Not Paul, But Jesus. Bentham Jeremy

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ then is this Ananias discarded: – discarded with this vision of his, and that other vision which we have seen within it: the communication, which, speaking in the first place in his own person, – and then, on one occasion, in the person of this same hero of his – the historian had just been declaring, was made – not to Paul, but to Ananias; – this all-important communication, speaking again in this same third person, but on another occasion – the discourse being supposed to be a long-studied one – he makes this same Paul declare, was given – not to any Ananias, not to any other person – but directly to him, Paul, himself.

      Let us now see what it amounts to. In the most logical manner, it begins with declaring the purposes it is made for; and, when the purposes are declared, all that it does is done. Ver. 16. "But now: rise, and stand upon thy feet; for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose."…In this purpose are several parts: let us look into them one by one.

      1. Part 1. "To make thee (says the Lord) a minister and a witness, both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee." But, as to the things which he had seen, by this same account they amounted to nothing but a glare of light. Here then was the light to bear witness of, if it was worth while: but, as to the ministering, here was nothing at all to minister to: for the light was past, and it required no ministering to, when it was present. Had it been the light of a lamp – yes; but there was no lamp in the case.

      Thus much, as to these things which he had seen. Thereupon comes the mention of those things "in the which, the Lord is supposed to say, I will appear unto thee!" Here, as before, we have another put-off. If, in the way in question, and of the sort in question, there had been anything said, here was the time, the only time, for saying it. For immediately upon the mention of this communication, such as it is, follows the mention of what was due in consequence of it, in obedience to the commands supposed to be embodied in it, and by the light of the information supposed to be conveyed by it. "Whereupon, says he, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision…"

      Part 2. The purpose continued. – "Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I now send thee." This, we see, is but a continuation of the same put-off: no revelation, no doctrine, no Gospel here. As to the doctrine – the Gospel – that Gospel which he preached, and which he said was his own, no such Gospel is on this occasion given to him; and, not being so much as reported to have been given to him on any other occasion, was it not therefore of his own making, and without any such supernatural assistance, as Christians have been hitherto made to believe was given to him?

      As to the deliverance from the people and from the Gentiles, this is a clause, put in with reference to the dangers, into which the intemperance of his ambition had plunged him, and from whence in part it had been his lot to escape. Here then the sub-king and his Roman superior were desired to behold the accomplishment of a prophecy: but the prophecy was of that sort which came after the fact. – "Unto whom now I send thee…" In this they were desired to see a continuation of the prophecy: for, as to this point, it was, in the hope of the prophet, of the number of those, which not only announce, but by announcing contribute to, their own accomplishment.

      Part 3. The purpose continued. – "To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God…" Still the same nothingness: to his life's end a man might be hearing stories such as these, and still at the end of it be none the wiser: – no additional doctrine – no additional gospel – no declaration at all – no gospel at all – here.

      Part 4. The purpose continued and concluded… "that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me." Good. But this is not doctrine; this is not gospel; this is not itself the promised doctrine: but it is a description of the effect, of which the promised doctrine was to be the cause.

      Now it is, as we have just seen, that Paul is represented as commencing his preaching, or sallying forth upon his mission; preaching, from instructions received in a supernatural way – received by revelation. Yet, after all, no such instructions has he received. Thrice has the historian – once in his own person, twice in that of his hero – undertaken to produce those instructions. But by no one, from first to last, have they anywhere been produced.

      Truly, then, of his own making was this Gospel which Paul went preaching; of his own making, as well as of his own using; that Gospel, which he himself declares to his Galatians was not of man, was not, therefore, of those Apostles, to whom the opposition made by him is thus proclaimed.

      When, after having given in his own person an account of a supposed occurrence, – an historian, on another occasion, takes up the same occurrence; and, in the person of another individual, gives of that same occurrence another account different from, and so different from, as to be irreconcileable with it; can this historian, with any propriety, be said to be himself a believer in this second account which he thus gives? Instead of giving it as a true account, does he not, at any rate, in respect of all the several distinguishable circumstances in which it differs from the account given in his own person – give it in the character of a fable? a fable invented on the occasion on which the other person is supposed to speak – invented in the intent that it shall promote the purpose for which this speech is supposed to be made? Yet this account, which in the eyes of the very man by whom it is delivered to us, is but a fable, even those to whom in this same character of a fable it is delivered – this account it is that Christians have thus long persisted in regarding, supporting, and acting upon, as if it were from beginning to end, a truth – a great body of truth! – O Locke! O Newton! where was your discernment!

      On such evidence would any Judge fine a man a shilling? Would he give effect to a claim to that amount? Yet such is the evidence, on the belief of which the difference between happiness and misery, both in intensity as well as duration, infinite, we are told, depends!

      SECTION 5.

      VISION III. – PAUL'S ANTERIOR VISION, AS REPORTED BY THE LORD TO ANANIAS

      By the nature of the acts which are the objects of it, the command, we see, is necessarily pregnant with information: but now comes the information given as such – the piece of information with which the command is followed. This information – in and by which another, an antecedent vision, is brought upon the carpet, and communicated – has been reserved for a separate consideration.

      This information is in its complexion truly curious: to present a clear view of it, is not an altogether easy task. The information thus given by the Lord – given to this Ananias – this information, of which Paul is the subject, is – what? that, on some former occasion, neither time nor place mentioned, he, Ananias, to whom the Lord is giving the information, had been seen by this same Paul performing, with a certain intention, a certain action; the intention being – that, in relation to this same Paul, a certain effect should be produced – to wit, that of his receiving his sight. The Lord declares, Acts ix. 12, to Ananias, that Paul "had seen in a vision a man, Ananias himself, coming and putting his hand on him, that he (Paul) might receive his sight."

      Well then – this action which the Lord thus informs Ananias that he, Ananias, had performed, – did he, at any time and place, ever perform it? Oh, no; that is not necessary: the question is not a fair one; for it was only in a vision that it was performed. Well then – if it was only in a vision that it was performed, then, in reality, it was never performed. The Lord said that it had been performed; but in so saying the Lord had said that which was not true. The Lord had caused him to believe this – the Lord knowing all the while that it was not true. Such is the deed, which, according to our historian, the Lord relates himself to have achieved.

      But the intention, was that true? Oh, no; nor was there any need of its being so: for the intention, with which the act was supposed to be performed, was part and parcel of the divinely-taught untruth.

      The СКАЧАТЬ