The Origin of the World According to Revelation and Science Part 19

Exod. vii., 9.--Take thy rod and Probably a serpent, though perhaps cast it before Pharaoh, and it a crocodile.

shall become a _serpent_. (Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

Deut. x.x.xii., 33.--Their vine is Probably a species of serpent.

the poison of _dragons_. (Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

Job vii., 12.--Am I a sea, or a Michaelis and others think, _whale_, that thou settest a probably correctly, that the Nile watch over me. and the crocodile, both objects of vigilance to the Egyptians, are intended.

(Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

Psa. lxxiv., 14.--Thou didst Evidently refers to the destruction divide the sea by thy strength. of the Egyptians in the Red Thou breakest the heads of the Sea, under emblem of the crocodile.

_dragons_ in the waters. (Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

Psa. xci., 13.--The young lion The a.s.sociation shows that a and the _dragon_ thou shalt powerful carnivorous animal is trample under foot. meant.

(Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

Psa. cxlviii., 7.--Praise the Evidently an aquatic creature.

Lord, ye _dragons_ and all deeps. (Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

Isa. xxvii., 1.--He shall slay A large predaceous aquatic animal the _dragon_ in the midst of the (the crocodile), used here as sea [river]. an emblem of Egypt.

(Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

Isa. li., 9.--Hath cut Rahab and Same as above.

wounded the _dragon_.

Jer. li., 34.--[Nebuchadnezzar] A large predaceous animal.

hath swallowed me up as a (Septuagint, [Greek: "drakon."]) _dragon_.

Ezek. xxix., 3.--Pharaoh, king In the Hebrew _tanim_ appears by of Egypt, the great _dragon_ mistake for _tannin_. This is that lieth in the rivers. clearly the crocodile of the Nile.

Verses 4 and 5 show that it is a large aquatic animal with _scales_.

(Septuagint, [Greek: "drakon."])

2. TAN.

Psa. xliv., 19.--Thou hast sore Some understand this of s.h.i.+pwreck; broken us in the place of but, more probably, the _dragons_. place of dragons is the desert.

(Septuagint, [Greek: "kakosis."])

Isa. x.x.xiv., 13.--[Bozrah in An animal inhabiting ruins, and Idumea] shall be a habitation of a.s.sociated with the ostrich.

_dragons_ and a court of owls [or (Septuagint, [Greek: "seiren."]) ostriches].

Isa. xliii., 20.--The wild Evidently an animal of the dry beasts shall honor me, deserts.

the _dragons_ and the ostriches, (Septuagint, [Greek: "seiren."]) because I give water in the wilderness.

Isa. xiii., 22.--Dragons in Represented as inhabiting the their pleasant palaces. ruins of Babylon, and a.s.sociated with wild beasts of the desert.

(Septuagint, [Greek: "xchinos."])

Isa. x.x.xv., 7.--And the parched An animal making its lair or nest ground shall become a pool, and in dry, parched places.

the thirsty land springs of (Septuagint, [Greek: "hornis."]) water; in the habitation of _dragons_, where each lay, shall be gra.s.s with reeds and rushes.

Job x.x.x., 29.--I am a brother of The a.s.sociation indicates an animal _dragons_ and a companion of of the desert, and the context ostriches. that its cry is mournful.

(Septuagint, [Greek: "seiren."])

Jer. ix., 11; x., 22.--I will Same as above. See also Jeremiah make Jerusalem heaps, a den of xlix., 33; li., 37; and Mal. i., 3, _dragons_. where the word is in the female form (_tanoth_).

(Septuagint, [Greek: "drakon"] and [Greek: "strouthos."])

Lam. iv., 3.--Even the In the Hebrew text the word is _sea-monsters_ draw out the _tannin_, evidently an error for breast, they give suck to their _tanim_. The suckling of young, and young ones. The daughter of my a.s.sociation of ostriches, agree with people is become cruel, like this. (Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].") the ostriches in the wilderness.

Micah i., 8.--I will make a The wailing cry accords with the wailing like the _dragons_, and view of Gesenius that the jackal is mourning like the owls meant.

[ostriches]. (Septuagint, "[Greek: drakon].")

We learn from the above comparative view that the _tannin_ is an aquatic animal of large size, and predaceous, clothed with scales, and a fit emblem of the monarchies of Egypt and a.s.syria. In two places it is possible that some species of serpent is denoted by it. We must suppose, therefore, that in Genesis i. it denotes large crocodilian and perhaps serpentiform reptiles. The _tan_ is evidently a small mammal of the desert.

