Prophecy is by some thought to be miraculous4, and by others to be supernatural, and there are others, who indulge themselves in an opinion, that they amount to no more than mere5 political conjectures7. Some nations have feigned8 an intercourse9 with good spirits by the art of divination10; and others with evil ones by the art of magic; and most nations have pretended to an intercourse with the world of spirits both ways.
The Romans trusted much to their sibylline11 oracles12 and soothsayers; the Babylonians to their magicians and astrologers; the Egyptians and Persians to their magicians; and the Jews to their seers or prophets; and all nations and individuals, discover an anxiety for an intercourse with the world of spirits; which lays a foundation for artful and designing men, to impose upon them. But if the foregoing arguments in chapter sixth, respecting the natural impossibility of an intercourse of any unbodied or imperceptible mental beings with mankind, are true, then the foretelling13 of future events can amount to nothing more. than political illusion. For prophecy as well as all other sorts of prognostication must be super-naturally inspired, or it could be no more than judging of future events from mere probability or guess-work, as the astronomers14 ingenuously15 confess in their calculations, by saying: “Judgment of the weather,” &c. So also respecting astrology, provided there is any such thing as futurity to be learned from it, it would be altogether a natural discovery; for neither astronomy nor astrology claim anything of a miraculous or supernatural kind, but their calculations are meant to be predicated on the order and course of nature, with which our senses are conversant16, and with which inspiration or the mere cooperation of spirits is not intended to act as part. So also concerning prophecy, if it be considered to be merely natural, (we will not at present dispute whether it is true or false) upon this position it stands on the footing of probability or mere conjecture6 and uncertainty17. But as to the doctrine18 of any supernatural agency of the divine mind on ours, which is commonly called inspiration, it has been sufficiently19 confuted in chapter sixth; which arguments need not be repeated, nor does it concern my system to settle the question, whether prophecy should be denominated miraculous or supernatural, inasmuch as both these doctrines20 have been confuted; though it is my opinion, that were we to trace the notion of supernatural to its source, it would finally terminate in that which is denominated miraculous; for that which is above or beyond nature, if it has any positive existence, must be miraculous.
The writings of the prophets are most generally so loose, vague and indeterminate in their meaning, or in the grammar of their present translation, that the prophecies will as well answer to events in one period of time, as in another; and are equally applicable to a variety of events, which have and are still taking place in the world, and are liable to so many different interpretations21, that they are incapable of being understood or explained, except upon arbitrary principles, and therefore cannot be admitted as a proof of revelation; as for instance, “it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God.” Who can understand the accomplishment23 of the prophecies, that are expressed after this sort? for every day in its turn has been, and will in its succession be the last day; and if we advert24 to the express words of the prophecy, to wit, “the last days,” there will be an uncertain plurality “of last days,” which must be understood to be short of a month, or a year; or it should have been expressed thus, and it shall come to pass in the last months or years, instead of days: and if it had mentioned last years, it would be a just construction to suppose, that it included a less number of years than a century; but as the prophecy mentions “last days” we are at a loss, which among the plurality of them to assign for the fulfilling of the prophecy.
Furthermore, we cannot learn from the prophecy, in what month, year, or any other part of duration those last days belong; so that we can never tell when such vague prophecies are to take place, they therefore remain the arbitrary prerogative25 of fanatics26 to prescribe their events in any age or period of time, when their distempered fancies may think most eligible27: there are other prophecies still more abstruse28; to wit, “And one said unto the man clothed in linen29, which was upon the waters of the river, how long shall it be to the end of these wonders? and I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto Heaven, and sware by him that liveth forever, that it should be for an time, times and an half.” The question, in the prophecy is asked “how long shall it be to the end of these wonders?” and the answer is given with the solemnity of an oath, “it shall be for a time, times and a half.” A time is an indefinite part of duration, and so are times, and the third description of time is as indefinite as either of the former descriptions of it; to wit, “and an half;” that is to say, half a time. There is no certain term given in any or either of the three descriptions of the end of the wonders alluded30 to, whereby any or all of them together are capable of computation, as there is no certain period marked out to begin or end a calculation. To compute31 an indefinite time in the single number or quantity of duration is impossible, and to compute an uncertain plurality of such indefinite times is equally perplexing and impracticable; and lastly, to define half a time by any possible succession of its parts, is a contradiction, for half a time includes no time at all; inasmuch as the smallest conception or possible moment or criterion of duration, is a time, or otherwise, by the addition of ever so many of those parts together, they would not prolong a period; so that there is not, and cannot be such a part of time, as half a time, for be it supposed to be ever so momentous32, yet if includes any part of duration, it is a time, and not half a time. Had the prophet said half a year, half a day, or half a minute, he would have spoken intelligibly34; but half a time has no existence at all, and consequently no period could ever possibly arrive in the succession or order of time, when there could be an end to the wonders alluded to; and in this sense only, the prophecy is intelligible2; to wit, that it will never come to pass.
The revelation of St. John the divine, involves the subject of time, if possible, in still greater inconsistencies, viz: “And to the woman was given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness35, into her place: Where she is nourished for a time, and times and half a time.” “And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hands to heaven, and sware by him that liveth forever and ever, who created heaven and the things that therein are, and the earth and the things that therein are, and the sea and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer.” Had this tremendous oath been verified there could have been no farther disputations on the calculation of “time and times and half a time,” (or about any thing else) for its succession would have reached its last and final period at that important crisis when time should have been “no longer.” The solar system must have ceased its motions, from which we compute the succession of time, and the race of man would have been extinct; for as long as they may be supposed to exist, time must of necessary consequence have existed also; and since the course of nature, including the generations of mankind, has been continued from the time of the positive denunciation of the angel to this day, we may safely conclude, that his interference in the system of nature, was perfectly36 romantic.
The apostle Peter, at the first Christian37 pentecost, objecting to the accusation38 of their being drunk with new wine, explains the prophecy of the prophet Joel, who prophesied39 of the events which were to take place in the last days, as coming to pass at that early period; his words are handed down to us as follows: “But this is that which is spoken by the prophet Joel, and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophecy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.”
The history of the out-pouring of the spirit at the Pentecost, admitting it to have been a fact, would have been very inadequate40 to the prophetical prediction, viz: I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; the most favorable construction is that the prophet meant human flesh, i. e. all human flesh; but instead of a universal effusion of the spirit, it appears to have been restricted to a select number, who were collected together at Jerusalem, and the concourse of spectators thought them to be delirious41; It may however be supposed, that St. Peter was a better judge of the accomplishment of the prophecy than I am: well then, admitting his application of the prophecy of the last days to take place at the first pentecost; it being now more than seventeen hundred years ago, they consequently could not have been the last days.
