such men as his disciples to consolidate these misty fables into a positive, living, creative religion; and in thirty or forty years to plant it among the most civilised and the most barbarous nations, and take captive the intellects and the hearts of hundreds of thousands, who, till then, had never known the meaning, or even heard the name, öf Messiah. This is the problem which Dr. Strauss has yet to solve, before he can command faith for his mythic system of interpretation; before he can accomplish the destruction of the historical character of the Gospel narratives.

does not always prove from history or the nature of things, that the idea existed before the story or the fact was invented. He finds certain opinions, prophecies, and expectations in the Old Testament, and affirms at once these were both the cause and the occasion of the later stories, in which they re-appear. This method of treatment requires very little ingenuity on the part of the critic; we could resolve half of Luther's life into a series of myths, which are formed after the mode of Paul's history; indeed, this has already been done. Nay, we could dissolve any given historical event in a mythical solution, and precipitate the seminal ideas' in their primitive form. We also can change a historical character into a symbol of 'universal humanity.'

Mr. Parker then proceeds to dissolve the history of the United States, a la mode Strauss, into a series of myths; and it is done in such a happy manner, and so admirably illustrates the plan, and real value, of Strauss' Life of Jesus, that we cannot forbear quoting it, notwithstanding its length. The myths are drawn in part from the Old Testament, in part from the Apocalypse, and in part from fancy.

"The British Government oppressing the Puritans, is the great red dragon of the Revelations, as is shown, by the national arms, and by the British legend of Saint George and the Dragon. The splendid career of the new people is borrowed from the persecuted woman's political history, her dress-" clothed with the sun." The stars said to be in the national banner, are only the crown of twelve stars on the poetic being's head; the perils of the pilgrims in the Mayflower are only the woman's flight on the wings of a

great eagle. The war between the two countries is only the practical application of the flood which the dragon cast out against the woman, &c. The story of the Declaration of Independence is also liable to many objections. The congress was held at a mythical town, whose very name is suspicious,-Philadelphia,-Brotherly Love. (We cannot fail to discover the influence of the myth, here, as Strauss would say.) The date is suspicious; it was the fourth day of the fourth month, reckoning from April, as it is probable the Heraclidæ, and Scandinavians, possible that the aborig. inal Americans, and certrin that the Hebrews did.) Now four was a sacred number with the Americans: the president was chosen for four years; there were four departments of affairs; four divisions of the political powers, viz: the people, the congress, the executive, and the judiciary, &c. Besides, which is still more incredible, three of the presidents, two of whom it is alleged signed the declaration, died on the fourth of July, and the two latter exactly fifty years after they had signed it, and about the same hour of the day. (This fifty years is probably a bungling allusion to the Jewish year of Jubilee.) The year is also suspicious; 1776 is but an ingenious combination of the sacred number, four, which is repeated three times, and then multiplied by itself to produce the date; thus 444 plus 4 1776. Q. E. D. Now dividing the first (444) by the second (4), we have Unity thrice repeated (111). This is a manifest symbol of the national oneness, (likewise represented in the motto, e pluribus unum); and of the national religion, of which the Triniform Monad, or "Trinity in Unity," and "Unity in Trinity," is the well known sign!! Still farther, the Declaration is metaphysical, and presupposes an acquaintance with the transcendental philosophy, on the part of the American people. Now the "Kritik of Pure Reason" was not published till after the Declaration was made. Still farther, the Americans were never, to use the nebulous expression of certain philosophers, an idealotranscendental-and-subjective, but an objective-and-concentrativopractical people, to the last degree; and therefore a metaphysical document is highly suspicious if found among them. Besides. Hualteperah, the great historian of Mexico, a neighboring state. never mentions this document. And farther still, if this Declaration had been made, and accepted by the whole nation, as it is pretended, then we cannot account for the fact, that the fundamental maxim of that paper, namely, the soul's equality to itself,—“ all men are born free and equal"-was perpetually lost sight of, and a large portion of the people kept in slavery; still later, peti

tions, supported by this fundamental article,-for the abolition of slavery, were rejected by Congress with unexampled contempt, when, if the history is not mythical, slavery never had a legal existence after 1776, &c., &c. But we could go on this way forever."-Critical and Miscellaneous Writings, pp. 299-301.

31

1. THE internal objections to the mythical character of the Gospel narratives, are as palpable and strong as the external. The difficulties in the way of this theory, which lie in the very structure of the narratives, in the character of the events related, and in the simplicity and naturalness with which they are set forth, are obvious to the most superficial reader. And it must require an effort, and all the ingenuity of a sceptical criticism, to give any appearance of probability to the argument in support of their legendary character. It is the object of this section to point out a few of the particulars illustrating the difference between actual myths and the Gospel accounts of Christ; and showing the necessity of acknowledging the historical character of the latter, or of admitting an effect without a cause.

1.

REAL MYTHS AND THE GOSPEL HISTORIES CONTRASTED,
AND THE DIFFERENCE SHOWN.

2. Without any argument grounded in the nature of the subject, and without a lengthy preface, we have thought it best to place actual existing legends or myths respecting Jesus, side by side with the simple, unadorned narratives of the evangelists; and then leave the reader to judge for himself of the contrast, and determine how much force there is in Strauss' arguments for the mythical character of the Gospels.

(1.) THE ESCAPE OF JESUS FROM THE MASSACRE BY HEROD.

GOSPEL HISTORIES.

"The angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. When he arose he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt; and was there until the death of Herod." Gospel by Matthew ii. 13, 14.

Note. The naturalness and simplicity of Matthew's account, compared with the account in the parallel columns, shows the difference between history and le

gend.

MYTHS OR LEGENDS.

"Elizabeth also, hearing that her son John was about to be searched for, took him and went up into the mountains, and looked around for a place to hide him; and there was no secret place to be found. Then she groaned within herself, and said, O mountain of the Lord, receive the mother with the child. For Elizabath could not climb up. And instantly the mountain was divided, and received them. And there appeared an angel of the Lord to preserve them." Apocryphal Prot-evangelion, xvi.

(II.) JESUS DISPUTING WITH THE DOCTORS IN THE TEMPLE.

"Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover. And when he

"When a certain astronomer, who was present, asked the Lord Jesus whether he had studied as