Conclusion Of Part First

There are many other legends recorded in the Old Testament which might

be treated at length, but, as we have considered the principal and most

important, and as we have so much to examine in Part Second, which

treats of the New Testament, we shall take but a passing glance at a few


In Genesis xli. is to be found the story of


is to the effect that Pharaoh dreamed that he stood by a river,

and saw come up out of it seven fat kine, and seven lean kine, which

devoured the fat ones. He then dreamed that he saw seven good ears of

corn, on one stalk, spring up out of the ground. This was followed by

seven poor ears, which sprang up after them, and devoured the good


Pharaoh, upon awaking from his sleep, and recalling the dreams which he

dreamed, was greatly troubled, "and he sent and called for all the

magicians of Egypt, and all the wise men thereof, and Pharaoh told them

his dreams, but there was none that could interpret them unto Pharaoh."

Finally, his chief butler tells him of one Joseph, who was skilled in

interpreting dreams, and Pharaoh orders him to be brought before his

presence. He then repeats his dreams to Joseph, who immediately

interprets them to the great satisfaction of the king.

A very similar story is related in the Buddhist Fo-pen-hing--one of

their sacred books, which has been translated by Prof. Samuel

Beal--which, in substance, is as follows:

Suddhodana Raja dreamed seven different dreams in one night, when,

"awaking from his sleep, and recalling the visions he had seen, was

greatly troubled, so that the very hair on his body stood erect, and his

limbs trembled." He forthwith summoned to his side, within his palace,

all the great ministers of his council, and exhorted them in these

words: "Most honorable Sirs! be it known to you that during the present

night I have seen in my dreams strange and potent visions--there were

seven distinct dreams, which I will now recite (he recites the

dreams). I pray you, honorable Sirs! let not these dreams escape your

memories, but in the morning, when I am seated in my palace, and

surrounded by my attendants, let them be brought to my mind (that they

may be interpreted.)"

At morning light, the king, seated in the midst of his attendants,

issued his commands to all the Brahmans, interpreters of dreams, within

his kingdom, in these terms, "All ye men of wisdom, explain for me by

interpretation the meaning of the dreams I have dreamed in my sleep."

Then all the wise Brahmans, interpreters of dreams, began to consider,

each one in his own heart, what the meaning of these visions could be;

till at last they addressed the king, and said: "Maha-raja! be it known

to you that we never before have heard such dreams as these, and we

cannot interpret their meaning."

On hearing this, Suddhodana was very troubled in his heart, and

exceeding distressed. He thought within himself: "Who is there that can

satisfy these doubts of mine?"

Finally a "holy one," called T'so-Ping, being present in the inner

palace, and perceiving the sorrow and distress of the king, assumed the

appearance of a Brahman, and under this form he stood at the gate of the

king's palace, and cried out, saying: "I am able fully to interpret the

dreams of Suddhodana Raja, and with certainty to satisfy all the


The king ordered him to be brought before his presence, and then related

to him his dreams. Upon hearing them, T'so-Ping immediately

interpreted them, to the great satisfaction of the king.[89:1]

In the second chapter of Exodus we read of


which is done by command of the king.

There are many counterparts to this in ancient mythology; among them may

be mentioned that of the infant Perseus, who was, by command of the

king (Acrisius of Argos), shut up in a chest, and cast into the sea. He

was found by one Dictys, who took great care of the child, and--as

Pharaoh's daughter did with the child Moses--educated him.[89:2]

The infant Bacchus was confined in a chest, by order of Cadmus, King

of Thebes, and thrown into the Nile.[90:1] He, like Moses, had two

mothers, one by nature, the other by adoption.[90:2] He was also, like

Moses, represented horned.[90:3]

Osiris was also confined in a chest, and thrown into the river


When Osiris was shut into the coffer, and cast into the river, he

floated to Phenicia, and was there received under the name of Adonis.

Isis (his mother, or wife) wandered in quest of him, came to Byblos, and

seated herself by a fountain in silence and tears. She was then taken by

the servants of the royal palace, and made to attend on the young prince

of the land. In like manner, Demeter, after Aidoneus had ravished her

daughter, went in pursuit, reached Eleusis, seated herself by a well,

conversed with the daughters of the queen, and became nurse to her

son.[90:5] So likewise, when Moses was put into the ark made of

bulrushes, and cast into the Nile, he was found by the daughters of

Pharaoh, and his own mother became his nurse.[90:6] This is simply

another version of the same myth.

In the second chapter of the second book of Kings, we read of


There are many counterparts to this, in heathen mythology.

Hindoo sacred writings relate many such stories--how some of their Holy

Ones were taken up alive into heaven--and impressions on rocks are

shown, said to be foot-prints, made when they ascended.[90:7]

According to Babylonian mythology, Xisuthrus was translated to


The story of Elijah ascending to heaven in a chariot of fire may also be

compared to the fiery, flame-red chariot of Ushas.[90:9] This idea of

some Holy One ascending to heaven without dying was found in the ancient

mythology of the Chinese.[90:10]

The story of


by throwing a stone and hitting him in the forehead,[90:11] may be

compared to the story of Thor, the Scandinavian hero, throwing a

hammer at Hrungnir, and striking him in the forehead.[91:1]

We read in Numbers[91:2] that


to his master, and reproved him.

In ancient fables or stories in which animals play prominent parts, each

creature is endowed with the power of speech. This idea was common in

the whole of Western Asia and Egypt. It is found in various Egyptian and

Chaldean stories.[91:3] Homer has recorded that the horse of Achilles

spoke to him.[91:4]

We have also a very wonderful story in that of


This story is related in the tenth chapter of the book of Joshua, and is

to the effect that the Israelites, who were at battle with the Amorites,

wished the day to be lengthened that they might continue their

slaughter, whereupon Joshua said: "Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon,

and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and

the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their

enemies. . . . And there was no day like that before it or after it."

There are many stories similar to this, to be found among other nations

of antiquity. We have, as an example, that which is related of Bacchus

in the Orphic hymns, wherein it says that this god-man arrested the

course of the sun and the moon.[91:5]

An Indian legend relates that the sun stood still to hear the pious

ejaculations of Arjouan after the death of Crishna.[91:6]

A holy Buddhist by the name of Matanga prevented the sun, at his

command, from rising, and bisected the moon.[91:7] Arresting the course

of the sun was a common thing among the disciples of Buddha.[91:8]

The Chinese also, had a legend of the sun standing still,[91:9] and a

legend was found among the Ancient Mexicans to the effect that one of

their holy persons commanded the sun to stand still, which command was


We shall now endeavor to answer the question which must naturally arise

in the minds of all who see, for the first time, the similarity in the

legends of the Hebrews and those of other nations, namely: have the

Hebrews copied from other nations, or, have other nations copied from

the Hebrews? To answer this question we shall; first, give a brief

account or history of the Pentateuch and other books of the Old

Testament from which we have taken legends, and show about what time

they were written; and, second, show that other nations were possessed

of these legends long before that time, and that the Jews copied from


The Pentateuch is ascribed, in our modern translations, to Moses,

and he is generally supposed to be the author. This is altogether

erroneous, as Moses had nothing whatever to do with these five books.

Bishop Colenso, speaking of this, says:

"The books of the Pentateuch are never ascribed to Moses in

the inscriptions of Hebrew manuscripts, or in printed copies

of the Hebrew Bible. Nor are they styled the 'Books of

Moses' in the Septuagint[92:1] or Vulgate,[92:2] but only in

our modern translations, after the example of many eminent

Fathers of the Church, who, with the exception of Jerome, and,

perhaps, Origen, were, one and all of them, very little

acquainted with the Hebrew language, and still less with its


The author of "The Religion of Israel," referring to this subject, says:

"The Jews who lived after the Babylonish Captivity, and the

Christians following their examples, ascribed these books (the

Pentateuch) to Moses; and for many centuries the notion was

cherished that he had really written them. But strict and

impartial investigation has shown that this opinion must be

given up; and that nothing in the whole Law really comes

from Moses himself except the Ten Commandments. And even

these were not delivered by him in the same form as we find

them now. If we still call these books by his name, it is

only because the Israelites always thought of him as their

first and greatest law-giver, and the actual authors grouped

all their narratives and laws around his figure, and

associated them with his name."[92:4]

As we cannot go into an extended account, and show how this is known,

we will simply say that it is principally by internal evidence that

these facts are ascertained.[92:5]

Now that we have seen that Moses did not write the books of the

Pentateuch, our next endeavor will be to ascertain when they were

written, and by whom.

We can say that they were not written by any one person, nor were they

written at the same time.

We can trace three principal redactions of the Pentateuch, that is to

say, the material was worked over, and re-edited, with

modifications and additions, by different people, at three

distinct epochs.[93:1]

The two principal writers are generally known as the Jehovistic and

the Elohistic. We have--in speaking of the "Eden Myth" and the legend

of the "Deluge"--already alluded to this fact, and have illustrated how

these writers' narratives conflict with each other.

The Jehovistic writer is supposed to have been a prophet, who, it

would seem, was anxious to give Israel a history. He begins at Genesis,

ii. 4, with a short account, of the "Creation," and then he carries

the story on regularly until the Israelites enter Canaan. It is to him

that we are indebted for the charming pictures of the patriarchs. He

took these from other writings, or from the popular legends.[93:2]

About 725 B. C. the Israelites were conquered by Salmanassar, King of

Assyria, and many of them were carried away captives. Their place was

supplied by Assyrian colonists from Babylon, Persia, and other

places.[93:3] This fact is of the greatest importance, and should not

be forgotten, as we find that the first of the three writers of the

Pentateuch, spoken of above, wrote about this time, and the Israelites

heard, from the colonists from Babylon, Persia, and other places--for

the first time--many of the legends which this writer wove into the

fabulous history which he wrote, especially the accounts of the Creation

and the Deluge.

The Pentateuch remained in this, its first form, until the year 620 B.

C. Then a certain priest of marked prophetic sympathies wrote a book

of law which has come down to us in Deuteronomy, iv. 44, to xxvi., and

xxviii. Here we find the demands which the Mosaic party at that day

were making thrown into the form of laws. It was by King Josiah that

this book was first introduced and proclaimed as authoritative.[93:4] It

was soon afterwards wove into the work of the first Pentateuchian

writer, and at the same time "a few new passages" were added, some of

which related to Joshua, the successor of Moses.[94:1]

At this period in Israel's history, Jehovah had become almost forgotten,

and "other gods" had taken his place.[94:2] The Mosaic party, so

called--who worshiped Jehovah exclusively--were in the minority, but

when King Amon--who was a worshiper of Moloch--died, and was succeeded

by his son Josiah, a change immediately took place. This young prince,

who was only eight years old at the death of his father, the Mosaic

party succeeded in winning over to their interests. In the year 621 B.

C., Josiah, now in the eighteenth year of his reign, began a thorough

reformation which completely answered to the ideas of the Mosaic


It was during this time that the second Pentateuchian writer wrote,

and he makes Moses speak as the law-giver. This writer was probably

Hilkiah, who claimed to have found a book, written by Moses, in the

temple,[94:4] although it had only just been drawn up.[94:5]

The principal objections which were brought against the claims of

Hilkiah, but which are not needed in the present age of inquiry, was

that Shaphan and Josiah read it off, not as if it were an old book,

but as though it had been recently written, when any person who is

acquainted, in the slightest degree, with language, must know that a man

could not read off, at once, a book written eight hundred years

before. The phraseology would necessarily be so altered by time as to

render it comparatively unintelligible.

We must now turn to the third Pentateuchian writer, whose writings

were published 444 B. C.

At that time Ezra (or Ezdras) added to the work of his two

predecessors a series of laws and narratives which had been drawn

up by some of the priests in Babylon.[94:6] This "series of laws and

narratives," which was written by "some of the (Israelitish) priests in

Babylon," was called "The Book of Origins" (probably containing the

Babylonian account of the "Origin of Things," or the "Creation").

Ezra brought the book from Babylon to Jerusalem. He made some

modifications in it and constituted it a code of law for Israel,

dove-tailing it into those parts of the Pentateuch which existed

before. A few alterations and additions were subsequently made,

but these are of minor importance, and we may fairly say that Ezra put

the Pentateuch into the form in which we have it (about 444 B. C.).

These priestly passages are partly occupied with historical matter,

comprising a very free account of things from the creation of the world

to the arrival of Israel in Canaan. Everything is here presented from

the priestly point of view; some events, elsewhere recorded, are

touched up in the priestly spirit, and others are entirely


It was the belief of the Jews, asserted by the Pirke Aboth (Sayings of

the Fathers), one of the oldest books of the Talmud,[95:2] as well as

other Jewish records, that Ezra, acting in accordance with a divine

commission, re-wrote the Old Testament, the manuscripts of which were

said to have been lost in the destruction of the first temple, when

Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem.[95:3] This we know could not have been

the case. The fact that Ezra wrote--adding to, and taking from the

already existing books of the Pentateuch--was probably the foundation

for this tradition. The account of it is to be found in the Apocryphal

book of Esdras, a book deemed authentic by the Greek Church.

Dr. Knappert, speaking of this, says:

"For many centuries, both the Christians and the Jews supposed

that Ezra had brought together the sacred writings of his

people, united them in one whole, and introduced them as a

book given by the Spirit of God--a Holy Scripture.

"The only authority for this supposition was a very modern and

altogether untrustworthy tradition. The historical and

critical studies of our times have been emancipated from the

influence of this tradition, and the most ancient statements

with regard to the subject have been hunted up and compared

together. These statements are, indeed, scanty and incomplete,

and many a detail is still obscure; but the main facts have

been completely ascertained.

"Before the Babylonish captivity, Israel had no sacred

writings. There were certain laws, prophetic writings, and a

few historical books, but no one had ever thought of ascribing

binding and divine authority to these documents.

"Ezra brought the priestly law with him from Babylon,

altering it and amalgamating it with the narratives and laws

already in existence, and thus produced the Pentateuch in

pretty much the same form (though not quite, as we shall

show) as we still have it. These books got the name of the

'Law of Moses,' or simply the 'Law.' Ezra introduced them

into Israel (B. C. 444), and gave them binding authority, and

from that time forward they were considered divine."[95:4]

From the time of Ezra until the year 287 B. C., when the Pentateuch was

translated into Greek by order of Ptolemy Philadelphus, King of Egypt,

these books evidently underwent some changes. This the writer quoted

above admits, in saying:

"Later still (viz., after the time of Ezra), a few more

changes and additions were made, and so the Pentateuch grew

into its present form."[96:1]

In answer to those who claim that the Pentateuch was written by one

person, Bishop Colenso says:

"It is certainly inconceivable that if the Pentateuch be the

production of one and the same hand throughout, it should

contain such a number of glaring inconsistencies. . . . No

single author could have been guilty of such absurdities; but

it is quite possible, and what was almost sure to happen in

such a case, that, if the Pentateuch be the work of different

authors in different ages, this fact should betray itself

by the existence of contradictions in the narrative."[96:2]

Having ascertained the origin of the Pentateuch, or first five books of

the Old Testament, it will be unnecessary to refer to the others here,

as we have nothing to do with them in our investigations. Suffice it

to say then, that: "In the earlier period after Ezra, none of the other

books which already existed, enjoyed the same authority as the


It is probable[96:4] that Nehemiah made a collection of historical and

prophetic books, songs, and letters from Persian kings, not to form a

second collection, but for the purpose of saving them from being lost.

The scribes of Jerusalem, followers of Ezra, who were known as "the men

of the Great Synagogue," were the collectors of the second and third

divisions of the Old Testament. They collected together the historical

and prophetic books, songs, &c., which were then in existence, and

after altering many of them, they were added to the collection of

sacred books. It must not be supposed that any fixed plan was pursued

in this work, or that the idea was entertained from the first, that

these books would one day stand on the same level with the


In the course of time, however, many of the Jews began to consider

some of these books as sacred. The Alexandrian Jews adopted books

into the canon which those of Jerusalem did not, and this difference of

opinion lasted for a long time, even till the second century after

Christ. It was not until this time that all the books of the Old

Testament acquired divine authority.[96:6] It is not known, however,

just when the canon of the Old Testament was closed. The time and

manner in which it was done is altogether obscure.[97:1] Jewish

tradition indicates that the full canonicity of several books was not

free from doubt till the time of the famous Rabbi Akiba,[97:2] who

flourished about the beginning of the second century after Christ.[97:3]

After giving a history of the books of the Old Testament, the author of

"The Religion of Israel," whom we have followed in this investigation,


"The great majority of the writers of the Old Testament had no

other source of information about the past history of Israel

than simple tradition. Indeed, it could not have been

otherwise, for in primitive times no one used to record

anything in writing, and the only way of preserving a

knowledge of the past was to hand it down by word of mouth.

The father told the son what his elders had told him, and the

son handed it on to the next generation.

"Not only did the historian of Israel draw from tradition with

perfect freedom, and write down without hesitation anything

they heard and what was current in the mouths of the people,

but they did not shrink from modifying their representation

of the past in any way that they thought would be good and

useful. It is difficult for us to look at things from this

point of view, because our ideas of historical good faith are

so utterly different. When we write history, we know that we

ought to be guided solely by a desire to represent facts

exactly as they really happened. All that we are concerned

with is reality; we want to make the old times live again,

and we take all possible pains not to remodel the past from

the point of view of to-day. All we want to know is what

happened, and how men lived, thought, and worked in those

days. The Israelites had a very different notion of the nature

of historical composition. When a prophet or a priest related

something about bygone times, his object was not to convey

knowledge about those times; on the contrary, he used history

merely as a vehicle for the conveyance of instruction and

exhortation. Not only did he confine his narrative to such

matters as he thought would serve his purpose but he never

hesitated to modify what he knew of the past, and he did not

think twice about touching it up from his own imagination,

simply that it might be more conducive to the end he had in

view and chime in better with his opinions. All the past

became colored through and through with the tinge of his own

mind. Our own notions of honor and good faith would never

permit all this; but we must not measure ancient writers by

our own standard; they considered that they were acting quite

within their rights and in strict accordance with duty and


It will be noticed that, in our investigations on the authority of the

Pentateuch, we have followed, principally, Dr. Knappert's ideas as set

forth in "The Religion of Israel."

This we have done because we could not go into an extended

investigation, and because his words are very expressive, and just to

the point. To those who may think that his ideas are not the same as

those entertained by other Biblical scholars of the present day, we

subjoin, in a note below, a list of works to which they are


We shall now, after giving a brief history of the Pentateuch, refer to

the legends of which we have been treating, and endeavor to show from

whence the Hebrews borrowed them. The first of these is "The Creation

and Fall of Man."

Egypt, the country out of which the Israelites came, had no story of the

Creation and Fall of Man, such as we have found among the Hebrews;

they therefore could not have learned it from them. The Chaldeans,

however, as we saw in our first chapter, had this legend, and it is from

them that the Hebrews borrowed it.

The account which we have given of the Chaldean story of the Creation

and Fall of Man, was taken, as we stated, from the writings of Berosus,

the Chaldean historian, who lived in the time of Alexander the Great

(356-325 B. C.), and as the Jews were acquainted with the story some

centuries earlier than this, his works did not prove that these

traditions were in Babylonia before the Jewish captivity, and could not

afford testimony in favor of the statement that the Jews borrowed this

legend from the Babylonians at that time. It was left for Mr. George

Smith, of the British Museum, to establish, without a doubt, the fact

that this legend was known to the Babylonians at least two thousand

years before the time assigned for the birth of Jesus. The cuneiform

inscriptions discovered by him, while on an expedition to Assyria,

organized by the London "Daily Telegraph," was the means of doing this,

and although by far the greatest number of these tablets belong to the

age of Assurbanipal, who reigned over Assyria B. C. 670, it is

"acknowledged on all hands that these tablets are not the originals,

but are only copies from earlier texts." "The Assyrians acknowledge

themselves that this literature was borrowed from Babylonian sources,

and of course it is to Babylonia we have to look to ascertain the

approximate dates of the original documents."[98:2] Mr. Smith then

shows, from "fragments of the Cuneiform account of the Creation and

Fall" which have been discovered, that, "in the period from B. C. 2000

to 1500, the Babylonians believed in a story similar to that in

Genesis." It is probable, however, says Mr. Smith, that this legend

existed as traditions in the country long before it was committed to

writing, and some of these traditions exhibited great difference in

details, showing that they had passed through many changes.[99:1]

Professor James Fergusson, in his celebrated work on "Tree and Serpent

Worship," says:

"The two chapters which refer to this (i. e., the Garden,

the Tree, and the Serpent), as indeed the whole of the first

eight of Genesis, are now generally admitted by scholars to be

made up of fragments of earlier books or earlier traditions,

belonging, properly speaking, to Mesopotamia rather than to

Jewish history, the exact meaning of which the writers of the

Pentateuch seem hardly to have appreciated when they

transcribed them in the form in which they are now


John Fiske says:

"The story of the Serpent in Eden is an Aryan story in every

particular. The notion of Satan as the author of evil appears

only in the later books, composed after the Jews had come

into close contact with Persian ideas."[99:3]

Prof. John W. Draper says:

"In the old legends of dualism, the evil spirit was said to

have sent a serpent to ruin Paradise. These legends became

known to the Jews during their Babylonian captivity."[99:4]

Professor Goldziher also shows, in his "Mythology Among the

Hebrews,"[99:5] that the story of the creation was borrowed by the

Hebrews from the Babylonians. He also informs us that the notion of the

bore and yoser, "Creator" (the term used in the cosmogony in

Genesis) as an integral part of the idea of God, are first brought into

use by the prophets of the captivity. "Thus also the story of the

Garden of Eden, as a supplement to the history of the Creation, was

written down at Babylon."

Strange as it may appear, after the Genesis account, we may pass

through the whole Pentateuch, and other books of the Old Testament,

clear to the end, and will find that the story of the "Garden of Eden"

and "Fall of Man," is hardly alluded to, if at all. Lengkerke says:

"One single certain trace of the employment of the story of Adam's

fall is entirely wanting in the Hebrew Canon (after the Genesis

account). Adam, Eve, the Serpent, the woman's seduction of her husband,

&c., are all images, to which the remaining words of the Israelites

never again recur."[100:1]

This circumstance can only be explained by the fact that the first

chapters of Genesis were not written until after the other portions

had been written.

It is worthy of notice, that this story of the Fall of Man, upon which

the whole orthodox scheme of a divine Saviour or Redeemer is based, was

not considered by the learned Israelites as fact. They simply looked

upon it as a story which satisfied the ignorant, but which should be

considered as allegory by the learned.[100:2]

Rabbi Maimonides (Moses Ben Maimon), one of the most celebrated of the

Rabbis, says on this subject:--

"We must not understand, or take in a literal sense, what is

written in the book on the Creation, nor form of it the

same ideas which are participated by the generality of

mankind; otherwise our ancient sages would not have so much

recommended to us, to hide the real meaning of it, and not to

lift the allegorical veil, which covers the truth contained

therein. When taken in its literal sense, the work gives

the most absurd and most extravagant ideas of the Deity.

'Whosoever should divine its true meaning ought to take great

care in not divulging it.' This is a maxim repeated to us by

all our sages, principally concerning the understanding of the

work of the six days."[100:3]

Philo, a Jewish writer contemporary with Jesus, held the same opinion of

the character of the sacred books of the Hebrews. He has made two

particular treatises, bearing the title of "The Allegories," and he

traces back to the allegorical sense the "Tree of Life," the "Rivers

of Paradise," and the other fictions of the Genesis.[100:4]

Many of the early Christian Fathers declared that, in the story of the

Creation and Fall of Man, there was but an allegorical fiction. Among

these may be mentioned St. Augustine, who speaks of it in his "City of

God," and also Origen, who says:

"What man of sense will agree with the statement that the

first, second, and third days, in which the evening is named

and the morning, were without sun, moon and stars? What man

is found such an idiot as to suppose that God planted trees in

Paradise like an husbandman? I believe that every man must

hold these things for images under which a hidden sense is


Origen believed aright, as it is now almost universally admitted, that

the stories of the "Garden of Eden," the "Elysian Fields," the "Garden

of the Blessed," &c., which were the abode of the blessed, where grief

and sorrow could not approach them, where plague and sickness could not

touch them, were founded on allegory. These abodes of delight were far

away in the West, where the sun goes down beyond the bounds of the

earth. They were the "Golden Islands" sailing in a sea of blue--the

burnished clouds floating in the pure ether. In a word, the "Elysian

Fields" are the clouds at eventide. The picture was suggested by the

images drawn from the phenomena of sunset and twilight.[101:1]

Eating of the forbidden fruit was simply a figurative mode of expressing

the performance of the act necessary to the perpetuation of the human

race. The "Tree of Knowledge" was a Phallic tree, and the fruit which

grew upon it was Phallic fruit.[101:2]

In regard to the story of "The Deluge," we have already seen[101:3]

that "Egyptian records tell nothing of a cataclysmal deluge," and that,

"the land was never visited by other than its annual beneficent

overflow of the river Nile." Also, that "the Pharaoh Khoufou-cheops was

building his pyramid, according to Egyptian chronicle, when the whole

world was under the waters of a universal deluge, according to the

Hebrew chronicle." This is sufficient evidence that the Hebrews did not

borrow the legend from the Egyptians.

We have also seen, in the chapter that treated of this legend, that it

corresponded in all the principal features with the Chaldean account.

We shall now show that it was taken from this.

Mr. Smith discovered, on the site of Ninevah, during the years 1873-4,

cylinders belonging to the early Babylonian monarchy, (from 2500 to 1500

B. C.) which contained the legend of the flood,[101:4] and which we gave

in Chapter II. This was the foundation for the Hebrew legend, and they

learned it at the time of the Captivity.[101:5] The myth of Deucalion,

the Grecian hero, was also taken from the same source. The Greeks

learned it from the Chaldeans.

We read in Chambers's Encyclopaedia, that:

"It was at one time extensively believed, even by intelligent

scholars, that the myth of Deucalion was a corrupted

tradition of the Noachian deluge, but this untenable

opinion is now all but universally abandoned."[102:1]

This idea was abandoned after it was found that the Deucalion myth was

older than the Hebrew.

What was said in regard to the Eden story not being mentioned in other

portions of the Old Testament save in Genesis, also applies to this

story of the Deluge. Nowhere in the other books of the Old Testament

is found any reference to this story, except in Isaiah, where "the

waters of Noah" are mentioned, and in Ezekiel, where simply the name

of Noah is mentioned.

We stated in Chapter II. that some persons saw in this story an

astronomical myth. Although not generally admitted, yet there are very

strong reasons for believing this to be the case.

According to the Chaldean account--which is the oldest one

known--there were seven persons saved in the ark.[102:2] There were

also seven persons saved, according to some of the Hindoo

accounts.[102:3] That this referred to the sun, moon, and five planets

looks very probable. We have also seen that Noah was the tenth

patriarch, and Xisuthrus (who is the Chaldean hero) was the tenth

king.[102:4] Now, according to the Babylonian table, their Zodiac

contained ten gods called the "Ten Zodiac gods."[102:5] They also

believed that whenever all the planets met in the sign of Capricorn,

the whole earth was overwhelmed with a deluge of water.[102:6] The

Hindoos and other nations had a similar belief.[102:7]

It is well known that the Chaldeans were great astronomers. When

Alexander the Great conquered the city of Babylon, the Chaldean priests

boasted to the Greek philosophers, who followed his army, that they had

continued their astronomical calculations through a period of more than

forty thousand years.[102:8] Although this statement cannot be credited,

yet the great antiquity of Chaldea cannot be doubted, and its immediate

connection with Hindostan, or Egypt, is abundantly proved by the little

that is known concerning its religion, and by the few fragments that

remain of its former grandeur.

In regard to the story of "The Tower of Babel" little need be said.

This, as well as the story of the Creation and Fall of Man, and the

Deluge, was borrowed from the Babylonians.[102:9]

"It seems," says George Smith, "from the indications in the (cuneiform)

inscriptions, that there happened in the interval between 2000 and 1850

B. C. a general collection of the development of the various

traditions of the Creation, Flood, Tower of Babel, and other similar

legends." "These legends were, however, traditions before they were

committed to writing, and were common in some form to all the


The Tower of Babel, or the confusion of tongues, is nowhere alluded to

in the Old Testament outside of Genesis, where the story is related.

The next story in order is "The Trial of Abraham's Faith."

In this connection we have shown similar legends taken from Grecian

mythology, which legends may have given the idea to the writer of the

Hebrew story.

It may appear strange that the Hebrews should have been acquainted

with Grecian mythology, yet we know this was the case. The fact is

accounted for in the following manner:

Many of the Jews taken captive at the Edomite sack of Jerusalem were

sold to the Grecians,[103:2] who took them to their country. While

there, they became acquainted with Grecian legends, and when they

returned from "the Islands of the Sea"--as they called the Western

countries--they brought them to Jerusalem.[103:3]

This legend, as we stated in the chapter which treated of it, was

written at the time when the Mosaic party in Israel were endeavoring to

abolish human sacrifices and other "abominations," and the author of the

story invented it to make it appear that the Lord had abolished them in

the time of Abraham. The earliest Targum[103:4] knows nothing about

the legend, showing that the story was not in the Pentateuch at the time

this Targum was written.

We have also seen that a story written by Sanchoniathon (about B. C.

1300) of one Saturn, whom the Phenicians called Israel, bore a

resemblance to the Hebrew legend of Abraham. Now, Count de Volney

tells us that "a similar tradition prevailed among the Chaldeans,"

and that they had the history of one Zerban--which means

"rich-in-gold"[103:5]--that corresponded in many respects with the

history of Abraham.[103:6] It may, then, have been from the Chaldean

story that the Hebrew fable writer got his idea.

The next legend which we examined was that of "Jacob's Vision of the

Ladder." We claimed that it probably referred to the doctrine of the

transmigration of souls from one body into another, and also gave the

apparent reason for the invention of the story.

The next story was "The Exodus from Egypt, and Passage through the Red

Sea," in which we showed, from Egyptian history, that the Israelites

were turned out of the country on account of their uncleanness, and

that the wonderful exploits recorded of Moses were simply copies of

legends related of the sun-god Bacchus. These legends came from "the

Islands of the Sea," and came in very handy for the Hebrew fable

writers; they saved them the trouble of inventing.

We now come to the story relating to "The Receiving of the Ten

Commandments" by Moses from the Lord, on the top of a mountain, 'mid

thunders and lightnings.

All that is likely to be historical in this account, is that Moses

assembled, not, indeed, the whole of the people, but the heads of the

tribes, and gave them the code which he had prepared.[104:1] The

marvellous portion of the story was evidently copied from that related

of the law-giver Zoroaster, by the Persians, and the idea that there

were two tables of stone with the Law written thereon was evidently

taken from the story of Bacchus, the Law-giver, who had his laws

written on two tables of stone.[104:2]

The next legend treated was that of "Samson and his Exploits."

Those who, like the learned of the last century, maintain that the

Pagans copied from the Hebrews, may say that Samson was the model of all

their similar stories, but now that our ideas concerning antiquity are

enlarged, and when we know that Hercules is well known to have been the

God Sol, whose allegorical history was spread among many nations

long before the Hebrews were ever heard of, we are authorized to believe

and to say that some Jewish mythologist--for what else are their

so-called historians--composed the anecdote of Samson, by partly

disfiguring the popular traditions of the Greeks, Phenicians and

Chaldeans, and claiming that hero for his own nation.[104:3]

The Babylonian story of Izdubar, the lion-killer, who wandered to the

regions of the blessed (the Grecian Elysium), who crossed a great

waste of land (the desert of Lybia, according to the Grecian mythos),

and arrived at a region where splendid trees were laden with jewels

(the Grecian Garden of the Hesperides), is probably the foundation for

the Hercules and other corresponding myths. This conclusion is drawn

from the fact that, although the story of Hercules was known in the

island of Thasus, by the Phenician colony settled there, five

centuries before he was known in Greece,[105:1] yet its antiquity

among the Babylonians antedates that.

The age of the legends of Izdubar among the Babylonians cannot be placed

with certainty, yet, the cuneiform inscriptions relating to this hero,

which have been found, may be placed at about 2000 years B. C.[105:2]

"As these stories were traditions," says Mr. Smith, the discoverer of

the cylinders, "before they were committed to writing, their antiquity

as tradition is probably much greater than that."[105:3]

With these legends before them, the Jewish priests in Babylon had no

difficulty in arranging the story of Samson, and adding it to their

already fabulous history.

As the Rev. Dr. Isaac M. Wise remarks, in speaking of the ancient

Hebrews: "They adopted forms, terms, ideas and myths of all nations with

whom they came in contact, and, like the Greeks, in their way, cast

them all in a peculiar Jewish religious mold."

We have seen, in the chapter which treats of this legend, that it is

recorded in the book of Judges. This book was not written till after

the first set of Israelites had been carried into captivity, and perhaps

still later.[105:4]

After this we have "Jonah swallowed by a Big Fish," which is the last

legend treated.

We saw that it was a solar myth, known to many nations of antiquity.

The writer of the book--whoever he may have been--lived in the fifth

century before Christ--after the Jews had become acquainted and had

mixed with other nations. The writer of this wholly fictitious story,

taking the prophet Jonah--who was evidently an historical personage--for

his hero, was perhaps intending to show the loving-kindness of


We have now examined all the principal Old Testament legends, and,

after what has been seen, we think that no impartial person can still

consider them historical facts. That so great a number of educated

persons still do so seems astonishing, in our way of thinking. They have

repudiated Greek and Roman mythology with disdain; why then admit with

respect the mythology of the Jews? Ought the miracles of Jehovah to

impress us more than those of Jupiter? We think not; they should all be

looked upon as relics of the past.

That Christian writers are beginning to be aroused to the idea that

another tack should be taken, differing from the old, is very evident.

This is clearly seen by the words of Prof. Richard A. Armstrong, the

translator of Dr. Knappert's "Religion of Israel" into English. In the

Preface of this work, he says:

"It appears to me to be profoundly important that the youthful

English mind should be faithfully and accurately informed of

the results of modern research into the early development of

the Israelitish religion. Deplorable and irreparable mischief

will be done to the generation, now passing into manhood and

womanhood, if their educators leave them ignorant or loosely

informed on these topics; for they will then be rudely

awakened by the enemies of Christianity from a blind and

unreasoning faith in the supernatural inspiration of the

Scriptures; and being suddenly and bluntly made aware that

Abraham, Moses, David, and the rest did not say, do, or write

what has been ascribed to them, they will fling away all care

for the venerable religion of Israel and all hope that it can

nourish their own religious life. How much happier will those

of our children and young people be who learn what is now

known of the actual origin of the Pentateuch and the Writings,

from the same lips which have taught them that the Prophets

indeed prepared the way for Jesus, and that God is indeed our

Heavenly Father. For these will, without difficulty, perceive

that God's love is none the feebler and that the Bible is no

less precious, because Moses knew nothing of the Levitical

legislation, or because it was not the warrior monarch on his

semi-barbaric throne, but some far later son of Israel, who

breathed forth the immortal hymn of faith, 'The Lord is my

Shepherd; I shall not want.'"

For the benefit of those who may think that the evidence of plagiarism

on the part of the Hebrew writers has not been sufficiently

substantiated, we will quote a few words from Prof. Max Mueller, who is

one of the best English authorities on this subject that can be

produced. In speaking of this he says:

"The opinion that the Pagan religions were mere corruptions

of the religion of the Old Testament, once supported by men of

high authority and great learning, is now as completely

surrendered as the attempts of explaining Greek and Latin as

the corruptions of Hebrew."[106:1]

Again he says:

"As soon as the ancient language and religion of India became

known in Europe it was asserted that Sanskrit, like all other

languages, was to be derived from Hebrew, and the ancient

religion of the Brahmans from the Old Testament. There was at

that time an enthusiasm among Oriental scholars, particularly

at Calcutta, and an interest for Oriental antiquities in the

public at large, of which we, in these days of apathy for

Eastern literature, can hardly form an adequate idea.

Everybody wished to be first in the field, and to bring to

light some of the treasures which were supposed to be hidden

in the sacred literature of the Brahmans. . . . No doubt the

temptation was great. No one could look down for a moment into

the rich mine of religious and mythological lore that was

suddenly opened before the eyes of scholars and theologians,

without being struck by a host of similarities, not only in

the languages, but also in the ancient traditions of the

Hindoos, the Greeks, and the Romans; and if at that time the

Greeks and Romans were still supposed to have borrowed their

language and their religion from Jewish quarters, the same

conclusion could hardly be avoided with regard to the language

and the religion of the Brahmans of India. . . .

"The student of Pagan religion as well as Christian

missionaries were bent on discovering more striking and more

startling coincidences, in order to use them in confirmation

of their favorite theory that some rays of a primeval

revelation, or some reflection of the Jewish religion, had

reached the uttermost ends of the world."[107:1]

The result of all this is summed up by Prof. Mueller as follows:

"It was the fate of all (these) pioneers, not only to be left

behind in the assault which they had planned, but to find that

many of their approaches were made in a false direction, and

had to be abandoned."[107:2]

Before closing this chapter, we shall say a few words on the religion of

Israel. It is supposed by many--in fact, we have heard it asserted by

those who should know better--that the Israelites were always

monotheists, that they worshiped One God only--Jehovah.[107:3] This

is altogether erroneous; they were not different from their

neighbors--the Heathen, so-called--in regard to their religion.

In the first place, we know that they revered and worshiped a Bull,

called Apis,[107:4] just as the ancient Egyptians did. They worshiped

the sun,[108:1] the moon,[108:2] the stars and all the host of


They worshiped fire, and kept it burning on an altar, just as the

Persians and other nations.[108:4] They worshiped stones,[108:5]

revered an oak tree,[108:6] and "bowed down" to images.[108:7] They

worshiped a "Queen of Heaven" called the goddess Astarte or Mylitta,

and "burned incense" to her.[108:8] They worshiped Baal,[108:9]

Moloch,[108:10] and Chemosh,[108:11] and offered up human sacrifices

to them,[108:12] after which in some instances, they ate the


It was during the Captivity that idolatry ceased among the

Israelites.[108:14] The Babylonian Captivity is clearly referred to in

the book of Deuteronomy, as the close of Israel's idolatry.[108:15]

There is reason to believe that the real genius of the people was first

called into full exercise, and put on its career of development at this

time; that Babylon was a forcing nursery, not a prison cell; creating

instead of stifling a nation. The astonishing outburst of intellectual

and moral energy that accompanied the return from the Babylonish

Captivity, attests the spiritual activity of that "mysterious and

momentous" time. As Prof. Goldziher says: "The intellect of Babylon

and Assyria exerted a more than passing influence on that of the

Hebrews, not merely touching it, but entering deep into it, and

leaving its own impression upon it."[108:16]

This impression we have already partly seen in the legends which they

borrowed, and it may also be seen in the religious ideas which they


The Assyrian colonies which came and occupied the land of the tribes of

Israel filled the kingdom of Samaria with the dogma of the Magi, which

very soon penetrated into the kingdom of Judah. Afterward, Jerusalem

being subjugated, the defenseless country was entered by persons of

different nationalities, who introduced their opinions, and in this way,

the religion of Israel was doubly mutilated. Besides, the priests and

great men, who were transported to Babylon, were educated in the

sciences of the Chaldeans, and imbibed, during a residence of fifty

years, nearly the whole of their theology. It was not until this time

that the dogmas of the hostile genius (Satan), the angels Michael,

Uriel, Yar, Nisan, &c., the rebel angels, the battle in heaven, the

immortality of the soul, and the resurrection, were introduced and

naturalized among the Jews.[109:1]

* * * * *

NOTE.--It is not generally known that the Jews were removed from their

own land until the time of the Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar, but there is

evidence that Jerusalem was plundered by the Edomites about 800 B. C.,

who sold some of the captive Jews to the Greeks (Joel, iii. 6). When the

captives returned to their country from "the Islands which are beyond

the sea" (Jer. xxv. 18, 22), they would naturally bring back with them

much of the Hellenic lore of their conquerors. In Isaiah (xi. 11), we

find a reference to this first captivity in the following words: "In

that day the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover

the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from

Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar,

and from Hamath, and from the Islands of the sea;" i. e., GREECE.


[89:1] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 111, et seq.

[89:2] Bell's Pantheon, under "Perseus;" Knight: Ancient Art and Mytho.,

p. 178, and Bulfinch: Age of Fables, p. 161.

[90:1] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 118. Taylor's Diegesis, p. 190.

Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 19.

[90:2] Ibid.

[90:3] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 122. Dupuis: Origin of Religious

Belief, p. 174. Goldziher: Hebrew Mythology, p. 179. Higgins:

Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 19.

[90:4] Bell's Pantheon, art. "Osiris;" and Bulfinch: Age of Fable, p.


[90:5] Baring-Gould: Orig. Relig. Belief, i. 159.

[90:6] Exodus, ii.

[90:7] See Child: Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 6, and most any work on


[90:8] See Smith: Chaldean Account of Genesis.

[90:9] See Goldziher: Hebrew Mythology, p. 128, note.

[90:10] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. pp. 213, 214.

[90:11] I. Samuel, xvii.

[91:1] See Goldzhier: Hebrew Mythology, p. 430, and Bulfinch: Age of

Fable, 440.

[91:2] Chapter xxii.

[91:3] See Smith's Chaldean Account of Genesis, p. 188, et seq.

[91:4] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 323.

[91:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 19.

[91:6] Ibid. i. 191, and ii. 241; Franklin: Bud. & Jeynes, 174.

[91:7] Hardy: Buddhist Legends, pp. 50, 53, and 140.

[91:8] See Ibid.

[91:9] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 191.

[91:10] Ibid. p. 39.

[92:1] "Septuagint."--The Old Greek version of the Old Testament.

[92:2] "Vulgate."--The Latin version of the Old Testament.

[92:3] The Pentateuch Examined, vol. ii. pp. 186, 187.

[92:4] The Religion of Israel, p. 9.

[92:5] Besides the many other facts which show that the Pentateuch was

not composed until long after the time of Moses and Joshua, the

following may be mentioned as examples: Gilgal, mentioned in Deut. xi.

30, was not given as the name of that place till after the entrance

into Canaan. Dan, mentioned in Genesis xiv. 14, was not so called till

long after the time of Moses. In Gen. xxxvi. 31, the beginning of the

reign of the kings over Israel is spoken of historically, an event

which did not occur before the time of Samuel. (See, for further

information, Bishop Colenso's Pentateuch Examined, vol. ii. ch. v. and


[93:1] The Religion of Israel, p. 9.

[93:2] Ibid. p. 10.

[93:3] Chambers's Encyclo., art. "Jews."

[93:4] The Religion of Israel, pp. 10, 11.

[94:1] The Religion of Israel, p. 11.

[94:2] See Ibid. pp. 120, 122.

[94:3] See Ibid. p. 122.

[94:4] The account of the finding of this book by Hilkiah is to be

found in II. Chronicles, ch. xxxiv.

[94:5] See Religion of Israel, pp. 124, 125.

[94:6] Ibid. p. 11.

[95:1] The Religion of Israel, pp. 186, 187.

[95:2] "Talmud."--The books containing the Jewish traditions.

[95:3] See Chambers's Encyclo., art. "Bible."

[95:4] The Religion of Israel, pp. 240, 241.

[96:1] The Religion of Israel, p. 11.

[96:2] The Pentateuch Examined, vol. ii. p. 178.

[96:3] The Religion of Israel, p. 241.

[96:4] On the strength of II. Maccabees, ii. 12.

[96:5] The Religion of Israel, p. 242.

[96:6] Ibid. p. 243.

[97:1] Chambers's Encyclo., art. "Bible."

[97:2] Ibid.

[97:3] Chambers's Encyclo., art. "Akiba."

[97:4] The Religion of Israel, pp. 19, 23.

[98:1] "What is the Bible," by J. T. Sunderland. "The Bible of To-day,"

by J. W. Chadwick. "Hebrew and Christian Records," by the Rev. Dr.

Giles, 2 vols. Prof. W. R. Smith's article on "The Bible," in the last

edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Introduction to the Old

Testament," by Davidson. "The Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua

Examined," by Bishop Colenso. Prof. F. W. Newman's "Hebrew Monarchy."

"The Bible for Learners" (vols. i. and ii.), by Prof. Oort and others.

"The Old Testament in the Jewish Church," by Prof. Robertson Smith, and

Kuenen's "Religion of Israel."

[98:2] Smith: Chaldean Account of Genesis, pp. 22, 29.

[99:1] Ibid. pp. 29, 100. Also, Assyrian Discoveries, p. 397.

[99:2] Tree and Serpent Worship, pp. 6, 7.

[99:3] Myths and Myth-Makers, p. 112.

[99:4] Draper: Religion and Science, p. 62.

[99:5] Goldziher: Hebrew Mythology, p. 328, et seq.

[100:1] Quoted by Bishop Colenso: The Pentateuch Examined, iv. 283.

[100:2] "Much of the Old Testament which Christian divines, in their

ignorance of Jewish lore, have insisted on receiving and interpreting

literally, the informed Rabbis never dreamed of regarding as anything

but allegorical. The 'literalists' they called fools. The account of

the Creation was one of the portions which the unlearned were

specially forbidden to meddle with." (Greg: The Creed of Christendom, p.


[100:3] Quoted by Dupuis: Origin of Religious Belief, p. 226.

[100:4] See Ibid. p. 227.

[100:5] Quoted by Dunlap: Mysteries of Adoni, p. 176. See also, Bunsen:

Keys of St. Peter, p. 406.

[101:1] See Appendix, c.

[101:2] See Westropp & Wakes, "Phallic Worship."

[101:3] In chap. ii.

[101:4] See Assyrian Discoveries, pp. 167, 168, and Chaldean Account of


[101:5] "Upon the carrying away of the Jews to Babylon, they were

brought into contact with a flood of Iranian as well as Chaldean myths,

and adopted them without hesitation." (S. Baring-Gould; Curious Myths,

p. 316.)

[102:1] Chambers's Encyclo., art. "Deucalion."

[102:2] See chapter ii.

[102:3] Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 185, and Maurice: Indian

Antiquities, vol. ii. p. 277.

[102:4] Chapter ii.

[102:5] See Dunlap's Son of the Man, p. 153, note.

[102:6] See Prog. Relig. Ideas, vol. i. p. 254.

[102:7] See Ibid. p. 367.

[102:8] See Ibid. p. 252.

[102:9] Goldzhier: Hebrew Mythology, pp. 130-135, and Smith's Chaldean

Account of Genesis.

[103:1] Chaldean Account of Genesis, pp. 27, 28.

[103:2] See Note, p. 109.

[103:3] See Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 685.

[103:4] "Targum."--The general term for the Aramaic versions of the

Old Testament.

[103:5] In Genesis xxiii. 2, Abraham is called rich in gold and in


[103:6] See Volney's Researches in Ancient History, pp. 144-147.

[104:1] The Religion of Israel, p. 49.

[104:2] Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 122. Higgins: vol. ii. p. 19.

[104:3] In claiming the "mighty man" and "lion-killer" as one of their

own race, the Jews were simply doing what other nations had done before

them. The Greeks claimed Hercules as their countryman; stated where he

was born, and showed his tomb. The Egyptians affirmed that he was born

in their country (see Tacitus, Annals, b. ii. ch. lix.), and so did

many other nations.

[105:1] See Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, pp. 92, 93.

[105:2] Chaldean Account of Genesis, pp. 168 and 174; and Assyrian

Discoveries, p. 167.

[105:3] Chaldean Account of Genesis, p. 168.

[105:4] See The Religion of Israel, p. 12; and Chadwick's Bible of

To-Day, p. 55.

[105:5] See The Religion of Israel, p. 41, and Chadwick's Bible of

To-Day, p. 24.

[106:1] The Science of Religion, p. 48.

[107:1] They even claimed that one of the "lost tribes of Israel" had

found their way to America, and had taught the natives Hebrew.

[107:2] The Science of Religion, pp. 285, 292.

[107:3] "It is an assumption of the popular theology, and an almost

universal belief in the popular mind, that the Jewish nation was

selected by the Almighty to preserve and carry down to later ages a

knowledge of the One and true God--that the Patriarchs possessed this

knowledge--that Moses delivered and enforced this doctrine as the

fundamental tenet of the national creed; and that it was, in fact, the

received and distinctive dogma of the Hebrew people. This alleged

possession of the true faith by one only people, while all surrounding

tribes were lost in Polytheism, or something worse, has been adduced by

divines in general as a proof of the truth of the sacred history, and of

the divine origin of the Mosaic dispensation." (Greg: The Creed of

Christendom, p. 145.)

Even such authorities as Paley and Milman have written in this strain.

(See quotations from Paley's "Evidences of Christianity," and Dean

Milman's "History of the Jews," made by Mr. Greg in his "Creed of

Christendom," p. 145.)

[107:4] See the Bible for Learners, vol. i. p. 321, vol. ii. p. 102; and

Dunlap: Mysteries of Adoni, p. 108.

[108:1] See the Bible for Learners, vol. i. pp. 317, 418; vol. ii. p.

301. Dunlap's Son of the Man, p. 3, and his Spirit Hist., pp. 68 and

182. Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. pp. 782, 783; and Goldziher: Hebrew

Mythol., pp. 227, 240, 242.

[108:2] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. p. 317. Dunlap's Son of the Man,

p. 3; and Spirit Hist., p. 68. Also, Goldziher: Hebrew Mythol., p. 159.

[108:3] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. p. 26, and 317; vol. ii. p. 301

and 328. Dunlap's Son of the Man, p. 3. Dunlap's Spirit Hist., 68;

Mysteries of Adoni, pp. xvii. and 108; and The Religion of Israel, p.


[108:4] Bunsen: Keys of St. Peter, pp. 101, 102.

[108:5] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. pp. 175-178, 317, 322, 448.

[108:6] Ibid. 115.

[108:7] Ibid. i. 23, 321; ii. 102, 103, 109, 264, 274. Dunlap's Spirit

Hist., p. 108. Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. i. p. 438; vol. ii. p. 30.

[108:8] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. pp. 88, 318; vol. ii. pp. 102,

113, 300. Dunlap: Son of the Man, p. 3; and Mysteries of Adoni, p. xvii.

Mueller: The Science of Religion, p. 261.

[108:9] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. pp. 21-25, 105, 391; vol. ii.

pp. 102, 136-138. Dunlap: Son of the Man, p. 3. Mysteries of Adoni, pp.

106, 177. Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. pp. 782, 783. Bunsen: The Keys

of St. Peter, p. 91. Mueller: The Science of Religion, p. 181. Bal,

Bel or Belus was an idol of the Chaldeans and Phenicians or

Canaanites. The word Bal, in the Punic language, signifies Lord or

Master. The name Bal is often joined with some other, as Bal-berith,

Bal-peor, Bal-zephon, &c. "The Israelites made him their god, and

erected altars to him on which they offered human sacrifices," and "what

is still more unnatural, they ate of the victims they offered."

(Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. pp. 113, 114.)

[108:10] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. pp. 17, 26; vol. ii. pp. 102,

299, 300. Bunsen: Keys of St. Peter, p. 110. Mueller: The Science of

Religion, p. 285. Moloch was a god of the Ammonites, also worshiped

among the Israelites. Solomon built a temple to him, on the Mount of

Olives, and human sacrifices were offered to him. (Bell's Pantheon,

vol. ii. pp. 84, 85.)

[108:11] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. p. 153; vol. ii. pp. 71, 83,

125. Smith's Bible Dictionary art. "Chemosh."

[108:12] The Bible for Learners, vol. i. pp. 26, 117, 148, 319, 320;

vol. ii. pp. 16, 17, 299, 300. Dunlap's Spirit Hist., pp. 108, 222.

Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. pp. 100, 101. Mueller: Science of

Religion, p. 261. Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. 113, 114; vol. ii. 84, 85.

[108:13] See note 9 above.

[108:14] See Bunsen: Keys of St. Peter, 291.

[108:15] Ibid. p. 27.

[108:16] Goldziher: Hebrew Mythology, p. 319

[109:1] The Talmud of Jerusalem expressly states that the names of the

angels and the months, such as Gabriel, Michael, Yar, Nisan, &c., came

from Babylon with the Jews. (Goldziher, p. 319.) "There is no trace of

the doctrine of Angels in the Hebrew Scriptures composed or written

before the exile." (Bunsen: The Angel Messiah, p. 285) "The Jews

adopted, during the Captivity, the idea of angels, Michael, Raphael,

Uriel, Gabriel," &c. (Knight: Ancient Art and Mythology, p. 54.) See,

for further information on this subject, Dr. Knappert's "Religion of

Israel," or Prof. Kuenen's "Religion of Israel."