I omitted to notice in the text a criticism of my explanation of the word _bhemah_ in "Archaia," made in Archdeacon Pratt's "Scripture and Science not at Variance" (edition of 1872). He opposes to the meaning of "herbivorous animals" which I have sought to establish, two exceptional pa.s.sages. In one of these, Deut. xxviii., 26, the word is used in its most general sense for all beasts, which the context shows can not be its meaning in Gen. i. In the other, Prov. x.x.x., 30, he says it is applied to the lion. The actual expression used, however, merely implies that the lion is "mighty among _bhemah_," the comparison being probably between the strength of the lion and that of oxen, antelopes, and other strong and active creatures. It does not affirm that the lion is one of the _bhemah_. While I have every respect for the erudition of Archdeacon Pratt, and highly value his book, I must regard this objection as an example of a style of biblical exposition much to be deprecated, though too often employed.

I.--ANCIENT MYTHOLOGIES.

The current views respecting the relations of ancient mythologies with each other and with the Bible have been continually s.h.i.+fting and oscillating between extremes. The latest and at present most popular of these extreme views is that so well expounded by Dr. Max Muller in his various essays on these subjects, and which traces at least the Indo-European theogony to a mere personification of natural objects.

The views given in the text are those which to the author appear alone compatible with the Bible, and with the relations of Semitic and Aryan theology; but, as the subject is generally regarded from a quite different point of view, a little further explanation may be necessary.

1. According to the Bible, spiritual monotheism is the primitive faith of man, and with this it ranks the doctrine of a malignant spirit or being opposed to G.o.d, and of a primitive state of perfection and happiness. It is scarcely necessary to say that these doctrines may be found as sub-strata in all the ancient theologies.

2. In the Hebrew theology the fall introduces the new doctrine of a mediator or deliverer, human and divine, and an external symbolism, that of the cherubic forms, composite figures made up of parts of the man, the lion, the ox, and the eagle. These forms are referred back to Eden, where they are manifestly the emblems of the perfections of the Deity, lost to man by the fall, and now opposed to his entrance into Eden and access to the tree of life, the symbol of his immortal happiness. Subsequently the cherubim are the visible indications of the presence of G.o.d in the tabernacle and temple; and in the Apocalypse they reappear as emblems of the Divine perfections, as reflected in the character of man redeemed. The cherubim, as guardians of the sacred tree, and of sacred places in general, appear in the wors.h.i.+p of the a.s.syrians and Egyptians, as the winged lions and bulls of the former, and the sphinx of the latter. They can also be recognized in the sepulchral monuments of Greek Asia and of Etruria.

Farther, it was evidently an easy step to proceed from these cherubic figures to the adoration of sacred animals. But the cherubic emblems were connected with the idea of a coming Redeemer, and this was with equal ease perverted into hero-wors.h.i.+p. Every great conqueror, inventor, or reformer was thus recognized as in some sense the "coming man," just as Eve supposed she saw him in her first-born. In addition to this, the sacredness of the first mother as the mother of the promised seed of the woman, led to the introduction of female deities.

3. The earliest ecclesiastical system was the patriarchal, and this also admitted of corruption into idolatry. The great patriarch, venerable by age and wisdom, when he left this earth for the spirit world, was supposed there, in the presence of G.o.d, to be the special guardian of his children on earth. Some of the G.o.ds of Egypt and of Greece were obviously of this character, and in China and Polynesia we see at this day this kind of idolatry in a condition of active vitality.

4. As stated in the text, the mythology of Egypt and Greece bears evident marks of having personified certain cosmological facts akin to those of the Hebrew narrative of creation. In this way ancient idolators disposed of the prehistoric and pre-Adamite world, changing it into a period of G.o.ds and demiG.o.ds. This is very apparent in the remarkable a.s.syrian Genesis recovered by the late George Smith from the clay tablets found in the ruined palace of a.s.surbanipal.

5. In all rude and imaginative nations, which have lost the distinct idea of the one G.o.d, the Creator, nature becomes more or less a source of superst.i.tions. Its grand and more rare phenomena of volcanoes, earthquakes, thunder-storms, eclipses, become supernatural portents; and as the idea of power a.s.sociates itself with them, they are personified as actual agents and become G.o.ds. In like manner, the more constant and useful objects and processes of nature become personified as beneficent deities. This may be, to a great extent, the character of the Aryan theology; but, except where all ideas of primitive religion and traditions of early history have been lost, it can not be the whole of the religion of any people. The Bible negatively recognizes this source of idolatry, in so constantly referring all natural phenomena to the divine decree. In connection with this, it is worthy of remark that rude man tends to venerate the new animal forms of strange lands. Something of this kind has probably led some of the American Indians to give a sort of divine honor to the bear. It was in Egypt that man first became familiar with the strange and gigantic fauna of Africa, whose effect on his mind in primitive times we may gather from the book of Job. In Egypt, consequently, there must have been a strong natural tendency to the adoration of animals.

The above origins of idolatry and mythology, as stated or implied in the Bible, of course a.s.sume that the Semitic monotheistic religion is the primitive one. The first deviations from it probably originated in the family of Ham. A city of the Rephaim of Bashan was in the days of Abraham named after Ashtoreth Karnaim--the two-horned Astarte, a female divinity and prototype of Diana, and perhaps an historic personage, in whom both the moon and the domestic ox were rendered objects of wors.h.i.+p. This is the earliest Bible notice of idolatry.[160] In Egypt a mythology of complex diversity existed at least as far back. We must remember, however, that Egypt is Cush as well as Mizraim, and its idolatry is probably to be traced, in the first instance, to the Nimrodic empire, from which, as from a common centre, certain new and irreligious ideas seem to have been propagated among all the branches of the human family. It is quite probable that the correspondences between Egyptian, Greek, and Hindoo myths go back as far as to the time when the first despotism was erected on the plain of s.h.i.+nar, and when able but unG.o.dly men set themselves to erect new political and social inst.i.tutions on the ruins of all that their fathers had held sacred. In addition to this, the mythology and language of the Aryans alike bear the impress of the innovating and restless spirit of the sons of j.a.phet.

I have stated the above propositions to show that the Bible affords a rational and connected theory of the origin of the false religions of antiquity; and to suggest as inquiries in relation to every form of mythology--how much of it is primitive monotheism, how much cherub-wors.h.i.+p, how much hero-wors.h.i.+p, how much ancestor-wors.h.i.+p, how much distorted cosmogony, how much pure idealism and superst.i.tion, since all these are usually present. I may be allowed further to remind the reader how much evidence we have, even in modern times, of the strong tendency of the human mind to fall into one or another of these forms of idolatry; and to ask him to reflect that really the only effectual conservative element is that of revelation. How strong an argument is this for the necessity to man of an inspired rule of religious faith.

[The above note was in substance contained in the Appendix to "Archaia" in 1860, and its correctness has, I think, been confirmed by subsequent discoveries.]

K.--a.s.sYRIAN AND EGYPTIAN TEXTS.

Progress is continually being made in the decipherment and publication of these, and new facts are coming to light in consequence as to the religions of the early postdiluvian period.

According to the late George Smith and to Mr. Sayce, in their contributions to Bagster's "Records of the Past," the earliest monumental history of Babylonia reveals two races, the Akkadian or Urdu, a Turanian race, with an agglutinate language of the Finnish or Tartar type, and the Sumir or Keen-gi, believed to be Shemitic. The race of Akkad seems to have invented the cuneiform writing at a very early period, and it no doubt represents the primitive Cus.h.i.+tes of the Bible, to whom is attributed the empire of Nimrod, whose first cities were Babel and Erech and Akkad and Calneh. Very ancient inscriptions of this early Chaldean or Cus.h.i.+te race exist, probably earlier than the time of Abraham. That of king Urukh, who is called "a very ancient king," on an inscription of Nabonadius, 555 B.C., represents himself as building temples to several G.o.ds and G.o.ddesses, so that in his time there was already a developed polytheism, unless, indeed, he was himself the inventor or introducer of much of it. Yet one can gather from the probably contemporary Creation and Deluge tablets translated by Mr. Smith, that a Supreme G.o.d was still recognized, and that the subordinate deities, though their wors.h.i.+p was probably gaining in importance, were still only local and created beings. Yet it was undoubtedly from this embryo idolatry that Abraham dissented, and was thus led to leave his native land.

In like manner, in the early Egyptian Hymn to Amen Ra, translated by Mr. Goodwin, though we have the G.o.ds mentioned, they are inferior beings, and not higher in position than the angels of the Old Testament, while Ra himself is "Lord of Eternity, Maker Everlasting,"

and is praised as

"Chief creator of the whole earth, Supporter of affairs above every G.o.d, In whose goodness the G.o.ds rejoice."

Thus, although there can be little doubt that Ra was a sun-G.o.d, there can be as little that he is the Il or El of the Shemitic peoples, and that his wors.h.i.+p represents that of the one G.o.d, the Creator. It seems probable also that there was an esoteric doctrine of this kind among the priests and the educated, however gross the polytheism of the vulgar. In short, the state of things in a.s.syria and Egypt was not dissimilar from that prevailing at this day in India, where learned men may fall back upon the ancient Vedas, and maintain that their religion is monotheistic, while the common people wors.h.i.+p innumerable G.o.ds. All this points to a primitive monotheism, just as the peculiar forms of adoration given to saints and the Virgin Mary in the Greek and Roman churches historically imply a primitive Christianity on which these newer beliefs and rites have been engrafted.