Still a query42 arises, whether every of the prophecies, which were predicted to be fulfilled in the last days, must not have been accomplished43 at that time; or whether any of the prophecies thus expressed are still to be completed by any events which may in future take place; or by any which have taken place since those last days called pentecost; or whether any prophecy whatever can be fulfilled more than once; and if so, how many times; or how is it possible for us, out of the vast variety of events (in which there is so great a similarity) which one in particular to ascribe to its right prediction among the numerous prophecies?
Furthermore, provided some of the prophecies should point out some particular events, which have since taken place, there might have been previous grounds of probability, that such or such events would in the ordinary course of things come to pass; for instance, it is no ways extraordinary, that the prophet Jeremiah should be able to predict that Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, should take Jerusalem, when we consider the power of the Babylonish empire at that time, and the feebleness of the Jews. “The word, which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, when Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and all his army, and all the kingdoms of the earth of his dominion44, and all the people fought against Jerusalem, and against all the cities thereof, saying, thus saith the Lord the God of Israel, go and speak unto Zedekiah king of Judah, and tell him thus saith the Lord, behold45, I will give this city of Jerusalem into the hand of the king of Babylon.” No politicians could at the time of the prediction be much at a loss respecting the fate of Jerusalem. Nor would it be at all evidential to any candid46 and ingenious enquirer47, that God had any manner of agency in fabricating the prophecies, though, some of them should seem to decypher future events, as they might, to human appearance, turn out right, merely from accident or contingency48. It is very improbable, or rather incompatible49 with human nature, that the prophecy of Micah will ever come to pass, who predicts that “they,” speaking of mankind, “shall beat their swords into plough-shares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” Some of the prophecies are so apparently50 contradictory51, that they contain their own confutation; as for instance, the prophecy of Micaiah contained in the book of Chronicles, which probably is as absurd as any thing that is to be met with in story: “And when he was come unto the king, the king said unto him, Micaiah, shall we go to Ramoth Gilead to battle, or shall I forbear? and he said go ye up and prosper52, and they shall be delivered into your hand, and the king said unto him, how many times shall I adjure53 thee, that thou shalt tell me nothing, but that which is true in the name of the Lord? then he said I did see all Israel scattered54 upon the mountains, as sheep that have no shepherd, and the Lord said, these have no master, let them return, therefore, every man to his house in peace: and the king said unto Jehoshaphat, did not I tell thee, that he would prophecy no good concerning me, but evil?” “Again he said, therefore, hear the word of the Lord — I saw the Lord sitting upon his throne, and all the host of Heaven standing55 on his right hand and on his left, and the Lord said who shall entice56 Ahab, King of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth Gilead, and one spake saying after this manner, and another saying after that manner; then there came out a spirit and stood before the Lord, and said I will entice him, and the Lord said unto him wherewith? And he said I will go forth57 and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets, and the Lord said thou shalt entice him and thou shalt prevail; go out and do even so. Now therefore, behold the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets and the Lord hath spoken evil against thee.” It is observable that the prophet at first predicted the prosperity of Ahab, saying, “go ye up and prosper, and they shall be delivered into your hand,” but after a little adjurement by the king, he alters his prediction and prophecies diametrically the reverse. What is more certain than that the event of the expedition against Ramoth Gilead must have comported58 with the one or the other of his prophecies? Certain it was, that Ahab would take it or not take it, he must either prosper or not prosper, as there would be no third way or means between these two; and it appears that the prophet was determined59 to be in the right of it by his prophecy both ways. It further appears from his prophecy, that there was a great consultation60 in Heaven to entice Ahab King of Israel to his destruction, and that a certain lying spirit came and stood before the Lord, and proposed to him to go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of the king’s prophets. But what is the most incredible is, that God should countenance61 it, and give him positive orders to falsify the truth to the other prophets. It appears that Micaiah in his first prophecy, viz: “Go up to Ramoth Gilead and prosper, and they shall be delivered into your hand,” acted in concert with the lying spirit which stood before the Lord, but afterwards acted the treacherous62 part by prophecying the truth, which, if we may credit his account, was in direct opposition63 to the scheme of Heaven.
Section ii. The Contentions64 which Subsisted66 Between the Prophets Respecting Their Veracity67, and Their Inconsistencies With One Another, and with the Nature of Things, and Their Omission68 in Teaching the Doctrine of Immortality69, Precludes70 the Divinity of Their Prophecies.
Whoever examines the writings of the prophets will discover a spirit of strife71 and contention65 among them; they would charge each other with fallacy and deception72; disputations of this kind are plentifully73 interspersed75 through the writings of the prophets; we will transcribe76 a few of those passages out of many: “Thus saith the Lord to the foolish prophets that follow their own spirit, and have found nothing, they have seen vanity and lying divination, saying the Lord saith, and the Lord hath, not sent them, and they have made others to hope that they would confirm the word.” And in another place, “I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken unto them, yet they prophecy.” Again, “I have heard what the prophets said, that prophecy lies in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed, yet they are the prophets of the deceit of their own hearts.” And again, “Yea, they are greedy dogs, which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand; they all look to their own way, every one for his gain from his quarter.” It being the case that there was such a strife among the prophets to recommend themselves to the people, and every art and dissimulation77 having been practised by them to gain power and superiority, all which artifice78 was to be judged of by the great vulgar, or in some instances by the political views of the Jewish Sanhedrim, how could those who were cotemporaries with the several prophets, distinguish the premised true prophets from the false? Much less, how can we, who live more than seventeen hundred years since the last of them, be able to distinguish them apart? And yet, without the knowledge of this distinction, we cannot with propriety79 give credit to any of them, even admitting there were some true prophets among them. Nor is it possible for us to know but that their very institution was merely a reach of policy of the Israelitish and Judaic governments, the more easily, implicitly80 and effectually to keep their people in subordination, by inculcating a belief that they were ruled with special directions from heaven, which in fact originated from the Sanhedrim. Many other nations have made use of much the same kind of policy.
In the 22d chapter of Genesis, we have a history of a very extraordinary command from God to Abraham, and of a very unnatural81 attempt of his to obey it. “And it came to pass after these things that God did tempt82 Abraham, and he said unto him, Abraham, and he said behold here I am, and he said take now thy son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee to the land of Moriah, and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of;” “And they came to the place which God had told him of, and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood; and Abraham stretched forth his hand and took the knife to slay83 his son.” Shocking attempt! Murder is allowed by mankind in general to be the most capital crime that is possible to be acted among men; it would therefore be incompatible with the divine nature to have enjoined84 it by a positive command to Abraham to have killed his son; a murder of all others the most unnatural and cruel and attended with the most aggravating85 circumstances, not merely from a prescribed breach86 of the ties of parental87 affection, but from the consideration that the child was to be (if we may credit the command,) offered to God as a religious sacrifice. What could have been a more complicated wickedness than the obedience88 of this command would have been? and what can be more absurd than to suppose that it came from God? It is argued, in vindication89 of the injunction to Abraham to kill his son, that it was merely for a trial of his obedience, and that God never designed to have him do it; to prevent which an angel from heaven called to him and gave him counter orders, not to slay his son; but to suppose that God needed such an experiment, or any other, in order to know whether Abraham would be obedient to his commands, is utterly90 incompatible with his omniscience91, who without public exhibitions understands all things; so that had the injunction been in itself, fit and reasonable, and also from God, the compliance92 or non-compliance of Abraham thereto, could not have communicated any new idea to the divine mind. Every part of the conduct of mankind is a trial of their obedience and is known to God, as well as the particular conduct of Abraham; besides in the canonical93 writings, we read that “God cannot be tempted94 with evil, neither tempteth he any man.” How then can it be, “that God did tempt Abraham?” a sort of employment which, in scripture95, is commonly ascribed to the devil. It is a very common thing to hear Abraham extolled96 for attempting to comply with the supposed command of sacrificing his son; but it appears to me, that it had been wiser and more becoming the character of a virtuous98 man, for Abraham to have replied in answer to the injunction as follows, to wit, that it could not possibly have come from God; who was the fountain of goodness and perfection, and unchangeable in his nature, who had endowed him with reason and understanding, whereby he knew his duty to God, his son, and to himself, better than to kill his only son, and offer him as a religious sacrifice to God, for God would never have implanted in his mind such a strong affection towards him, nor such a conscious sense of duty to provide for, protect and succor99 him in all duties, and to promote his happiness and well being, provided he had designed that he should have laid violent hands on his life. And inasmuch as the command was, in itself, morally speaking, unfit, and altogether unworthy of God, he presumed that it never originated from him, but from some inhuman100, cruel and destructive being, who delighted in wo, and pungent101 grief; for God could not have been the author of so base an injunction, nor could he be pleased with so inhuman and sinful a sacrifice.
Moses in his last chapter of Deuteronomy crowns his history with the particular account of his own death and burial. “So Moses, the servant of the Lord, died there, in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, and he buried him in a valley, in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor, but no man knew of his sepulchre unto this day; and Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died, his eyes were not dim, nor his natural force abated102, and the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days.” This is the only historian in the circle of my reading, who has ever given the public a particular account of his own death, and how old he was at that decisive period, where he died, who buried him, and where he was buried, and withal of the number of days his friends and acquaintances mourned and wept for him. I must confess I do not expect to be able to advise the public of the term of my life, nor the circumstances of my death and burial, nor of the days of the weeping or laughing of my survivors103.
Part of the laws of Moses were arbitrary impositions upon the tribes of Israel, and have no foundation in the reason and fitness of things, particularly that in which he inculcates punishing the children for the iniquities104 of the father; “visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children unto the third and fourth generation.” There is no reason to be given, why the iniquity105 of the father might not as well have involved the fifth, sixth and seventh generations, and so on to the latest posterity106 in guilt107 and punishment, as the first four generations; for if it was possible, that the iniquity of the father could be justly visited upon any of his posterity, who were not accomplices108 with him in the iniquity, or were not some way or other aiding or accessary in it, then the iniquity might as justly be visited upon any one of the succeeding generations as upon another, or upon the generation of any indifferent person: for arbitrary imputations of iniquity are equally absurd in all supposable cases; so that if we once admit the possibility of visiting iniquity upon any others than the perpetrators, be they who they will, we overturn our natural and scientifical notions of a personal retribution of justice among mankind. It is, in plain English, punishing the innocent for the sin of the guilty. But virtue110 or vice111 cannot be thus visited or imputed112 from the fathers to the unoffending children, or to children’s children; or which is the same thing, from the guilty to the innocent; for moral good or evil is mental and personal, which cannot be transferred, changed or altered from one person to another, but is inherently connected with its respective personal actors, and constitutes a quality or habit, and is the merit or demerit of the respective agents or proficients113 in moral good or evil, and is by nature inalienable, “The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.” But as we shall have occasion to argue this matter at large in the twelfth chapter of this treatise114, where we shall treat of the imputed sin of Adam to his posterity, and of imputative righteousness, we will discuss the subject of imputation109 no farther in this place. However, the unjust practice of punishing the children for the iniquity of the father having been an ordinance115 of Moses, was more or less continued by the Israelites, as in the case of Achan and his children. “And Joshua and all Israel with him took Achan the son of Zorah, and the silver and the garment, and the wedge of gold, and his sons, and his daughters, and his oxen, and his asses116, and his sheep, and his tent, and all that he had, and brought them to the valley of Achor, and all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones, and they raised over him a great heap of stones unto this day; so the Lord turned from the fierceness of his anger.” “Fierce anger” is incompatible with the divine perfection, nor is the cruel extirpation117 of the innocent family, and live stock of Achan, to be accounted for on principles of reason. This flagrant injustice118 of punishing the children for the iniquity of the father had introduced a proverb in Israel, viz: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children’s teeth are set on edge.” But the prophet Ezekiel in the 18th chapter of his prophecies, has confuted Moses’s statutes120 of visiting the iniquities of the father upon the children, and repealed121 them with the authority of thus saith the Lord, which was the manner of expression by which they were promulgated123. But the prophet Ezekiel did not repeal122 those statutes of Moses merely by the authority of thus saith the Lord, but over and above gives the reason for it, otherwise he could not have repealed them; for Moses enacted124 them as he relates, from as high authority as Ezekiel could pretend to in nullifying them; so that had he not produced reason and argument, it would have been “thus saith the Lord,” against “thus saith the Lord.” But Ezekiel reasons conclusively125, viz: “The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying, what meat ye that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, the fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children’s teeth are set on edge; as I live, saith the Lord God, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. Behold all souls are mine, as the soul of the father so also the soul of the son is mine; the soul that sinneth it shall die, the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son, the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him, therefore, I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to their ways saith the Lord God.” It is observable, that the prophet ingeniously says, “Ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel,” implicitly acknowledging that the law of Moses had given occasion to that proverb, nor was it possible to remove that proverb or grievance126 to which the Israelites were liable on account of visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children, but by the repeal of the statute119 of Moses in that case made and provided; which was effectually done by Ezekiel: in consequence whereof the administration of justice became disencumbered of the embarrassments127 under which it had labored128 for many centuries. Thus it appears, that those laws, denominated the laws of God, are not infallible, but have their exceptions and may be dispensed129 with.
