Priestocracy has thrown around it its superstitious mantles, so much that the people are afraid to look in, like the tabernacle superstition of Moses, &c.

Paul was the worst of sophists and impostors, who supported the miserable humbug As much as you adopt Christ, so much you remove yourself from God. The messiah is only the shadow, will you take that for the substance, God? The people did not know the month, nor the year of Christ's birth.

The two dispensations comprehend the after-thoughts of mind, not the fore-thoughts of God, who is not identified with either, as he is the creator of mind that looks at principles, not sectarian false doctrines utterly impracticable.

Was not the temple of Jerusalem destroyed by Titus, long before the scene of the drama of Christ was laid? How easy was it, to have it Christ's prophecy antedated ? It does not matter whether it was after or before, as we have convicted this character so often. Had the christian been the true faith, the world could not have been kept back at all, by no force or stratagem. Principles will exclude the idea, of mastery of any christ. "Search the Scriptures," is invalid, for they are false and do not comprehend the subject. The justice of penalty cannot be liquidated by vicarious blood. That is impossible in the court of the God of the universe, however it may be ascribed to the peculiar god of a peculiar people. It was of course, only a peculiar mind-facture.

To accomplish any other than a universal system, is to advance man's, and make a peculiar system of gods.

If the peculiar god consent to a bloody, systematic murder and adultery, both impossibilities with the God of the universe, all the perpetrators commit a blasphemy in ascribing such to the creator, and a base libel on his attributes, revolting and disgusting to his principles. But if christianity be the cause of arts and sciences flourishing, how comes it that we are not indebted to it for all the inventions and discoveries of the ancients ?

Its head robs God of his functions, and its advocates rob mind of its attributes: The Egyptians and Chaldeans taught the Greeks Pythagoras, Thales, &c., astronomy. That state of science, proves them far before the Jews every way.

As to new birth or regeneration, that is not original, but belongs to the Brahmins of an older date. It is inadmissible in any peculiar faith. The master has to submit to principles, that he was to operate with.

He traded on the capital he found, and that is the province of a mortal. A God creates. All this is no more than myth-mythology varied-mystified by man-in deep insidious collusion-so Mosaic, that you do not know how or when it is done.

But the ancient was not christianity in the crusades ?

The modern is a suicidal, subversive of all that is true. It visits continents with military prowess, and extracts conquests and dominion over man and country, while it defends the union of church and state at home, and alienates the rights of citizens, because not of court faith. This doctrine teaches intoleration to those of different opinion, but for mind rationalized. It plants conquest in America, slavery upon Africa, poison in China, and extensive dominion in Asia. The actors are countries coveted by christianity. With the bible it gives wars, takes away the strength and beauty of continents, debases mind, which it deceives and betrays.

But there must be pious frauds practiced, by nations as individuals. But conscience is easy, for the piety of God's service, alias the priestocracy's.

They were the gods: it is polytheism of men.

Who will adopt the base actions of the world, sophisticated as they are? Where there has been an inquisition to force it, wars for centuries to uphold it, kingly and imperial power to sustain it. Insidious have been its enactments. This business will not

stand the fair investigation of honest intelligence.

Christians are vindictive, they forswear for each other, and expel numbers on trivial grounds, and retain others that are unworthy members of society. They go more for previous standing, than present impropriety.

Socrates died like a man, but Jesus Christ like a blasphemous culprit. But no great institution of learning, for fifty years has flourished, without the influence of christianity. Where are all the Mahometans, Jews or Chinese, the last of whom constitute nearly one-third of all the world? Is not the balance on the side of a large majority? What produced our republican revolution, that will bury all pagan idolatry at the feet of monotheism? Mind; certainly not christianity, whose church was in union with the state of Britain, with some honorable exceptions on the side of mind. What does the world need of non-resistance, that will not suit for man nor woman, for fortitude or chastity.

Non-resistance will not answer at all for the world, as conservatism must preserve all by constitutional principles. Christians only have the peculiar god of Judaism,

involved with their peculiar god. But do we think Christ a master moralist? We do not, for he was a bitter and decided sectarian, drawing the sword instead of promoting peace, setting the family at variance, and deranging God's religion, by telling us that if his faith doctrine was not believed, that the unbeliever should be damned. What principles are in that position?

Principle, is the only safe position. But as he could not be a God, for he was born, lived and died a mortal, and blasphemous at that, an impostor on the world, he was necessarily a perjurer.

An apostate to God is he who does not recognise his exclusive unity, where he has the power of analysis.

A rational being needs rational religion, the highest rational duty to rational society of a rational world, for a rational God. Was Christ then a rational being?

Gratitude is one of the noblest attributes of the human mind or character, to be estimated by action. Did Christ duly exercise it towards his creator, when he or his pretenders assumed for him the regency?

Was he a faithful patriot, leading his country or the world to God by principle, when he dictated by selfishness, and commanded by credulity?

We can only take the whole story of Christ, on analysis of representation.

Is it certain, that christianity furnishes supreme excellence?

What is its moral influence? What can the world do without it? What was the world thousands of years anterior to it? God could not in justice to mankind, preceding the time of the man Christ, have established messiahship, unless he had after-thoughts, a thing impossible-nor could he in justice to himself permit innocent blood to be shed for the guilty, for that causes him to participate in murder, an inconsistency with himself.

But Christ was a God: so much the worse.

Science is aimed to be scowled at by peculiar faith people, as subversive of their plans. Partial success is all that any peculiar faith can ever claim, and that proves nothing essential for christians, as the Mahometans have 140 millions, also victorious they have been over the Christians and Brahmins. But various have been the mutations of war, dependent on mind-skill, not peculiar faith. The christians have conquered much of Asia, where the Mahometan and Brahmin abide.

Christianity was provincial at first, then world travelling, being indebted to the union of state, both of which refer to mind. Instead of pardon of sins, in seeking an intercessor, we commit the most awful blasphemy in such faith.

When we leave creation, we leave the functions of the God of nature, and when we speak of begetting, we at once speak of the functions of creatures clearly proved. All this debits God instead of giving him an elevated credit for creation, and stultifies credulous man. The slow progress of christianity, proves its head a mortal. The man-worship and messiahship of Christ, are in the way of due devotion to God.

God created, not begat the universe; the science of physiology sets right the stupid blasphemers. We can only have right and justice, by wisdom, truth and science. Can the birth day of Christ be designated, a day most remarkable of all others. Can even the month ? Still worse, can even the year? This proves most conclusively the deepest imposition and fraud on the world. The only way whereby man can be saved, is certainly not by that, not worth a thought beyond its analysis.

It is only by the right action of mind, through the grace of the Creator. Christ never took away sin. There can be no propitiation by blood, only by mind. There can be no other principle, as the analysis of mind discloses. There is no definite prophecy of Isaiah about Christ, nor can Matthew appropriate it. The right functions of time preclude prophecy. All creation is on rational principles; all that mind does then and recognises, is rational, and has to look to rational ways. It is a fine thing that the means have not been in proportion to the ambition of the enterprise. Christ, as created a creature, had no power above a mortal, as his birth, life and death, prove. No special mission on earth, in lieu of the universe, avails, and Christ could only speak of an individual mission, as he was individualized to time, locality, or theatre. This reduces him most clearly and conclusively, to the state analogous to what all souls have by creation right, to which the christian faith is in antagonism.

The christian faith is in antagonism with that of Judaism. How is this, if the last was right? If not right, how can christian faith, that assumes to be founded thereon, be right? The proposition is too clear to be mistaken. If Judaism were ever right, it is so now; but if false now, it was always false. The proposition is undeniable, consequently all its false positions are inherited by its offspring, Christianity, Mahometanism, and Mormonism, and they are in antagonism to all that is Judaism. The sophistry of three in one, that trinity is unity, is hardly a remove from the first step of ignorance

of mind, and certainly bespeaks the lowest state of sophistry. It proves the perjury of undeveloped mind very verdant, but would if it could. It took the sophistry of priestocracy to invent, and the tyranny of the imperial people at Rome to impose, the christian faith on the world.

If Christ advanced new principles, he proved himself a God; as he did not, the failure proves him worse than man, as he was an impostor, and it proves the Creator supreme and sublime in unity, and in supremacy most adequate.

Martyrs are cited as dying, for love of Christ. Millions have died for other christs and messiahs, so that martyrdom is no test of true faith or pure religion.

Of what benefit is Christ to us in the latter days; he is an after-thought. No, he is assumed to be from the foundation. That cannot stand, for there is no foundation to that assertion. The very books that give it, are not proved at all, and ere they be, no such assertion is worth anything with honest or sound truthful minds. People most gullible, go for popularity, not the test of merit and principles, for the master, not principles. The defect of the evangelists, or those who wrote for them, leaves a folly.

Christ's birth-day is unknown! What? The peculiar heavens would have the sign; earth and mortals could not mistake it. The polytheists make God only part of a God, a very small part; the trinitarians only make him one-third of a God. The two attributes, the Holy Ghost and Christ, being absent, how then did he act, when they were on earth? If they have to go to the rest of the universe, for if God be imperfect in this world, he is so in all necessarily, how then is this difficulty to be surmounted? God cannot be a perfect being, when he has others to assist him in his attributes. Of course he lacks those attributes that they have to fulfil. The reason of the second covenant was from the defect of the first, that reflects its defective paternity upon all its progeny. The peculiarity of that matter begets its like. All are peculiar, and all are defective, from that defective peculiarity, most certainly.

If real deism or monotheism had been known to the ancient world, we should now be more exempt from the foul corruptions of Judaism, as God does not beget, but create then all are his creatures, and Christ is no more than the balance of mortals, and directly proved this by showing his mortality.

What did he do? He left the world worse than he found it, for he proves that a majority has been decidedly against him all the time. In old times, when the mass was ignorant, the cunning impostors had to resort to stratagem, ventriloquism, hand-jugglery, &c., to maintain their doctrines, but all such pretences as these are mind-juggleries, downright falsehoods, stories.

You claim, by excellence, to be above and separate from the world. By what? On the merits of a redeemer! Why not Why not say the truth-on the false pretences of mortals? A man or mortal savior bespeaks his false position. The error in some church members is thinking themselves above the world. All are of the human family, and can only sin the least. Their very position is very sinful, and should be repented of.

Christ was intolerant to the Pharisees and Jews, like all sectarians. Joseph or any other half-witted cuckold, may have had hundreds of dreams about their faithless spouses, but it would be visionary in any mind to believe it.

John, ch. viii., v. 59: "But Jesus hid himself." What an idea of a God, as Jesus running away. John, ch. x., v. 39: "Therefore they sought again to take him; but he escaped out of their hand." How was the world saved, anterior to Christ, which knew not of him? No faith will do it, for faith could not exist independent of the knowledge of the fact. All this is falsehood perjury.

Christ was a great reformer, as the bible pretends, but on the whole analysis, he is defiled with sectarianism; thus now we write it out, after a better comprehensive analysis on our own minds, not relying on the defective analysis of the deepest interested priestocracy. Why was not the resurrection of Christ before the whole world, which was to be thereby benefited? Because his mission is an after-thought; God had nothing to do with it. Bad, wicked men, had, and no one else. Bad despotic worldrules, show the reason for such fooleries. This miserable idea is bandied about by weakminded people, to disturb old imbecile men, weak women, and children. The poor patient is not permitted to die in peace, but his mind is tortured, and he is nearly deranged about this matter that has not the base of satisfaction. But what essential proof of Christ's resurrection is before the world of cotemporary authors? Do Pliny or Seneca, the greatest philosophers of those days, mention the darkness?

But it is claimed by men, assuming to have been deists, that "Celsus, Thallus, Phlegon, Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian and others, some of them christians and some of them pagans, do," and they blame the author, Gibbon, for adverting to the silence of Pliny and Seneca. But one observation will suffice. Were any of these men cotemporaries? All that is advanced must relate most powerfully to that point. Constantine, with

perjury in his mouth, carried the sword in one hand, and the cross in the other, under the banner of which Popes and their adherents have granted dispensations, for the conquest of the non-christian world, a few centuries back! Could there be a baser system of piracy perpetrated, on the world and mind?

Three

What is trinity? An impossibility, or what is incompatible with reason. bodies cannot exist in one and the same space, at the same time, the one omnipotent, the second local, and third imaginary.

God, as immutable, manifests himself uniformly now as previously. There is no change; all else is mere false pretence.

God is not a personal being, because his function pertains to the universe, which premises unity of being and principles, that necessarily impeach all bibles of tradition. We go against the errors of the ignorant, as well as the false pretences of the criminal. Plurality in the godhead, so far from being rational, cannot be reconciled to reason, sound, faithful, truthful, honest sense.

Christ's words are nothing at all, when his actions, birth, life and death, prove him the merest mortal. Christ was a selfish sectarian; he could only have been a rationalist to have been right, but he fell by the ignorance and vices of the times, far below rationalism.

Had Christ been a rationalist, he could have abundantly censured Judaism, one of the pests of sectarianism, and might have asserted the proper position without one iota of reference to the old or new bible of tradition. He might have had it in his power as the greatest reformer, to have carried through the world's reformation on rational principles, but he missed all by the worst of errors, his own sectarianism.

Christ was the greatest of sectarians, as he was granted to have had the greatest power. He sowed the seeds of evil, by his sectarianism.

Trinity is the last relic of polytheism and sectarianism, destroys all the divinity of Christ. Christianity is man and bible worship, pagan idolatry; that is the way to tell it! Our opinion was favorably inclined, as previously recorded, but the comprehension of the whole subject decides the question satisfactorily against any true expounder of religion when identified with sectarianism.

Mark gives us the recital of Christ's commission to his disciples, which completely disproves his divine mission. Ch. xvi. v. 17. "And these signs shall follow them that believe." One of two propositions necessarily follow, either that Christ or his believers are false, and what is inextricable for the poor dupes, christians, their position is false altogether, the rebuke from God's word. If the position were divine, it would be omnipresent wherever mind is; there would be the elements of the christian faith; but it requires a mission that necessarily kills the whole. When we analyze the nature of mind and its duties, we find conclusively that it is not the book that convinces, but it is the actor, God. His deeds are necessary for all cases. Christ's doc

trine so far from being a perfect religion, is no religion at all.

Is this true, Mark xvi. v. 20 : They went forth and preached everywhere?" Did they preach in America? What good scholar is not thoroughly convinced, that this is all false? But as to Christ's locality on this one earth, being objectionable, there might have been duplicates on other globes. That implies an Almighty power, that is not to be delegated for the plainest and justest of reasons, as all can be comprehended by God's way. Man's is a botch of after-thoughts, all the time. The christian faith had prevailed for nearly fifteen centuries on the old continent, and might have continued for as many more, but for mind that burst asunder the prison-bars of ignorance. O christianity, then was your time for glory. Columbus stands before all such intellectually, what Socrates does morally. And yet christianity has assumed the guardianship of science and art, genius and discovery. What intelligent, honest mind, can believe this? Christianity is a prostitution of mind that thus loses its dignity.

Who were the council men ?

"Frail and fallible."

And who empowered them, to make and impose canons for the world? rational mind, education, and religion, properly represented?

Were

Constantine and other christian emperors, are said to have had the writings of Porphyry against christianity destroyed. After all, Christ was the reformer of sectarianism, that gives him at the best only mortal existence and fame. Men's minds were not elevated to the demands of the case.

One language that could have been universal to the Apostles, to teach the world, would have benefited them. Was this bestowed by Christ, when he did not possess this himself? God Almighty has proved himself by such, which excludes "the prince of the power of the air." But not so they who give fiction, what does not belong to any but God. What has not been vitiated by the peculiar code of peculiar faith? Having vitiated Josephus, where would they stop?

It is remarkable that Josephus did not write of Jesus, of whom, if so celebrated, he as the whole world would, if he had lived in the age claimed, As there is no genuine document by Josephus, the world must give up the imposition.

Call you christianity a defender of science, a friend to mind, when it excludes religion? When it asserts that those who read must not doubt, as those that doubt will be damned! Is this less tyrannical on mind, than any ukase issued by the most despotic emperor? Is an honest disbelief in matters not and never proved, not possible to be proved, worse than a hypocritical or senseless belief? What virtue is there in all such faith? Christ, a God? It is incompatible with God to abide on earth, most inconsistent with his functions. God would not let mind mistake that, if it had been a mission. Its end proved itself, a blasphemous imposition.

Which of the four gospel writers is right? right? Two most essentially clash with each other, and all disagree with truth. They have written falsely; Christ could not carry through his own doctrines on account of sectarianism, by which he clearly lost his life, or was victimized. Of course, he had no one to blame but himself. And this is the reason on truthful analysis, that his followers were in antagonism to the world, having the identity of vitiation. What is called martyrdom, results from the persecution of sectarianism of peculiar faith.

In tracing the lineage of Christ from David, the pretenders and advocates of such, ask the people to be fools, to believe the very first item.

Constantine had copies of the scriptures multiplied at the expense of the imperial treasury.

He was smuggler general to this mighty fund of bigotry, and has left a potent curse of absolutism.

Christ could not have been very wise to go for sectarianism, that is necessarily temporary.

His sectarianism, it is true, was the most elaborate of all others. Now all action on principle, will redound to the world's dignity and happiness.

If Christ could not institute any new principles, he could not originate any new functions.

Then he had no divine function, conclusively proving himself a mortal, and necessarily an impostor.

What he taught was incompatible, which solves the main question, that he was mortal. Christ was ambitious, vain and egotistical, reckless of truth. Matthew, ch. xiii. v. 58, “He did not many mighty works then, because of their unbelief." That was the very reason, he should have convinced them. Matthew, xxi. 22, “All things whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, it shall be done."

Is this honorable truth? What pitiful dramatists !

The people of Palestine did many things incompatible with rational principles, according to Josephus, who in his Antiq., 1. xix. c. 8, sec. 2. "They called him (Herod) a God.'

But what will the world do for redemption of its sins, for justification by Christ's blood? That position involves murder of all the parties concerned, even of the latest posterity adopting. Who wishes to be involved in such criminal participation, when the bountiful grace of God Almighty is the sustenance of the universe?

We have two points among many that pull down Christ's mortality, his sectarianism, that could not possibly be of God. Christ could not originate any principles, therefore all the work had been done perfect at first, as premised by God's forethought; now, we will defy the world to prove the least necessity of Christ's mission, when he would not originate a single principle, consequently the Almighty had premised all practicable. No two persons, let alone nations, can clash on principles that are truth and fact, which bespeak much sublimer ground than passiveness under aggression, turning the second cheek, and non-resistance. Christ as divine claimed of God, should be divinely inspired when he says, "That the stars shall fall from heaven:" does he speak right?

John vi., 66. "From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him." If we wished any direct proof of Christ's mortality, we could not have gotten one more direct. If he, with all his pretended miracles, could not retain, but lost many of his own disciples, who turned away from him, how could it be expected that the world since would follow him? How shall it be with his representatives, who have not the works of the signs with them? These many disciples must have best known him, and therefore left him. His own prophecy in Mark proves him a pitiful perjurer. But how about passive obedience? That is most objectionable. How? As it does not promote the dignity and elevation of character. The adoption of principles promotes the world's satisfaction and happiness,-short of that social relations