Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    April 8, 1880

    “A Review of Paine’s ‘Age of Reason.’ (Continued.)” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 55, 15, pp. 226, 227.

    BY ELD. A. T. JONES

    (Continued.)

    AS Part First of the “Age of Reason,” which we have just been examining, was written to show that there is no need of a revelation, so Part Second was written to show that the Bible is not true. And as we showed conclusively that his arguments in part First demand a revelation, we shall find also that Part Second fails to disprove the truth of the Bible. In Part First he said he had no Bible. But now he has a Bible and Testament; he says on page 64, “They will now find that I have furnished myself with a Bible and a Testament.”ARSH April 8, 1880, page 226.1

    The first thing that we find worthy of note in this connection is on pages 73, 74: “I come now to speak of historical and chronological evidence. The chronology that I shall use is the Bible chronology. I beging with the book of Genesis. In the 14th chapter of Genesis, the writer gives an account of Lot’s being taken prisoner in a battle between the four kings against five, and carried off; and that when the account of Lot’s being taken came to Abraham, he armed all his household, and marched to rescue Lot from the captors; and that he pursued them unto Dan.” “I now come ... to show that there was not such place as Dan till many years after the death of Moses; and, consequently, that Moses could not be the writer of the book of Genesis.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 226.2

    “To establish this in proof, it is necessary to refer from Genesis to the 18th chapter of the book called the book of Judges. It is said (verse 27) that the (the Danites) came unto Laish to a people that were quiet and secure; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and burned the city with fire; and they built a city (verse 28) and dwelt therein, and called the name of the city, Dan, after the name of Dan their father; howbeit the name of the city was called Laish at the first. Therefore the writer of the book of Genesis must have been some person who lived after the town of Laish had the name of Dan, and who that person was nobody knows; and consequently the book of Genesis is anonymous, and without authority.”ARSH April 8, 1880, page 226.3

    Now, it is an historical fact that there was just such a place as Dan, not only at the time when the book of Genesis was written, but at the time that Abraham pursued after the kings and rescued Lot. Josephus says: “When Abraham heard of their calamity, he was at once afraid for Lot his kinsman, and pitied the Sodomites his friends and neighbors; and thinking it proper to afford them assistance, he did not delay it, but marched hastily, and the fifth night fell upon the Assyrians, near Dan, for that is the name of the other spring of Jordan.”—Antiquities, book I, chap 10. sect. 1. Therefore, this argument of Mr. Paine’s is false. Jordan comes from the words “zhar-dan,” which signify “the river of Dan,” first mentioned in Genesis 13:9-11.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 226.4

    On page 74 he again says: “There is a striking confusion between the historical and the chronological arrangement in the book of Judges. The five last chapters, as they stand in the book, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, are put chronologically before all the preceding chapters; they are made to be 28 years [It should be 286—a typographical error, I suppose.] before the 16th chapter, 266 before the 15th, 245 before the 13th, 195 before the 9th, 90 before the 4th, and 15 years before the first chapter.”ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.1

    Here is a shameful fraud. The date at the head of the last five chapters of Judges, beginning at the 17th, is B. C. 1406, while the date at the head of the first chapter is B. C. 1425. Anybody who knows enough to subtract one number from another, can see that the difference between 1425 and 1406 is 19. And therefore, so far from the last five chapters being place “fifteen years before the first chapter,” they are placed nineteen years after.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.2

    Mr. Paine was not an ignorant man; he professed to understand the sciences, especially astronomy. Nor can this discrepancy be excused by saying that the chronology has been changed since his day; for all his other figures are correct, except the 195, which should be 197. Then what can we say of this but that it is the invention of a shameful fraud, and is palmed off upon the credulity of those who are greedy to swallow anything that is opposed to the Bible. But, above all, what shall we say of those profoundly learned (?) infidels who have read and studied, printed and re-printed, the “Age of Reason,” for nearly a hundred years, and hurled it against the Bible; yet have never read, or compared it, with the Bible sufficiently to discover a fraud so glaringly apparent that the veriest school-boy could see it, who would take the pains to make the comparison. And this is the king of reasoning (?) that is to overthrow the Bible! We showed in the former part of this review, that they who reject the Scriptures, reject reason; and in this, and many other instances which we shall find before we get through, it is verified.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.3