Under the dispensation of the law a breach of the Sabbath was a capital offence. “And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day, and the Lord said unto Moses, the man shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp; and all the congregation brought him without the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died, as the Lord commanded Moses.” The very institution of the Sabbath was in itself arbitrary, otherwise it would not have been changed from the last to the first day of the week. For those ordinances130 which are predicated on the reason and fitness of things can never change: as that which is once morally fit, always remains131 so, and is immutable132, nor could the same crime, in justice, deserve death in Moses’s time (as in the instance of the Israelite’s gathering133 sticks), and but a pecuniary134 fine in ours; as in the instance of the breach of Sabbath in these times.
Furthermore, the order of nature respecting day and night, or the succession of time, is such, as renders it impossible that any identical part of time, which constitutes one day, can do it to all the inhabitants of the globe at the same time, or in the same period. Day is perpetually dawning, and night commencing to some or other of the inhabitants of the terraqueous ball without intermission. At the distance of fifteen degrees of longitude135 to the east of us, the day begins an hour sooner than it does with us here in Vermont, and with us an hour sooner than it does fifteen degrees to the westward136, and thus it continues in succession round the globe, and night as regularly revolving137 after it, succeeding each other in their alternate rounds; so that when it is mid-day with us, it is mid-night with our species, denominated the Periaeci, who live under the same parallel of latitude138 with us, but under a directly opposite meridian139; so likewise, when it is mid-day with them, it is mid-night with us. Thus it appears that the same identical part of time, which composes our days, compose their nights, and while we are keeping Sunday, they are in their midnight dreams; nor is it possible in nature, that the same identical part of time, which makes the first day of the week with us, should make the first day of the week with the inhabitants on the opposite side of the globe. The apostle James speaks candidly140 on this subject, saying, “Some esteem141 one day above another, others esteem every day alike, let every one be fully74 persuaded in his own mind,” and keep the laws of the land. It was unfortunate for the Israelite who was accused of gathering sticks on the Israelitish Sabbath, that he was convicted of it; for though by the law of his people he must have died, yet the act for which he suffered was no breach of the law of nature. Supposing that very delinquent142 should come to this world again, and gather sticks on Saturday in this country, he might as an hireling receive his wages for it, without being exposed to a similar prosecution143 of that of Moses; and provided he should gather sticks on our Sunday, his wages would atone144 for his crime instead of his life, since modern legislators have abated the rigor145 of the law for which he died.
The barbarous zeal146 of the prophet Samuel in hewing147 Agag to pieces after he was made prisoner by Saul, king of Israel, could not proceed from a good spirit, nor would such cruelty be permitted towards a prisoner in any civilized148 nation at this day. “And Samuel hewed149 Agag to pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.” The unmanly deed seems to be mentioned with a phiz of religion, viz: that it was done before the Lord; but that cannot alter the nature of the act itself, for every act of mankind, whether good or evil, is done before the Lord, as much as Samuel’s hewing Agag to pieces. The orders which Samuel gave unto Saul, (as he says by the word of the Lord) to cut off the posterity of the Amalekites, and to destroy them utterly, together with the cause of God’s displeasure with them, are unworthy of God as may be seen at large in the 15th chapter of the Book of Samuel, “Spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass22.” The ostensible150 reason for all this, was, because the ancestors of the Amalekites, as long before the days of Samuel as when the children of Israel came out of Egypt, which was near five hundred years, had ambushed151 and fought against Israel, in their passage from thence to the land which they afterwards inhabited. Although it appears from the history of Moses and Joshua, that Israel was going to disposess them of their country, which is thought to be a sufficient cause of war in these days. It is true they insinuate152 that the Lord had given the land to the children of Israel, yet it appears that they had to fight for it and get it by the hardest, notwithstanding, as is the case with nations in these days, and ever has been since the knowledge of history.
But be the old quarrel between Israel and Amalek as it will, it cannot on any principle be supposed, the successors of those Amalekites, in the days of Samuel, could be guilty of any premised transgressions153 of their predecessors154. The sanguinary laws of Moses did not admit of visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children in the line of succession, farther than to the fourth generation, but the Amalekites against whom Samuel had denounced the wrath155 of God, by the hand of Saul, were at a much greater remove from those their progenitors156, who were charged with the crime for which they were cut off as a nation. Nor is it compatible with reason to suppose, that God ever directed either Moses or Joshua to extirpate157 the Canaanitish nations. “And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men and the women, and the little ones of every city, we left none to remain.” There is not more propriety in ascribing these cruelties to God, than those that were perpetrated by the Spaniards against the Mexican and Peruvian Indians or natives of America. Every one who dares to exercise his reason, free from bias158, will readily discern, that the inhumanities exercised towards the Canaanites and Amorites, Mexicans and Peruvians, were detestably wicked, and could not be approbated by God, or by rational and good men. Undoubtedly159 avarice160 and domination were the causes of those abounding161 cruelties, in which religion had as little to do as in the crusades of the holy land (so called.)
The writings of the prophets abound162 with prodigies163, strange and unnatural events. The walls of Jericho are represented to have fallen to the ground in consequence of a blast of ram’s horns; Balaam’s ass to speak to his master, and the prophet Elijah is said to have been carried off bodily into heaven by a chariot, in a whirlwind. Strange stories! But other scriptures164 tell us, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” The history of the affront165, which the little children of Bethel gave the prophet Elisha, his cursing them, and their destruction by the bears, has the appearance of a fable166. That Elisha should be so exasperated167 at the children for calling him bald head, and telling him to go up, was rather a sample of ill breeding; most gentlemen would have laughed at the joke, instead of cursing them, or being instrumental in their destruction, by merciless, wild and voracious168 beasts. Though the children were saucy169, yet a man of any considerable candor170, would have made allowance for their non-age, “for childhood and youth are vanity.” “And he went up from thence unto Bethel, and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city and mocked him, and said unto him, go up thou bald-head, go up thou bald-head, and he turned back and looked on them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord, and there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare171 forty and two children of them.” It seems by the children’s address to Elisha, that he was an old bald-headed man, and that they had heard, that his mate, Elijah, had gone up a little before; and as it was an uncommon172 thing for men to kite away into the air, and leave the world after that sort, it is likely that it excited a curiosity in the children to see Elisha go off with himself in the same manner, which occasioned their particular mode of speech to him, saying, “go up bald head.” The writings of Solomon, Song of Israel, must needs have been foisted173 into the canonical volume by some means or other, for no one passage therein gives the least intimation of inspiration, or that he had any immediate174 dictation from God in his compositions, but oh the contrary, he informs us, that he acquired his knowledge by applying himself to wisdom, “to seek and to search out concerning all things that are done under the sun. This sore travail,” says he, “has God given to the sons of men to be exercised therewith.” And since Solomon never pretended to inspiration, others cannot justly claim his writings to have been anything more than natural reasonings, for who can, with propriety stamp his writings with divine authority, when he pretended no such thing, but the contrary? His song of songs appears to be rather of the amorous175 kind, and is supposed to have been written at the time he was making love to the daughter of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, who is said to have been a princess of exquisite176 beauty and exceeding coy, and so captivated his affections that it made him light headed and sing about the “joints of her thighs,” and her “belly.”
The divine legation of Moses and the prophets is rendered questionable177 from the consideration that they never taught the doctrine of immortality, their rewards and punishments are altogether temporary, terminating at death; they have not so much as exhibited any speculation178 of surviving the grave; to this is ascribed the unbelief of the Sadducees of the resurrection of the dead, or of an angel or spirit, as they strenuously179 adhered to the law of Moses, for they could not imagine, but that their great prophet and law giver would have apprised180 them of a state of immortality had it been true; and in this the Sadducees seem to argue with force on their position of the divine legation of Moses. For admitting the reality of man’s immortality, it appears incredible to suppose, that God should have specially181 commissioned Moses, as his prophet and instructor182 to the tribes of Israel, and not withal to have instructed them in the important doctrine of a future existence.
Section iii. Dreams or Visions Uncertain and Chimerical183 Channel for the Conveyance184 of Revelation; with Remarks on the Communication of the Holy Ghost to the Disciples185, by the Prayers and Laying on of the Apostles Hands, with Observations on The Divine Dictations of the First Promulgators of the Gospel, and an Account of the Elect Lady, and Her New Sectary of Shakers.
It appears from the writings of the prophets and apostles, that part of their revelations were communicated to them by dreams and visions, which have no other existence but in the imagination, and are defined to be “the images which appear to the mind during sleep, figuratively, a chimera186, a groundless fancy or conceit187, without reason.” Our experience agrees with this definition, and evinces that there is no trust to be reposed188 in them. They are fictitious189 images of the mind, not under the control of the understanding, and therefore not regarded at this day except by the credulous190 and superstitious191, who still retain a veneration192 for them. But that a revelation from God to man, to be continued to the latest posterity as a divine and perfect rule of duty or law, should be communicated through such a fictitious and chimerical channel, carries with it the evident marks of deception itself, or of unintelligibleness, as appears from the vision of St. Paul. “It is not expedient193 for me doubtless to glory, I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord; I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, whether in the body I cannot tell, or whether out of the body I cannot tell, God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heavens. And I knew such a man, whether in the body or out of the body I cannot tell, God knoweth how that he was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable words which it is not lawful194 for a man to utter.” That God knoweth the whole affair, will not be disputed, but that we should understand it is impossible, for the apostle’s account of his vision is unintelligible1; it appears that he was rather in a delirium195 or a stupor196, so that he knew not that whether he was in or out of the body: he says he heard “unspeakable words,” but this communicates no intelligence of the subject-matter of them to us; and that they “were not lawful for a man to utter,” but what they were, or wherein their unlawfulness to be uttered by man consisted, he does not inform us. His revelation from his own story was unspeakable and unlawful, and so he told us nothing what it was, nor does it compose any part of revelation, which is to make known. He is explicit197 as to his being caught up to the third heaven, but how he could understand that is incredible, when at the same time he knew not whether he was in the body or out of the body; and if he was in such a delirium that he did not know so domestic a matter as that, it is not to be supposed that he could be a competent judge whether he was at the first, second, third, or fourth heaven, or whether he was advanced above the surface of the earth, or not.
That the apostles in their ministry198 were dictated199 by the Holy Ghost, in the settlement of disputable doctrines, is highly questionable. “Forasmuch as we have heard that certain, which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting201 your souls, saying, ye must be circumcised and keep the law, to whom we gave no such commandment, for it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no other burden than these necessary things.” Acts 15. And after having given a history of the disputations concerning circumcision, and of keeping the law of Moses, and of the result of the council, the same chapter informs us, that a contention happened so sharp between Paul and Barnabas, “that they parted asunder202 the one from the other.” Had the Holy Ghost been the dictator of the first teachers of Christianity, as individuals, there could have been no disputable doctrines or controversies203, respecting the religion which they were promulgating204 in the world or in the manner of doing it, to be referred to a general council of the apostles and elders held at Jerusalem, for had they been directed by the Holy Ghost, there could have been no controversies among them to have referred to the council. And inasmuch as the Holy Ghost neglected them as individuals, why is it not as likely that it neglected to dictate200 the council held at Jerusalem or elsewhere? It seems that the Holy Ghost no otherwise directed them in their plan of religion, than by the general council of the apostles and elders, the same as all other communities are governed. “Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus, and finding certain disciples, he said unto them have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? and they said unto him we have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost; and when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them, and they spoke33 with tongues and prophesied.”
The spirit of God is that which constitutes the divine essence, and makes him to be what he is, but that he should be dictated, or his spirit be communicated by any acts or ceremonies of the apostles, is by no means admissible; for such exertions206 of the apostles, so far as they may be supposed to communicate the holy spirit to their disciples, would have made God passive in the premised act of the gift of the spirit; for it must have been either the immediate act of God or of the apostles, and if it was the immediate act of the one, it could not have been the immediate act of the other.
To suppose that the act of the gift of the spirit was the mere act of God, and at the same time the mere act of the apostles, are propositions diametrically opposed to each other, and cannot both be true. But it may be supposed that the gift of the spirit was partly the act of God and partly the act of the apostles; admitting this to have been the case the consequences would follow, that the act of the gift of the spirit was partly divine and partly human, and therefore the beneficence and glory of the grant of the gift of the spirit unto the disciples, would belong partly to God and partly to the apostles, and in an exact proportion to that which God and they may be supposed to have respectively contributed towards the marvellous act of the gift of the spirit. But that God should act in partnership207 with man, or share his providence208 and glory with him, is too absurd to demand argumentative confutation, especially in an act which immediately respects the display or exertion205 of the divine spirit on the spirits of men.
Such delusions209 have taken place in every age of the world since history has attained210 to any considerable degree of intelligence; nor is there at present a nation on earth, but what is more or less infatuated with delusory notions of the immediate influence of good or evil spirits on their minds. A recent instance of it appears in the Elect Lady (as she has seen fit to style herself) and her followers211, called Shakers; this pretended holy woman began her religious scheme at Connestaguna; in the northwestardly part of the State of New York, about the year 1769, and has added a new sectary to the religious catalogue. After having instilled212 her tenets among the Connestagunites, and the adjacent inhabitants, she rambled213 into several parts of the country, promulgating her religion, and has gained a considerable number of scattering214 proselytes, not only in the State of New York, but some in the New England States. She has so wrought215 on the minds of her female devotees, respecting the fading nature, vanity and tempting97 allurements216 of their ornaments217 (which by the by are not plenty among her followers,) and the deceitfulness of riches, that she has procured219 from them a considerable number of strings220 of gold beads221 and jewels, and amassed222 a small treasure; and like most sectaries engrosses223 the kingdom of heaven to herself and her followers, to the seclusion224 of all others. She gives out that her mission is immediately from heaven, that she travails225 in pain for her elect, and pretends to talk in seventy-two unknown languages, in which she converses226 with those who have departed this life, and says, that there has, not been a true church on earth since the apostles days until she had erected227 hers. That both the living and the dead must be saved in, by, and through her, and that they must confess their sins unto her and procure218 her pardon, or cannot be saved. That every of the human race who have died since the apostle’s time, until her church was set up has been damned, and that they are continually making intercession to her for salvation228, which is the occasion of her talking to them in those unknown tongues; and that she gathers her elect from earth and hell. She wholly refuses to give a reason for what she does or says: but says that it is the duty of mankind to believe in her, and receive her instructions, for they are infallible.
For a time she prohibited her disciples from propagating their species, but soon after gave them ample license229, restricting them, indiscriminately, to the pale of her sanctified church, for that she needed more souls to complete the number of her elect. Among other things, she instructs those who are young and sprightly230 among her pupils, to practise the most wild, freakish, wanton and romantic gestures, as to that of indecently stripping themselves, twirling round, extorting231 their features, shaking and twitching232 their bodies and limbs into a variety of odd and unusual ways, and many other extravagancies of external behavior, in the practice of which they are said to be very alert even to the astonishment233 of spectators, having by use acquired an uncommon agility234 in such twirling, freakish and romantic practices. The old Lady having such an ascendancy235 over them as to make them believe that those extravagant236 actions were occasioned by the immediate power of God, it serves among them as a proof of the divinity of her doctrines.
A more particular account of this new sectary has been lately published in a pamphlet by a Mr. Rathburn, who, as he relates, was for a time, one of her deluded237 disciples, but after a while apostatised from the faith, and has since announced to the world the particulars of their doctrine and conduct.
Probably there never was any people or country, since the era of historical knowledge, who were more confident than they that they are acted upon by the immediate agency of the divine spirit; and as there are facts now existing in a considerable tract238 of country, and are notoriously known in this part of America, I take the liberty to mention them, as a knowledge of these facts, together with the concurrent239 testimony240 of the history of such deceptions241 in all ages and nations, might induce my countrymen to examine strictly242 into the claim and reality of ghostly intelligence in general.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
unintelligible
|
|
| adj.无法了解的，难解的，莫明其妙的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
intelligible
|
|
| adj.可理解的，明白易懂的，清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
miraculous
|
|
| adj.像奇迹一样的，不可思议的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
conjecture
|
|
| n./v.推测，猜测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
conjectures
|
|
| 推测，猜想( conjecture的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
feigned
|
|
| a.假装的，不真诚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
intercourse
|
|
| n.性交；交流，交往，交际 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
divination
|
|
| n.占卜，预测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
sibylline
|
|
| adj.预言的；神巫的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
oracles
|
|
| 神示所( oracle的名词复数 )； 神谕； 圣贤； 哲人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
foretelling
|
|
| v.预言，预示( foretell的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
astronomers
|
|
| n.天文学者，天文学家( astronomer的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
ingenuously
|
|
| adv.率直地，正直地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
conversant
|
|
| adj.亲近的，有交情的，熟悉的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
uncertainty
|
|
| n.易变，靠不住，不确知，不确定的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
sufficiently
|
|
| adv.足够地，充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
doctrines
|
|
| n.教条( doctrine的名词复数 )；教义；学说；（政府政策的）正式声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
interpretations
|
|
| n.解释( interpretation的名词复数 )；表演；演绎；理解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
ass
|
|
| n.驴；傻瓜，蠢笨的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
accomplishment
|
|
| n.完成，成就，（pl.）造诣，技能 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
advert
|
|
| vi.注意，留意，言及；n.广告 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
prerogative
|
|
| n.特权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
fanatics
|
|
| 狂热者，入迷者( fanatic的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
eligible
|
|
| adj.有条件被选中的；(尤指婚姻等)合适(意)的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
abstruse
|
|
| adj.深奥的，难解的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
linen
|
|
| n.亚麻布，亚麻线，亚麻制品；adj.亚麻布制的，亚麻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
alluded
|
|
| 提及，暗指( allude的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
compute
|
|
| v./n.计算，估计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
momentous
|
|
| adj.重要的，重大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
intelligibly
|
|
| adv.可理解地，明了地，清晰地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
wilderness
|
|
| n.杳无人烟的一片陆地、水等，荒漠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
accusation
|
|
| n.控告，指责，谴责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
prophesied
|
|
| v.预告，预言( prophesy的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
inadequate
|
|
| adj.(for,to)不充足的，不适当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
delirious
|
|
| adj.不省人事的，神智昏迷的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
query
|
|
| n.疑问，问号，质问；vt.询问，表示怀疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
accomplished
|
|
| adj.有才艺的；有造诣的；达到了的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
dominion
|
|
| n.统治，管辖，支配权；领土，版图 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
behold
|
|
| v.看，注视，看到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
candid
|
|
| adj.公正的，正直的；坦率的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
enquirer
|
|
| 寻问者，追究者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
contingency
|
|
| n.意外事件，可能性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
incompatible
|
|
| adj.不相容的，不协调的，不相配的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
contradictory
|
|
| adj.反驳的，反对的，抗辩的；n.正反对，矛盾对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
prosper
|
|
| v.成功，兴隆，昌盛；使成功，使昌隆，繁荣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
adjure
|
|
| v.郑重敦促(恳请) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
scattered
|
|
| adj.分散的，稀疏的；散步的；疏疏落落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
entice
|
|
| v.诱骗，引诱，怂恿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
comported
|
|
| v.表现( comport的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
consultation
|
|
| n.咨询；商量；商议；会议 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
countenance
|
|
| n.脸色，面容；面部表情；vt.支持，赞同 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
treacherous
|
|
| adj.不可靠的，有暗藏的危险的；adj.背叛的，背信弃义的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
opposition
|
|
| n.反对，敌对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
contentions
|
|
| n.竞争( contention的名词复数 )；争夺；争论；论点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
contention
|
|
| n.争论，争辩，论战；论点，主张 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
subsisted
|
|
| v.（靠很少的钱或食物）维持生活，生存下去( subsist的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
veracity
|
|
| n.诚实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
omission
|
|
| n.省略，删节；遗漏或省略的事物，冗长 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
immortality
|
|
| n.不死，不朽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
precludes
|
|
| v.阻止( preclude的第三人称单数 )；排除；妨碍；使…行不通 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
strife
|
|
| n.争吵，冲突，倾轧，竞争 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
deception
|
|
| n.欺骗，欺诈；骗局，诡计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
plentifully
|
|
| adv. 许多地，丰饶地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
interspersed
|
|
| adj.[医]散开的；点缀的v.intersperse的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
transcribe
|
|
| v.抄写，誉写；改编(乐曲)；复制，转录 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
dissimulation
|
|
| n.掩饰，虚伪，装糊涂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
artifice
|
|
| n.妙计，高明的手段；狡诈，诡计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
propriety
|
|
| n.正当行为；正当；适当 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
implicitly
|
|
| adv. 含蓄地, 暗中地, 毫不保留地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
unnatural
|
|
| adj.不自然的；反常的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
tempt
|
|
| vt.引诱，勾引，吸引，引起…的兴趣 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
slay
|
|
| v.杀死，宰杀，杀戮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
enjoined
|
|
| v.命令( enjoin的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
aggravating
|
|
| adj.恼人的，讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
breach
|
|
| n.违反，不履行；破裂；vt.冲破，攻破 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
parental
|
|
| adj.父母的；父的；母的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
obedience
|
|
| n.服从，顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
vindication
|
|
| n.洗冤，证实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
omniscience
|
|
| n.全知，全知者，上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
compliance
|
|
| n.顺从；服从；附和；屈从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
canonical
|
|
| n.权威的；典型的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
scripture
|
|
| n.经文，圣书，手稿；Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》，《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
extolled
|
|
| v.赞颂，赞扬，赞美( extol的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
tempting
|
|
| a.诱人的, 吸引人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
virtuous
|
|
| adj.有品德的，善良的，贞洁的，有效力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
succor
|
|
| n.援助，帮助；v.给予帮助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
inhuman
|
|
| adj.残忍的，不人道的，无人性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
pungent
|
|
| adj.（气味、味道）刺激性的，辛辣的；尖锐的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
abated
|
|
| 减少( abate的过去式和过去分词 )； 减去； 降价； 撤消（诉讼） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
survivors
|
|
| 幸存者，残存者，生还者( survivor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
iniquities
|
|
| n.邪恶( iniquity的名词复数 )；极不公正 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
iniquity
|
|
| n.邪恶；不公正 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
posterity
|
|
| n.后裔，子孙，后代 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
guilt
|
|
| n.犯罪；内疚；过失，罪责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
accomplices
|
|
| 从犯，帮凶，同谋( accomplice的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
imputation
|
|
| n.归罪，责难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
virtue
|
|
| n.德行，美德；贞操；优点；功效，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
vice
|
|
| n.坏事；恶习；[pl.]台钳，老虎钳；adj.副的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
imputed
|
|
| v.把（错误等）归咎于( impute的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
proficients
|
|
| 精通的，熟练的( proficient的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
114
treatise
|
|
| n.专著；(专题)论文 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
ordinance
|
|
| n.法令；条令；条例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
asses
|
|
| n. 驴，愚蠢的人，臀部 adv. (常用作后置)用于贬损或骂人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
extirpation
|
|
| n.消灭，根除，毁灭；摘除 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
injustice
|
|
| n.非正义，不公正，不公平，侵犯（别人的）权利 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
statute
|
|
| n.成文法，法令，法规；章程，规则，条例 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
statutes
|
|
| 成文法( statute的名词复数 )； 法令； 法规； 章程 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
repealed
|
|
| 撤销，废除( repeal的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
repeal
|
|
| n.废止，撤消；v.废止，撤消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
promulgated
|
|
| v.宣扬（某事物）( promulgate的过去式和过去分词 )；传播；公布；颁布（法令、新法律等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
enacted
|
|
| 制定（法律），通过（法案）( enact的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
conclusively
|
|
| adv.令人信服地，确凿地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
grievance
|
|
| n.怨愤，气恼，委屈 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
embarrassments
|
|
| n.尴尬( embarrassment的名词复数 )；难堪；局促不安；令人难堪或耻辱的事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
labored
|
|
| adj.吃力的，谨慎的v.努力争取(for)( labor的过去式和过去分词 )；苦干；详细分析；（指引擎）缓慢而困难地运转 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
dispensed
|
|
| v.分配( dispense的过去式和过去分词 )；施与；配（药） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
ordinances
|
|
| n.条例，法令( ordinance的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
immutable
|
|
| adj.不可改变的，永恒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
gathering
|
|
| n.集会，聚会，聚集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
pecuniary
|
|
| adj.金钱的；金钱上的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
longitude
|
|
| n.经线，经度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
westward
|
|
| n.西方，西部；adj.西方的，向西的；adv.向西 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
revolving
|
|
| adj.旋转的，轮转式的；循环的v.（使）旋转( revolve的现在分词 )；细想 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
latitude
|
|
| n.纬度，行动或言论的自由(范围)，(pl.)地区 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
meridian
|
|
| adj.子午线的；全盛期的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
candidly
|
|
| adv.坦率地，直率而诚恳地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
esteem
|
|
| n.尊敬，尊重；vt.尊重，敬重；把…看作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
delinquent
|
|
| adj.犯法的，有过失的；n.违法者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
prosecution
|
|
| n.起诉，告发，检举，执行，经营 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
atone
|
|
| v.赎罪，补偿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
rigor
|
|
| n.严酷，严格，严厉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
zeal
|
|
| n.热心，热情，热忱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
hewing
|
|
| v.（用斧、刀等）砍、劈( hew的现在分词 )；砍成；劈出；开辟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
civilized
|
|
| a.有教养的，文雅的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
hewed
|
|
| v.（用斧、刀等）砍、劈( hew的过去式和过去分词 )；砍成；劈出；开辟 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
ostensible
|
|
| adj.(指理由)表面的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
ambushed
|
|
| v.埋伏( ambush的过去式和过去分词 )；埋伏着 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
insinuate
|
|
| vt.含沙射影地说，暗示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
transgressions
|
|
| n.违反，违法，罪过( transgression的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
predecessors
|
|
| n.前任( predecessor的名词复数 )；前辈；（被取代的）原有事物；前身 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
wrath
|
|
| n.愤怒，愤慨，暴怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
progenitors
|
|
| n.祖先( progenitor的名词复数 )；先驱；前辈；原本 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
extirpate
|
|
| v.除尽，灭绝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
bias
|
|
| n.偏见，偏心，偏袒；vt.使有偏见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
avarice
|
|
| n.贪婪；贪心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
abounding
|
|
| adj.丰富的，大量的v.大量存在，充满，富于( abound的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
abound
|
|
| vi.大量存在；(in，with)充满，富于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
prodigies
|
|
| n.奇才，天才（尤指神童）( prodigy的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
scriptures
|
|
| 经文，圣典( scripture的名词复数 )； 经典 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
affront
|
|
| n./v.侮辱，触怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
fable
|
|
| n.寓言；童话；神话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
exasperated
|
|
| adj.恼怒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
voracious
|
|
| adj.狼吞虎咽的，贪婪的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
saucy
|
|
| adj.无礼的；俊俏的；活泼的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
candor
|
|
| n.坦白，率真 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
tare
|
|
| n.皮重；v.量皮重 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
uncommon
|
|
| adj.罕见的，非凡的，不平常的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
foisted
|
|
| 强迫接受，把…强加于( foist的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
amorous
|
|
| adj.多情的；有关爱情的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
exquisite
|
|
| adj.精美的；敏锐的；剧烈的，感觉强烈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
questionable
|
|
| adj.可疑的，有问题的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
speculation
|
|
| n.思索，沉思；猜测；投机 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
strenuously
|
|
| adv.奋发地，费力地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
apprised
|
|
| v.告知，通知( apprise的过去式和过去分词 )；评价 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
specially
|
|
| adv.特定地；特殊地；明确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
instructor
|
|
| n.指导者，教员，教练 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
chimerical
|
|
| adj.荒诞不经的，梦幻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
conveyance
|
|
| n.(不动产等的)转让，让与；转让证书；传送；运送；表达；（正）运输工具 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
disciples
|
|
| n.信徒( disciple的名词复数 )；门徒；耶稣的信徒；（尤指）耶稣十二门徒之一 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
186
chimera
|
|
| n.神话怪物；梦幻 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
187
conceit
|
|
| n.自负，自高自大 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
188
reposed
|
|
| v.将（手臂等）靠在某人（某物）上( repose的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
189
fictitious
|
|
| adj.虚构的，假设的；空头的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
190
credulous
|
|
| adj.轻信的，易信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
191
superstitious
|
|
| adj.迷信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
192
veneration
|
|
| n.尊敬，崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
193
expedient
|
|
| adj.有用的，有利的；n.紧急的办法，权宜之计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
194
lawful
|
|
| adj.法律许可的，守法的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
195
delirium
|
|
| n. 神智昏迷,说胡话;极度兴奋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
196
stupor
|
|
| v.昏迷；不省人事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
197
explicit
|
|
| adj.详述的，明确的；坦率的；显然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
198
ministry
|
|
| n.(政府的)部；牧师 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
199
dictated
|
|
| v.大声讲或读( dictate的过去式和过去分词 )；口授；支配；摆布 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
200
dictate
|
|
| v.口授；(使)听写；指令，指示，命令 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
201
subverting
|
|
| v.颠覆，破坏（政治制度、宗教信仰等）( subvert的现在分词 )；使（某人）道德败坏或不忠 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
202
asunder
|
|
| adj.分离的，化为碎片 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
203
controversies
|
|
| 争论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
204
promulgating
|
|
| v.宣扬（某事物）( promulgate的现在分词 )；传播；公布；颁布（法令、新法律等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
205
exertion
|
|
| n.尽力，努力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
206
exertions
|
|
| n.努力( exertion的名词复数 )；费力；（能力、权力等的）运用；行使 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
207
partnership
|
|
| n.合作关系，伙伴关系 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
208
providence
|
|
| n.深谋远虑，天道，天意；远见；节约；上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
209
delusions
|
|
| n.欺骗( delusion的名词复数 )；谬见；错觉；妄想 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
210
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
211
followers
|
|
| 追随者( follower的名词复数 )； 用户； 契据的附面； 从动件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
212
instilled
|
|
| v.逐渐使某人获得（某种可取的品质），逐步灌输( instill的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
213
rambled
|
|
| （无目的地）漫游( ramble的过去式和过去分词 )； （喻）漫谈； 扯淡； 长篇大论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
214
scattering
|
|
| n.[物]散射；散乱，分散；在媒介质中的散播adj.散乱的；分散在不同范围的；广泛扩散的；（选票）数量分散的v.散射(scatter的ing形式)；散布；驱散 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
215
wrought
|
|
| v.引起；以…原料制作；运转；adj.制造的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
216
allurements
|
|
| n.诱惑( allurement的名词复数 )；吸引；诱惑物；有诱惑力的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
217
ornaments
|
|
| n.装饰( ornament的名词复数 )；点缀；装饰品；首饰v.装饰，点缀，美化( ornament的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
218
procure
|
|
| vt.获得，取得，促成；vi.拉皮条 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
219
procured
|
|
| v.（努力）取得， （设法）获得( procure的过去式和过去分词 )；拉皮条 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
220
strings
|
|
| n.弦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
221
beads
|
|
| n.（空心）小珠子( bead的名词复数 )；水珠；珠子项链 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
222
amassed
|
|
| v.积累，积聚( amass的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
223
engrosses
|
|
| v.使全神贯注( engross的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
224
seclusion
|
|
| n.隐遁，隔离 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
225
travails
|
|
| n.艰苦劳动( travail的名词复数 )；辛勤努力；痛苦；分娩的阵痛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
226
converses
|
|
| v.交谈，谈话( converse的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
227
ERECTED
|
|
| adj. 直立的，竖立的，笔直的 vt. 使 ... 直立，建立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
228
salvation
|
|
| n.（尤指基督）救世，超度，拯救，解困 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
229
license
|
|
| n.执照，许可证，特许；v.许可，特许 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
230
sprightly
|
|
| adj.愉快的，活泼的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
231
extorting
|
|
| v.敲诈( extort的现在分词 )；曲解 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
232
twitching
|
|
| n.颤搐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
233
astonishment
|
|
| n.惊奇，惊异 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
234
agility
|
|
| n.敏捷，活泼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
235
ascendancy
|
|
| n.统治权，支配力量 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
236
extravagant
|
|
| adj.奢侈的；过分的；(言行等)放肆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
237
deluded
|
|
| v.欺骗，哄骗( delude的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
238
tract
|
|
| n.传单，小册子，大片(土地或森林) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
239
concurrent
|
|
| adj.同时发生的，一致的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
240
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
241
deceptions
|
|
| 欺骗( deception的名词复数 )； 骗术，诡计 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
242
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |