposed to them, but how were we to judge upon many points of science, since men were so contradictory in their opinions on scientific subjects ?
MR. BARXER observed that he must be excused if he said he could not see any argument in what Mr. Grant had advanced. In answer to the remarks on the character of Solomon, made on the previous evening, Mr. Barker observed that he considered Solomon unfit to occupy the position of a judge, as he was unable to judge and guide himself, and lived a very discreditable life. Passing to the subject of creation, he read from the Bible passages as to the period at which the earth was formed, and followed them up by quotations from the works of Dr. Pye Smith, Dr. Harris, and Professor Hitchcock, in support of the indefinite antiquity of the earth. He considered the refutation of the Bible statements by geology to be unmistakable on this point, as could be shown by the remains of fossils and the strata of the earth. He also combatted the idea of an universal deluge, dwelling at length on the impossibility of collecting such a mass of the watery element-on the barbarity of the all but extermination of mankind-on the partiality of God in preserving but one family—and on the absurdity of attempting to assemble two of every species of all the animals in the world—and also to provide food for such # number, the whole to be accommodated within the ark. Divines might attempt to explain away the deluge, but it was impossible to convince him that such an event ever occurred.
Mr. Grant said his opponent had quoted Dr. Pye Sınith as an authority on the question of the earth's antiquity; but his quotations were most partial, and he (Mr. Barker) had made the author assert things which he would not be prepared to maintain if he were living. He (Mr. Grant) was aware that Dr. Pye Smith believed in an indefinite period since the creation of the earth, but the same author held that the present creation was of recent origin. Mr. Grant then proceeded to read extracts from Dr. Pye Smith's works having reference to the rendering of the first verse in the book of Genesis, which implied that the earth was created at a period unknown, but that the creation of man and other animals was of comparatively recent date. Mr. Grant referred also to the theory of the existence of light previous to the creation of the great luminary of the day. His opponent, he contended, had mistaken his premises, for he seemed to have abandoned the proposition of the human origin of the Bible. Mr. Grant then proceeded to show how the Bible affirmed its divine origin by the sentiments which it inculcated, and he laid down a number of propositions to show that it could not be a forged book, that it could not be the work of bad men or devils, nor even of good men, since it so often ascribed its origin to God. That it was written by different men was manifest from its various styles, as was also the fact that it was written at different times.
MR. BARKER observed that, that the Bible was written by different men, no one would deny; but he regarded it as the work of ages and nothing more. He then returned to the question of the creation of the world in six days, and again touched upon arguments which he had before advanced. In reference to the deluge, it was all a story and a fable. It was impossible to crowd a pair of the various species of animals not known within the described dimensions of the ark, and if it were possible, he would leave his audience to judge of the sweetness of the place. And to deluge the earth would require eight times more water than was found to be upon its surface. After dwelling for some time on the “s ridiculousness” of such a story as that of the deluge, he passed on to notice, in severe terms, the short-comings of Lot, in offering up his daughters to the men of the city, and in his flight and subsequent drunkenness, and also the dishonesty of Jacob to his uncle, in cheating him of the best of his flock. Moses he denounced as a murderer. He alluded to several sanguinary battles fought by the tribes of Israel, in which incredible numbers were killed in one day, amounting to some hundreds of thousands, statements which he considered to be absurd in the extreme.
Mr. Grant then rose to reply, and read and commented upon extracts from Dr. Pye Smith's works on geology. He then concluded by a review of the superiority of the Bible over other books, and by recommending to his audience certain works published by the Religious Tract Society.
MR. BARKER, then occupied his allotted time in reviewing a small work issued by the Religious Tract Society, containing a number of reasons for believing the Bible to be the word of God. Eachr eason was viewed seriatim and each characterised as most miserable.
SOME OF THE HORRORS AND MISERIES OF WAR.
Some idea of the hardships of a soldier's life may be got from the fact, that one-third of those that are enlisted for foreign service, are calculated to die off the first year; while the average life of soldiers generally in active service, is only three years.
I cannot,” says M. Necker, "remember without shuddering, to have seen the following statement in an estimate of the money requisite for the exigencies of the war :-Forty thousand men to be embarked for the Colonies ; deduct onethird for the first year's mortality, and there remains 26,667.”
The following returns of the British Army under the Duke of Wellington, in the Peninsular War, show the sickness which prevailed among the troops at five different periods:
April 1812 26,897 11,452 The extent to which property and human life are sacrificed is truly horrible ; to a person rot much acquainted with such matters it seems utterly incredible. The following is a statement of the expense in money and human life of seven particular wars engaged in by Great Britain.
War of the British Revolution, to establish William on the British Throne, and to humble France, cost 31,000,0001. The total loss of life in this war was 230,000.
War of the Spanish Succession, to deprive Philip of the crown of Spain, and to humble the Bourbons, cost 44,000,0001. The total loss of life in this war was 350,000.
Spanish War and Austrian Succession, quarrel about Campeachy and the Crown of Hungary, (no concern of ours), cost 47,000,0001. The total loss of life in this war was 240,000.
Seven Years War about Nova Scotia, &c., (not worth two-pence to us), cost 107,000,0001. The total loss of life in this war was 650,000.
American War, to maintain the British Power over North America, (as if the Americans were not as fit to govern themselves as we were), cost 150,000,0001. The total loss of life in this war was 340,000.
War of the French Revolution, to repress Anti-monarchical principles in France; and the rest of Europe, (or in other words, to maintain political and ecclesiastical tyranny,) cost 472,000,0001. The total loss of life in this war was 700,000.
War against Buonaparte, to restrain the ambition of Napoleon, and restore the
The cost of the whole was, in money, 1,438,000,0001.
“ During the celebrated war in Germany, at the commencement of the seventeenth century known in history by the name of the thirty years' war, about two-thirds of the German empire perished by the sword, or by sickness, famine, and outrage of every description. Most of the cities and towns were demolished or impoverished : arable land was everywhere covered with weeds; many villages had become totally depopulated, and others so utterly annihilated, that their place could no more be found. Thus, in Wurtemburg, the population, which had amounted to 340,000 at the beginning of the war, had sunk down to 48,000 ; and vineyards to the amount of 40,000 acres, corn lands and vegetable gardens to the amount of 248,000 acres, remained utterly neglected ; eight towns were destroyed; thirty six thousand houses burnt to the ground; and in twentytwo years landed property had suffered a loss to the amount of one hundred and eighteen millions of Aorins (or £10,163,887 sterling.) Among the other belligerent powers, agriculture and commerce were crippled, every country was drained of its resources, and hundreds of thousands of lives destroyed.
“ The sacrifice of human life in the wars of the late French Emperor was most frightful. The loss of the French and their auxiliaries, in the campaign to Russia, is reckoned by Boutourlin at 125,000 slain, 132,000' died of fatigue, hunger, disease, and cold, and 193,000 were made prisoners. The Petersburg Gazette stated, that the bodies burned in the spring, after the thaw, in Russian Proper, and Lithuania, amounted to 308,000, of which a considerable portion were Russians. In the river Berezina and the adjoining marshes, 36,000 bodies were said to have been found. Larrey, one of the chief surgeons in Napoleon's army, estimated that during ten years of that emperor, 2,173,000 were raised by con. scriptions, of which two-thirds at least perished in foreign lands, or were maimed for life."
But besides the endless loss of life and property that takes place in war, there are other dreadful horrors. The newspapers talk to us after a battle of courage, rewards, and glory; but there are other things of which the faithless newspapers do not tell us. I will present a small sample of these things. Here is a scene after the battle of Waterloo :
BURYING THE DEAD AT WATERLOO. -A private letter from Mons, dated 14th, July 1815. (twenty-seven days after the battle) mentions the following circuirstances, which attended burying the
dead on the field of Waterloo. “ It is only four days since they finished burying the dead bodies which strewed the field of the battle of Waterloo. Several thousand carts had been put in requisition for this operation in the department of Jemappe."
Several thousand carts employed for several days together, to carry the slaugh. tered to their grave. A cart could carry six or eight at a time, and perform several journeys in a day, one would suppose, and yet several thousand carts were em. ployed till more than twenty days after the battle, in carrying the murdered and the mangled to their horrible graves. What an awful multitude of slain. But it would seem they were not all dead when they were buried. Read the following from the same letter
“ After the lapse of TEN, TWELVE, and even FIFTEEN days, there were found among the dead carcasses, great numbers of wounded, who, impelled by madness or hunger, had eaten of the bodies of the men and horses that surrounded
The following is a glance at the battle field of Borodino, after the battle :
“ The field of battle (Borodino) had all the appearance of an extinguished Folcano. The ground was covered all around with fragments of helmets and cuirasses, broken drums, gun stocks, tatters of uniforms, and standards dyed with blood. On this spot lay thirty thousand half devoured corses. The emperor (Napoleon) passed quickly, nobody stopped; cold, hunger, and the enemy urged us on: we merely turned our faces as we proceeded, to take a last melancholy look at the vast grave of so many companions in arms uselessly sacrificed. Multitudes of these desolate fugitives lost their speech; others were seized with frenzy, and many were so maddened with the extremes of pain and hunger, that they tore the dead bodies of their comrades to pieces, and feasted on the disgusting remains.”
The following is another scene connected with this tragedy:
“ In the hospitals of Wilna, were above nineteen thousand dead and dying, frozen and freezing; the bodies of the former, broken up, served to stop the cavities in windows, floors, and wall; but in one of the corridors of the great convent, above fifteen hundred bodies were piled up transversely as pigs of lead or iron. In the roads, men were collected around the burning ruins of the cottages which a mad spirit of destruction had fired, picking and eating the burnt bodies of their fellow-men."
A FEW SERIOUS WORDS ADDRESSED TO ALL UNBELIEVERS.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE DEFENDER.
I hail, with sincere pleasure the appearance of your new weekly issue, and fervently hope it meets with the encouragement, it so truly merits. Long, Sir, has been needed such a publication amongst us, whose ostensible object is an able defence of religion, against the unprincipled attacks of Infidel adversaries, whose affected conceit of superior judgment and discernment, and boast of freedom from the shackles of religion, is perpetually sounded in our ears, and whose constant endeavour it is to rob man of the only comfort left him in age and distress, the truest enjoyment in life and health, but to give him nothing in its place.
I am induced to offer these remarks from the invitation you give your readers, to avail themselves of the advantage of your “Open Page.
For many years, Sir, I belonged, unhappily, to that class of individuals known as Owenites, or in other words, Infidels, and with an eagerness worthy of a better purpose, devoted most of my spare hours to their unworthy cause, till God in his wise providence has been pleased to open my long-closed
eyes to the utter weakness, and folly, and absurdity, not to say, the awful peril of the adoption of such principles.
To me, Sir, it is a matter of some surprise, that men gifted with ordinary reason and knowledge can so far deceive themselves, or be deceived into a rejection of religion, and a neglect of the worship of that Divine being, who bounteously bestows his manifold blessings alike upon him who daringly hlasphemes and insults his holy name, and upon those who in humbleness of heart love and fear him, and with the soul's true affection, yield him that service, adoration, and worship, that his mercy and goodness so much deniand from us. How perverse methinks must he be, (and alas ! I myself have been so blinded and obdurate,) that can with daring rashness hold up his head and look defiance on the Almighty author of his being, who for no selfish end, created 'man, whose heart has become so desperately wicked, as to deny the great being, who gave him his existence, and the fair and beauteous earth for his inheritance.
Does he suppose that the Almighty could not do without him? Is he needed to govern with such order, regularity, and beauty the magnificent universe which we inhabit ? Does it never occur to him that the Almighty could withhold his blessings and mercy, and cause the rich earth to refuse its wonted plenty. Surely it must not, or man could not be so rash, and so blind, as to deny his maker, or refuse him his heart's love and worship. I would ask the infidel in the silent hour of his meditation to think seriously upon the questions of life, death, and eternity, and beware lest he trifle with them too long, as alas ! too many are now doing, who are won over by the deluding theories of a class of men, who are scarcely ever true to their own teachings, who tremble to live them out, but who, from pride of heart, or other motives, throw off the sweet yoke of Christian truth, which they have persuaded themselves to be a "cunningly devised fable."
What did the great Addison say—and let it have its full force and weight with you, -"If Christianity be a dream it is a pleasant one, and nothing shall rob me of it."
O my friends, once brothers in unbelief, let me ask you to lay the question to heart. Think of it often-think of it night and day, for terrible
consequences hang upon the issue. Let your heart answer the question, is it 'not better to live under the cheering influence of truth, than to dwell amid the shadows and gloom of'unbelief?
Are there any of you, my unbelieving friends, who have not your doubts, and misgivings? Does not the sentiment of the poet Young, often beat against your breasts. “If weak thy faith, why choose the harder side ?"
If such men as a Newton, a Bacon, a Locke, a Milton, a Davy, could reconcile to their powerful intellects the truth and reasonableness of Christian belief,-men who could have no interest in deceiving others, or being deceived themselves--surely we of less intellect, should pause ere we reject a system that has conferred so many blessings on our race.
I know many of you possess energy, and industry, which could be turned to a better purpose. Pause I beseech you, ere it is too late. Put not on that false boldness, which in youth and health may serve you, but which, as the judgment becomes more matured, invariably gives way, and gladly asks to receive at approaching death that, which through life was despised. The real enjoyment and consolation which it affords at death, must make it worth your acceptance whilst in health ; and how humiliating a condition, how perilous & condition to leave the matter to the last hour of life. How many of the greatest infidels of this and other countries, have found they could not die in their infidelity, and have given their dying testimony to the excellence of Christianity. Even the "brilliant Frenchman" in fear, has again and again embraced religion. What excell