    On page 90 he condemns the books of the Kings and Chronicles, because the one does not repeat everything recorded in the other. Keep this in mind; we shall have use for it soon.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.4

    On pages 96 and 97, speaking of Ezra and Nehemiah he says: “But even in matters of historical record, neither of these writers is to be depended upon. In the second chapter of Ezra, the writer gives a list of the tribes and families, and of the precise number of souls of each that returned from Babylon to Jerusalem.” “The writer begins his enrollment in the following manner: Chap. 2:3: ‘The children of Parosh, two thousand an hundred seventy and two.’ Verse 4: ‘The children of Shephatiah, three hundred seventy and two.’ And in this manner he proceeds through all the families; and in the 64th verse, he makes a total, and says, the whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore. But whoever will take the trouble of casting up several particulars, will find that the total is but 29,818; so that the error is 12,542.”ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.5

    Then, after speaking of Nehemiah’s record, chap. 2:8, etc., in the same way, he says, “These writers may do well enough for Bible-makers, but not for anything where truth and exactness is necessary.” But is his statement concerning Ezra’s account true? Is there an error of 12,542? If it be true that there is such an error as that, we might well doubt. But it is not true. See Ezra 2:2, 3: “The number of the men of the people of Israel: the children of Parosh,” etc. Nehemiah the same. Nehemiah 7:7: “The number, I say, of the men of the people of Israel was this: The children of Parosh,” etc. So the truth is that the number of men was 29,818; and then (verse 66) with the women and children, “The whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore, besides their manservants and their maidservants.” Had he told the whole truth, he could have shown no objection to the books; but in harmony with the rule that he has adopted, he leaves out just enough to make the account falsify itself.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.6

    On page 98 he says of the book of Job: “The astronomical names, Pleiades, Orion, and Arcturus, are Greek, and not Hebrew names; and as it does not appear form anything that is to be found in the Bible that the Jews knew anything of astronomy, or that they studied it, they had no translation of those names into their own language, but adopted the names as they found them in the poem.” It is true “that the Hebrews had no translation of those names into their own language;” for the very good reason that they had names for them in the Hebrew 844 years before Cadmus introduced letters into Greece, and 1934 years before the Greek language was complete. In Hebrew the name of Arcturus was Ash, of Orion Cesil, and of Pleiades Cimah. See Job 9:9, margin.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.7

    Mr. Paine does not say plainly, but he insinuates in this, that the book of Job was not written in Hebrew, but in the Greek; and by this he would convey the idea that the book was not written as anciently as the Bible chronology places it. He says further of it on page 99, “It contains no one historical circumstance, nor allusion to any, that might serve to determine its place in the Bible.”ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.8

    Admitting, for the sake of the argument, that there is no “historical circumstance or allusion that would determine its place,” yet had he honestly allowed and investigated the claims of the book, he would have found astronomical allusions, by which, had he been as accomplished in the science of astronomy as he seems to indicate on page 44 to 49, he could have fixed to a certainty the date of the events recorded in the book of Job. I quote from Horne’s Introduction, “Analysis of the Book of Job:“—ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.9

    “Dr. Hales has adduced a new and more particular proof, drawn from astronomy, which fixes the time of the patriarch’s trial to 184 years before the birth of Abraham; for, by a retrograde calculation the principal stars referred to in Job by the names of Chimah and Chesil, or Taurus and Scorpio, are found to have been the cardinal constellations of spring and autumn in the time of Job, of which the chief stars are Aldebaran, the bull’s eye, and Antares, the scorpion’s heart. Knowing, therefore, the longitudes of these stars at present, the interval of time from thence to the assumed date of Job’s trial will give the difference of their longitudes, and ascertain their positions then, with respect to the vernal and autumnal points of intersection of the equinoctial and the ecliptic; which difference is one degree in 71½ years, according to the usual rate of the precession of the equinoxes. ‘In A. D. 1808, Aldebaran was in two signs, 7 deg. east longitude; but since the date of Job’s trial, B. C. 2338 added to 1800, makes 4138 years, the precession of the equinoxes amounted to 1 sign, 27 deg., 53 min., which, being subtracted from the former quantity, left Aldebaran in only 9 deg., 7 min. longitude, or, distance from the vernal intersection, which falling within the constellation Taurus, consequently rendered it the cardinal constellation of spring, as Pisces is at present.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.10

    “‘In A. D. 1800, Antares was in eight signs, 7 deg., 58 min. east longitude, or 2 signs, 6 deg., 58 min. east of autumnal intersection; from which subtracting, as before, the amount of the precession, Antares was left only 9 deg., 5 min. east. Since, then, the autumnal equinox was found within Scorpio, this was then the cardinal constellation of autumn, as Virgo is at present.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.11

    “‘Since, then, these calculations critically correspond with the positions of the equinoxes at the assumed date of Job’s trial, but disagree with the lower dates, of Moses, and still more of Ezra, furnishing different cardinal constellations, we may rest in the assumed date of the trial as correct. Such a combination and coincidence of various rays of evidence, derived from widely different sources, history, sacred and profane, chronology, and astronomy, and all converging to the same common focus, tends strongly to establish the time of Job’s trial as rightly assigned to the year B. C. 2337 (2130 of the common computation), or 816 years after the deluge; 184 years before the birth of Abraham; 474 years before the settlement of Jacob’s family in Egypt, and 689 years before the exode, or departure from thence.”ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.12

    On page 102 he says of the book of Isaiah: “Whoever will take the trouble of reading the book ascribed to Isaiah will find it one of the most wild and disorderly compositions ever put together; it has neither beginning, middle, nor end; and except a short historical part, and a few sketches of history, in two or three of the first chapters, it is one continued, incoherent, bombastical rant, full of extravagant metaphor, without application, and destitute of meaning; a school boy would scarcely have been excusable for writing such stuff.” I only give this as the most decent specimen of some of his reasoning (?) which I do not notice at all.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.13

    On pages 104, 105, he says: “The king of Syria and the king of Israel made war jointly against Ahaz, king of Judah, and marched their armies toward Jerusalem. Ahaz and his people became alarmed, and the account says, chap. 7:2, Their hearts were moved ‘as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.’ In this situation of things, Isaiah addresses himself to Ahaz, and assures him in the name of the Lord, that these two kings should not succeed against him.... But to show the imposition and falsehood of Isaiah, we have only to attend to the sequel of this story, which is related in the 28th chapter of Second Chronicles; and which is, that instead of these two kings failing in their attempt against Ahaz, as Isaiah had pretended to foretell in the name of the Lord, they succeeded! Ahaz was defeated, and destroyed; a hundred and twenty thousand of his people were slaughtered; Jerusalem was plundered, and two hundred thousand women, and sons of daughters, carried into captivity.”ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.14

    This is sufficiently astonishing to overturn a dozen books, if it were only true. But I say emphatically, It is not true. Proof: 2 Kings 16:5: “Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to war: and they besieged Ahaz, but could not overcome him.” This was in the year B. C. 742; but as Ahaz would not be reformed by this signal manner in which God had helped him, but continued in his wickedness, the next year, B. C. 741, those same kings came against him, defeated him, slew 120,000 of his people, and carried captive 200,000.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.15

    Now Mr. Paine had no excuse for this either; for he admitted before that he had a Bible with the “chronology printed in the margin of every page” (page 73). Therefore the margin of his Bible showed, at Isaiah 7, and 2 Kings 16:1-7, the figures B. C. 742, while in the margin of 2 Chronicles 28:1-19 were the figures B. C. 741.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.16

    Here we are forced to one or both of the following conclusions: either Thomas Paine did not understand the Bible, or he falsified the record. And it is my opinion, that, under the circumstances, both conclusions would be justifiable.ARSH April 8, 1880, page 227.17

    (Concluded next week.)

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents