Bible Myths and their Parallels in other Religions Being a Comparison of the Old and New Testament Myths and Miracles with those of the Heathen Nations of Antiquity Considering also their Origin and Meaning
[154:1] Matthew, ii.
[154:2] Luke, ii.
[154:3] Eusebius's Life of Constantine, lib. 3, chs. xl., xli. and xlii.
[155:1] Protevangelion. Apoc. chs. xii., xiii., and xiv., and Lily of Israel, p. 95.
[155:2] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. pp. 98, 99.
[155:3] Farrar's Life of Christ, p. 38, and note. See also, Hist. Hindostan, ii. 311.
[155:4] King: The Gnostics and their Remains, p. 134.
[155:5] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. ii. p. 95.
[155:6] Some writers have tried to connect these by saying that it was a cave-stable, but why should a stable be in a desert place, as the narrative states?
[156:2] See Asiatic Researches, vol. i. p. 259.
[156:3] See Amberly's Analysis, p. 226.
[156:4] See Calmet's Fragments, art. "Abraham."
[156:5] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 321. Bell's Pantheon, vol. i. p. 118, and Dupuis, p. 284.
[156:6] See Taylor's Diegesis, p. 150, and Bell's Pantheon under "Æsculapius."
[156:7] See Bell's Pantheon, vol. ii. p. 218.
[156:8] See Ibid. vol. i. p. 12.
[156:9] Aryan Mythology, vol. i. pp. 72, 158.
[156:10] See Dunlap's Mysteries of Adoni, p. 124, and Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 134.
[156:12] See Dupuis: Origin of Religious Beliefs, p. 255.
[156:13] See Dunlap's Mysteries of Adoni, p. 124.
[157:1] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 460.
[157:2] Cox: Aryan Mythology, vol. ii. p. 133. Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 130. See also, Vishnu Purana, p. 502, where it says:
"No person could bear to gaze upon Devaki from the light that invested her."
[157:3] See Beal: Hist. Buddha, pp. 43, 46, or Bunsen's Angel-Messiah, pp. 34, 35.
[157:4] See Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 322, and Dupuis: Origin of Relig. Belief, p. 119.
[157:5] Tales of Anct. Greece, p. xviii.
[157:7] Inman: Ancient Faiths, vol. ii. p. 460. Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 649.
[157:8] See Hardy: Manual of Buddhism, p. 145.
[158:2] It may be that this verse was added by another hand some time after the narrative was written. We have seen it stated somewhere that, in the manuscript, this verse is in brackets.
[158:3] See Vishnu Purana, book v. chap. iii.
[158:4] Here is an exact counterpart to the story of Joseph—the foster-father, so-called—of Jesus. He too, had a son in his old age.
[158:5] Vishnu Purana, book v. chap. v.
[159:1] Bunsen: The Angel-Messiah, p. 34. See also, Beal: Hist. Buddha, p. 32, and Lillie: Buddha and Early Buddhism, p. 73.
[159:2] Thornton: Hist. China, i. 138.
[159:4] Higgins: Anacalypsis, vol. i. p. 150.
[159:5] See Rhys David's Buddhism, p. 25.
THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST JESUS.
The biographers of Jesus, although they have placed him in a position the most humiliating in his infancy, and although they have given him poor and humble parents, have notwithstanding made him to be of royal descent. The reasons for doing this were twofold. First, because, according to the Old Testament, the expected Messiah was to be of the seed of Abraham,[160:1] and second, because the Angel-Messiahs who had previously been on earth to redeem and save mankind had been of royal descent, therefore Christ Jesus must be so.
The following story, taken from Colebrooke's "Miscellaneous Essays,"[160:2] clearly shows that this idea was general:
"The last of the Jinas, Vardhamâna, was at first conceived by Devanandā, a Brahmānā. The conception was announced to her by a dream. Sekra, being apprised of his incarnation, prostrated himself and worshiped the future saint (who was in the womb of Devanandā); but reflecting that no great saint was ever born in an indigent or mendicant family, as that of a Brahmānā, Sekra commanded his chief attendant to remove the child from the womb of Devanandā to that of Trisala, wife of Siddhartha, a prince of the race of Jeswaca, of the Kasyapa family."
In their attempts to accomplish their object, the biographers of Jesus have made such poor work of it, that all the ingenuity Christianity has yet produced, has not been able to repair their blunders.
The genealogies are contained in the first and third Gospels, and although they do not agree, yet, if either is right, then Jesus was not the son of God, engendered by the "Holy Ghost," but the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary. In any other sense they amount to nothing. That Jesus can be of royal descent, and yet [Pg 161]be the Son of God, in the sense in which these words are used, is a conclusion which can be acceptable to those only who believe in alleged historical narratives on no other ground than that they wish them to be true, and dare not call them into question.
The Matthew narrator states that all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen, from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen, and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Jesus are fourteen generations.[161:1] Surely nothing can have a more mythological appearance than this. But, when we confine our attention to the genealogy itself, we find that the generations in the third stage, including Jesus himself, amount to only thirteen. All attempts to get over this difficulty have been without success; the genealogies are, and have always been, hard nuts for theologians to crack. Some of the early Christian fathers saw this, and they very wisely put an allegorical interpretation to them.
Dr. South says, in Kitto's Biblical Encyclopædia:
"Christ's being the true Messiah depends upon his being the son of David and king of the Jews. So that unless this be evinced the whole foundation of Christianity must totter and fall."
Another writer in the same work says:
"In these two documents (Matthew and Luke), which profess to give us the genealogy of Christ, there is no notice whatever of the connection of his only earthly parent with the stock of David. On the contrary, both the genealogies profess to give us the descent of Joseph, to connect our Lord with whom by natural generation, would be to falsify the whole story of his miraculous birth, and overthrow the Christian faith."