μάτην οὖν περὶ θεοὺς ὁ πολύς ἐστι πόνος τοῖς ἀνοσίοις, 717, A. Compare Cicero, De Legibus, lib. ii., 41: Donis impii ne placare audeant Deos: Platonem audiant, qui vetat dubitare qua sit mente futurus Deus, quum nemo bonus ab improbo se donare velit. Also, Plautus, Rudens: Atque hoc scelesti in animum inducunt suum, Sed operam et sumptum perdunt, quia Nihil Ei acceptum est a perjuris supplicii. To refer to all the passages in the Scriptures where the same sentiment is strongly expressed would be to quote no small portion of the Sacred Volume. I will not receive a bullock from thine house, nor goats from thy fold; for all the beasts of the wood are mine, the cattle upon a thousand hills. Psalm 1., 9. Bring no more vain oblations; your incense is an abomination unto me. Isaiah, i., 13. Nothing could be more absurd than to suppose that, by such declarations, the God both of the Old and New Testament meant to undervalue his own most solemnly-appointed institution of sacrifice. It is most clear that he intended, rather, to guard it, by denouncing, in most indignant terms, that gross abuse which would pervert the ritual avowal of the need of expiation, and the ritual acknowledgment of the Great Atonement through its type, into the miserable conception of a bribe to the Almighty-an offering of flesh and fat as to a hungry Baal. And yet this is the only view which some, who would be styled theologians, can take of this institution, so ancient and so universal, not only as it regards the heathen nations, but even in respect to those who were expressly taught of God. The sentiment which we have quoted from Cicero and Plautus is most admirably expressed by Shakspeare. Nothing can be finer than the contrast he presents between Divine Justice and the imperfections of human courts. is also rendered peculiarly striking by being put into the mouth of the guilty King of Denmark : It Forgive me my foul murder! That cannot be; since I am still possessed LXXII. Different Species of Atheists. Morality of Atheists not Founded on Principle. First Species, styled díkalos by Plato, and invested by him with too good a Character. Second Species, the Magician or Juggler. The Atheist often in Secret the Victim of Superstition. Hobbes. The Ironical Species of Atheist, a character peculiar to the Ancient World. Elymas the Sorcerer. Simon Magus. Apollonius of Tyanea. PAGE 78, LINE 4. ỏ μèv yàp λóyw, K. T. λ. This is the first and most harmless kind of atheist, the one who, although honest and just in his private relations, does not hesitate boldly to avow his atheism in speaking against religion with its oaths and rites, while, at the same time, he ridicules those who respect them. Such a one Plato thinks may have a dislike for wrong doing (τῷ δυσχεραίνειν, page 77, line 7), that is, a dislike founded on habit, prejudice, or an early bias of the mind, remaining in spite of his atheism; for the dikalov noos he is there represented as possessing could not be the result of anything like principle, seeing he rejects the principium of all morals and all law in denying the existence of a Deity. That such indi viduals may be found here and there in the midst of a society holding to a different belief, may, perhaps, be admitted. Their virtue, however, is only the effect of outward pressure. How long anything like morality would remain in a nation of atheists is a question of far more fearful magnitude. Although the experiment has never yet been fully tried, there can be but little doubt as to what would be the horrid result. We can hardly help thinking that Plato, in what is said page 77, line 5, has given altogether too good a character to this man. Such persons may be found putting on a show of morality, and making their lives a lie for the sake of giving support to the falsehood of their creed, yet still, it is exceedingly difficult for them to disguise their deep hatred of all who are righteous from religious principle. This, however, was probably less apparent in Plato's time. Christianity has brought out many a malignant trait in the human character, which, although deep seated in the heart, never made its appearance in the dusky twilight of the heathen systems of religion. Notwithstanding the laboured chapters of Gibbon, he who reads human nature in the light of the New Testament will have little difficulty in understanding why, Christianity kindled such a flame of persecution on its first entrance into the world, or in realizing the truth of Christ's declaration, that he "came, not to send peace upon the earth, but a sword." ó dè ..... PAGE 78, LINE 8. ὁ δὲ δὴ δοξάζων μὲν . . . . . εὐφυὴς δὲ, K. T. λ. This is a very different character from the other. He has no ambition to be thought above vulgar prejudices. His grand object is to turn to the best account, in promoting his own interests, the prejudices and the superstitions of other men. Hence he carefully conceals his atheism, while he makes the most abominable abuse of the religious fears of mankind. Having none of that fear of the invisible which would deter ordinary men, he resolves upon playing a bold game in the assumed character of fanatic, magician, conjurer, fortune teller, oracle-monger (a character, as we learn from Aristophanes, quite common among the Athenians), Sophist, public lecturer, or whatever may best suit his unholy purposes. It is on this account he is styled svøvýs, acriori ingenio præditus, a man of great resources, having a nature well adapted to any scheme of impiety. Sometimes, however, the character may not be all affected. Gross as is the apparent inconsistency, atheism is often found connected with superstition. The absence of the fear of God may sometimes give rise to most alarming fears of a devil. The religious instinct, to which atheism has done violence, but has not been wholly able to destroy, may yet live in the most painful terrors of a superstitious and darkened imagination. The soul of man must have, in some way, its supernatural world It cannot long endure the desolating void of atheism, and would even find relief in the most horrid imaginings of malevolent superhuman powers. It must believe in something stronger and higher than itself. Hence, if a God is denied, the moral vacuum must be filled with some personification of Fate, Fortune, or Destiny, or peopled with the Gorgons and Chimeras of a diseased and troubled fancy. See page 133, where we have shown that the atheist, even on his own theory, has no security against an unknown world of horrible superhuman beings. No man ever furnished a stronger proof of the truth of these positions than Hobbes. However seemingly bold he may have been in his writings, we are told on the best authority that during a large portion of his life he was in * * Vide Bayle's Dictionary, vol. iii., 471, N. Bayle loved sometimes to expose the skeptic as well as to sneer at the believer, and he says, most justly, that "the principles of philosophy (meaning materialism) are not sufficient to rid a man of the fear of apparitions; for, to reason consequentially, there are no philosophers who have less right to reject magic and sorcery than the atheists." Нн constant terror of ghosts and hobgoblins, and that he could never sleep without a light burning in his chamber; not daring to trust himself to that darkness which presented so true a picture of his own depraved and gloomy mind. PAGE 78, LINE 15. tò μèv ɛipwvikov. The first impres sion would be that this refers to the first character, who is described as ridiculing (Karayeλov, line 6) and making a mock of sacred things. It is clear, however, that a more serious and develish kind of irony is intended. It is the irony of the laughing and juggling fiend, secretly triumphing in the ruin which he is accomplishing in weak and wicked human nature. The second character is undoubtedly meant—ὁ δόλου καὶ ἐνέδρας πλήρης—" the man full of guile and stratagem." Nothing could more perfectly correspond to some parts of Plato's representation, than the description of that magician and false prophet who is mentioned, Acts, xiii., 6, 10, under the name of Elymas the Sorcerer, and whom Paul addresses in a style remarkably similar, in some of its terms, to that which is here used: *Ω πλήρης παντὸς δόλου καὶ πάσης ῥᾳδιουργίας, υἱὲ Διαβόλου, ἐχθρὲ πάσης δικαιοσύνης. We can hardly appreciate, at the present day, the description of this character, as given by Paul and Plato; but there can be no doubt that heathenism furnished many an example, exhibiting a hideousness of depravity of which it is now difficult to form a conception. It was a character which combined, in their most revolting forms, the boldest and most Heaven-daring atheism with all the devilism (if we may use such a term) that existed in some of the most horrid rites of the heathen religions. Most faithfully drawn specimens of these last productions of the expiring reign of Satan may be found in two tracts of Lucian; one entitled The History of Alexander, and the other, The Death of Peregrinus. The first was a follower of the famous Apollonius Tyanæus, who has often been blasphe |