Extracted text
Editorial transcription, mechanically normalized from the cited scan. The claims remain those of The Flaming Sword.
WILL SOME CHRISTIAN TELL US? 1. W hat God was doing before he created everything out of nothing. 2. Where he got his material. 3. The appearance of the earth when it “ was without form.” 4. If it rotated round the sun be fore there was any sun. 5. How the earth brought forth herbs and fruit before the sun was created. 6. If man is in God’s image, in whose image is the monkey. 7. How woman was made out of .man’s rib. 8. Why Adam and Eve were for bidden to acquire knowledge. 9. Why God placed fruit trees in their way, of which he did not mean them to eat. 10. If it was fair to pit an innocent and unsophisticated woman against the Devil. 11. Why were serpents punished for the Devil’s sin. 12. What they walked on beforethey went on their bellies. 18. Their opinion of a father who, for a single act of disobedience, pun ishes his children’s children forever. 14. Why God chose one favored race and left the rest benighted heathens. 15. How he came to alter his de signs afterwards. 16. Why he should write his will instead of speaking to all face to face. 17. Why Christ never authorized any one to write about him. 18. Why gospels to Jews should be written in Greek. 19. How is it the original MSS. have disappeared. 20. Why they were not published among the people who could correct any error. 21. Who separated the true gospels from the many spurious ones. 22. Why don’t God work miracles now. 28. If the trade no longer pays. 24. How is it a Divine revelation sets everyone at loggerheads. 25. The name and address of a genuine Christian.—Ludanm, in the London Freethinker. 1. He was, probably, amusing him self by listening to the prating of the self-conceited freethinkers, who were sneering at the supposed wisdom of uninformed, professed Christians who were as ignorant as to the real facts of the creation as themselves. 2. Where the spirit, or life of the seed, always gets the material for every new creation. 8. The same as that which is now presented by the world of science, (falsely so-called,) of theology, of so cial science, of economics, of gov ernment. 4. Neither then did it rotate round the sun, nor does it now, except in the brain of befuddeled agnostics and professed freethinkers and belated Christians. 5. The, biological earth—the hu- : inanity—being the soil in which the Diyine seed was sown, did not require j . the help of the physical sun in order to the germination and growth of the seed entrusted to it, and the sun cre ated was the anthropostic, not the physical sun. 6. Man, especially man of the type represented by the writer of these questions, was created neither in the image nor likeness of God, and it would be a slander upon the monkey to affirm that he was created in his likeness. Jesus affords ns the only real solution of the problem of his creation when he said, “ye are of your father the devil.” 7. As in the opposite sense, woman represented the Church from the af fection of the false principle, it was but natural that she should be created out of the rib—bone—of man, the part of him that had the least true spiritual life. 8. Adam and Eve, since they sig nify not the first human beings in the physical earth, but as Swedenborg says, the men of the most Ancient Church ; and as a church always de clines in its knowledge till all its sci ence becomes fallacy, as it is to-day, in the nature of the case Adam and Eve are denied knowledge. 9. He did so, just as he places with in thereach of men health and lifegiving fruits and vegetables, and apples of Sodom and death-dealing herbs, not because he desires them to die of poison. 10. Just as fair as it is to pit the lamb against the wolf, or an innocent unsophisticated girl against a lustful, masculine devil in human form. As the woman represented the Church from affection of the false principle, and the devil was the serpent, the perverted, sensual, devilish wisdom, it was not unfair to pit the one against the other. 11. The serpent represents the true wisdom, likewise its opposite, fallacy. As fallacy is the devil’s serpent it na turally receives his punishment. 12. As walking upon the bellies, in the language of correspondences, in which 4he Bible was written, sig nifies walking in infernal falses, be fore these serpents thus walked they must have walked in Divine truths. 18. Their opinion would be similar to tnat which they would have of a white Leghorn rooster who should sin against his race by crossing himself with a black Spanish hen, thus pun ishing his children’s children forever, (which never, in the language of the Bible, means anything else than for the age) by making them speckled for the age, till by careful breeding, out of this mixture may be brought a flock of pure white Leghorns and an other of pure black Spanish chicks. 14. God chose one favored race in which to plant his seed just as a hus bandman chooses one of his fields in which to sow wheat. The next year he will not choose the same field but some other, and the fields not chosen will be left to grow some other grain, or weeds. 15. He did not alter his plans, but in the long process of development when he had brought to perfection in one race a single sample of the Divine seed, he chose other races in which to grow a full crop of the kind of seed thus perfected, mainly because, the field being humanity and pos sessed of a will that rejected this Di vine seed, he must needs find other fields in which to perfect his crop. 16. Why does any ordinary father write his will rather than speak it to all, face to face? The objection is brought not against the true, script ural idea of God, but against the false, orthodox idea of the present. 17. Probably for the same reason that Socrates never authorized any one to write about him. Jesus ex pressly chose twelve persons to be with him during all the time of his mission, in order to be witnesses. What more authorization did they need? And what authorization did any persons need to qualify them to write about him except a knowledge of the facts, of which a large number of persons were cognizant, or credibly informed? 18. The Greek language was exten sively understood and spoken in all that country, and there were reasons in the peculiarly lucid character of the language itself, and the relation which the language should sustain to the languages and learning of all succeed ing times, that made it peculiarly fit ting that the gospels which were not designed merely, nor mainly for Jews, but for all nations, should be written in that language. 19. While it remains true that the j manuscripts of many of the most im portant histories of antiquity, which all peoples have had a direct interest in preserving, like a portion of the histories of Tacitus, have been de stroyed, it cannot be very strange that most of the original manuscripts of. books, that infidels and votaries of other religions have sought for eight een hundred years to destroy, should not be able to be found. 20. In the sense in which books are now published, will Lucianus please tell us what book^. were pub lished in the time to which he refers? 21. Koreshans do not believe that any body did. 22. Hedoes work the same mira cles now that he did then. Beal mir acles are only facts in the ordinary operation of laws that men do not un derstand. When the laws are under stood the miracles cease. 28. The mountebanks, both infidel and professed Christian, like Simon Magus, have not wit enough to receive them, and the very few who really understand- them have ho need of them. 24. In a way very similar to that in which, what are supposed to be the plainest statutes, set what are re puted to be the ablest lawyers at log gerheads. There is still another and more weighty reason in the fact that the time for the fulfilment of prophe cies that were written, not in ordi nary language, but in the language of correspondences, had not yet come, and the knowledge of them would be harmful rather than useful to men. 25. He has not yet put in an ap pearance since the last and only per fect one left the world in the begin ning of the Christian age. As he was seed, and, when sown, had to die in order to reproduce, and the time of harvest, which is the end of the Christian age, has not yet come, it is just as absurd to say that there will be none on the earth, as it would be to say, after wheat has been sown, because none is seen until the time of harvest, none will ever be seen.— 0. F. L. The Modem So-called Christian Idea of the Trinity of the GodHead Compared with that of Koresh. The Teachingand A pplication of Primitive Judaism,Ancient Myth ologyand Genuine Christianity are Id en tical w ith K oreshan Principles, and Embodythe Absolute Truth, [Whitten by Hinson.] Does not the modem, so-called Christian Church teach that the mys tery of the Trinity is unexplainable, and yet does it not declare that the Trinity is composed of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and that these three are one God ? Does it not teach that God is a person, without body or parts, invisible to the natural eye, eteraal, all-knowing, all-wise, all-pow erful, illimitable, unchangeable and inseparable, and that each part of the Trinity has equal power with every 'Other? Does it not teach that man can have communion with the Son-God distinct from the Father-God? That through an acquaintance with the SonGod the Father-God’s wrath may be appeased after becoming reconciled, holding communion, and making an atonement with the Father-God through the intercession of the SonGod? Does the Church not teach, “Know God and live eternally,” and in almost the next breath declare that God is unknowable ? Does it not also teach that in the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the Word was God; that this Word became flesh, and men beheld his glory as the only begotten Son of God, and that by him were all things made that are made, and without him was not any thing made that is made? Does it not claim that this Son was the ful ness of the Godhead bodily, that who soever seeth him seeth the Father, for He and the Father are one? Does not modern Christianity refer to Him as the one spoken of in Isaiah, ix: 6, 7, “ Unto us a child is bom, unto us a son is given: and the gov ernment shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonder ful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of ; Peace. Of the increase of his govern ment and peace there shall beno end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to older it, and to es tablish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever ?” Is not this the same God who was in the beginning, always was and forever shall be ? Was there another God beside him in the Garden of Eden, who created man in his own image and likeness, just like himself in every attribute, male and female in one form? Has not God declared that he will not give his glory to another? In opposition to these statements the Church teaches that one part of the Trinity, the only begotten Son, sepa rated himself from the Father, came down to humanity, fulfilling a deliber ately designed plan, previously ar ranged between them, in which the Son-God is to be slaughtered as a lamb, for a vicarious atonement, to the end that his Majesty’s Divine wrath upon a sinful accursed human ity—which he made in the beginning in his own image and likeness—might be appeased; and that being all pow erful he could, by merely saying they should remain as perfect as he made them, have prevented the fall, and there would have been no sin nor wickedness in the world to-day. But he chose, rather, a method by which he could show forth his own glory by allowing them to fall, and then vol untarily causing a most infamous death to come upon the Son in order to save those who would believe in his power, and be saved in their sin, not out of it, and obey God’s command ments. According to the modern Church, in order to show his gracious kindness and his bountiful mercy to this “ fal len from Divine grace, humanity,” this innocent Son who knew no sin, but was equal to God himself, must bear the sin for the guilty and let the guilty go free. Did not Christ teach that the only way to have life eternal is to obey the ten com mandments in their fulness, as he did? Did be not say, “I am the way, the truth, and the life”? Yet modern spurious Christianity teaches that it is not necessary to know the science of these commands much less to obey them; that by merely believ ing and doing the best we can we shall receive the same glory that is agents—I don’t care if it is for life— somebody will be found who has the “sand” to prosecute them. But the old usury law is a dead letter, and we might just as well have no penalty as to have it. in the Sword/ No. 28, that it is common knowledge that the earth cqrves eight inches to the mile. From this statymejjt of a common fact I made the calculation, accord ing to the rule given in all the school books, that a man standing with his eye six feet above the water would have a horizon at a distance of three miles. When I made the statement of the common fact I had no idea but that all readers who did not believe this statement would consult the school books to see if I had made a false statement. ' promised to all who are absolutely righteous, becoming joint heirs with Jesus Christ, having him for their eldef brother. Does not the church teach that with one breath ho could instantly, regard less of established laws, decrees or destiny, destroy the powers of the wicked, relieve suffering humanity, provide for the comfort of the desti tute and starving multitudes; that every form of pestilence of a defiled world and the powers of the devil could be removed at any time when he willed to give the word? While *we have a law that the max imum rate of interest shall be 10 per cent, and two banks in this town tell us openly that their rates are from 12 to 18 up, what will we gain by reduc ing the legal rate to eight per cent, and having the penalty just what it is now? These men who loan money claim to be respectable people, and move in good society. Pass a law that will clothe some of them in the garb of old Grimes, except that the stripes will be horizontal instead of running “up and down,” and I think that it may have some tendency to do this business “on the sly,” at least, if not, “on the square.” All of the readers of that article as well as my critic should understand the simple propositions and theorems of geometry and the methods of their demonstration before they attempt more than the asking of questions. My critic shows that she is not inform ed concerning the point she criticises. Notwithstanding all the greatness and power which modern theologians ascribe to God, they claim that he is necessitated to call for assistance, to bring about a better condition in hu manity, from the modem clergy, law yers, physicians, surgeons, teachers, kings, statesmen, so-called philan thropists, and missionaries, to estab lish the kingdom for which Jesus told his disciples to pray. If the water curves eight inches to the mile it is very natural to say that in two miles the curve is sixteen inch es; in throe miles it is twenty-four, etc; but no one informed on the ratio of cur vature would ever make such a mis take. It is not necessary for me to give the page and author of as com mon a law as the one referred to by my critic (and the one she denies) because she says the man’s horizon would be nine miles away if his eye is six feet above the water. The reason that I did not deem it neces sary for me to give the name and page of the book referred to, or to quote the law, word for word, is because all school books on that subject contain the law or rule used, by which to calculate the curvature of the earth. A man said to me once: “I sold B-----a wagon for $75. He has paid mein interest $150, and he still owes me for the wagon $75.” Despite all the power ascribed to this Deity, Is not the world in the power of hell? Is not justice a farce? Is it not honorable to be a wholesale robber and murderer? Are not the editors of lying newspapers paid a premium for their scandals and lies and the general defamation of any one who attempts to express the truth? Aro not books, whose tendency is to purify the condition of society by ex- j posing the sensuality of the age, sup pressed? Put such men in the state’s prison, and, although others may be found to do the same work, none of them will be disposed to brag about it.—John Lat Jnxjp, in St. Paid f Minn.) State. CORRESPONDENCE. My “Royal” Brother:—I am abont to saya few things to yon th at I hopeyoawillnotfora m om ent th ink are said in a sp irit of criticism , b nt only that Koreshan Science, which, as far as Iunderstand,I love, m ay not be m isunder stood. We were told, “ If yon have anything againsta brother go to him w ith your com plaint,” and ‘‘I have somewhat against yon.” In your answer in the Flaming Sword to yonr N atick, Moss., correspondent there are some points on w hich yon fail to m ake yonr position clear, because to the casual observer they would n ot seem to be in accordance with manifest facts. Does not modem theology teach that, although God is unchangeable, one part of this Trinity, the Son, who, before he came down to humanity had no body, is now at the right hand of the Father-God with the same body he had in earth, and that the Holy Spirit, the other part of the Godhead, which Jesus could not give them while here in earth, and which he called the Comforter, is now in every one who wishes to receive it, just by the ask ing for it? With them the probabil ity is, that forever more this Holy Spirit will remain in the open air and will never cease to be there, but gen eration after generation will be able to accept it, while the millions upon millions of people who lived before Christ’s time, who had no opportu nity of seeing or hearing him, or of getting some of this valuable sub stance, are now writhing in the tor ments of a fiery hell. I quote from Simms, on leveling, Page 29, 1870 Edition, as follows: “Two-thirds of the square of the distance in miles will be the amount of the correction in feet.” Yon say, “ The law is given in the books that the earth curves eight inches to the mile;” still farther yon say, “ If this is trne, and if the water is convex, a man standing with his feet at the w ater's edge and his eye six feet above the w ater would have a horizon Jnst three miles away. A ship three m iles from him would be on his horizon and he could see no water beyond the ship. This is the claim made by modern philosophers.” Solve the problem by applying t"Ew aboverule.3x8=9.#of9=6 feet. So, if the man’s eye is six feet above the water his horizon is three miles distant. There is no use for me to enter into the geometric solution for the deduction of the above rule, be cause none but geometricians would understand it, and they are not ques tioning my statement. Now if modern philosophy makes this claim, why n ot qnote, word for word, giving the au thor’s nam e and the page of the book in which the claim m ay be found, and let him stand or fall by his own words; for, snrely, if the curve of the earth is eight inches to the m ile, the common m ind would instantly th ink th at the man w ith his eye six feet above the water onght to see farther than three m iles; for eight inches in one m ile would be only two feet, in three m iles an eye six feet above the w ater should see nine miles, or snrely more thanihree!!! Then, proofs that modern philosophers say it, would be demanded. Nine-tenths of the people fall into the error of my critic. There is a difference between a straight line di verging from a horizontal line, and a curve line diverging from a hori zontal line. I repeat, therefore, that it is my critic and not myself that has gone gunning with wet powder. Her game was not crippled. According to modem theology the only ones in the past, present or fu ture who do not accept this interpre tation of the Divine theology are des tined to eternal hell-fire, and yet it is possible, through the Father-God’s desire, that they may all be rescued and dwell in his righteousness forever. Again yon say, “ All equatorial ocean currents j move westerly. Gravic force, as it streams; down from the projected sun, carries the air, I water and earth along w ith it from east to west because the projected sun moves in th at direc tion.” The second criticism is concerning ocean currents. I said that “all equatorial ocean currents move westerly.” My critic denies this by referring to the Japan Current and the Gulf Stream. All of the text books on the subject of Physical Geography assert that the great Pacific equatorial current begins off the coast of South America; the main current moving a little north of west and passing to the north of Aus tralia. It moves along the coast of Japan and travels across the northern waters eastward. Such a God as this is called a lov ing Father, a beneficent Protector, a righteous Judge, an humble servant of servants, a gracious Lord, allseeing and all-wise, unchangeable and illimitable; last of all—a Trinity. Is itn ot a fact th at the two beet known equa torial ocean currents—the G ulf Stream , and the stream from the Japan and China seas—move very rapidly in an easterly and northerly direc tion? The one m odifying the clim ate of all Western Europe, m aking it mnoh w arm er in the same latitudes than on the eastern coast, of North America; and the other flowing easterly and northerly, greatly changing the clim ate oh the western coast of N orth America, so th at its clim ate is mnch more equable than that of the same latitude on the A tlantic or eastern side. (CONTINDED.) THE USURY QUESTION. Yon say, “The old theory gives to the earth an enormous speed which is absolutely impossi ble nnder the laws of the onion of m otions.” Is n ot this merely an assertion, nnlees proofs are given? W hat are the laws of the nnion of m otions? The m inie ball has its two motions as it is sent ont on its m ission. The man who invented th e tw ist in the bore of the rifle knew th at th e accuracy of its projectile force was greatly increased thereby; the very fact shown by the increased efficiency of th e minie ball through the nnion of the tw om otions brings many m inds to the conclusion th at there m ust be two corresponding m otions of the earth; b nt that part m ight easily be refuted. The Way to Stop U su ry is to T reat U surers as Convicted Felons. The Japan Current is not an equa torial current. The Gulf Stream is not an equatorial current. I wrote about equatorial currents which begin on the west coasts of the continents and which do move to the westward, and which, after they are checked by the continents, are compelled to change their direction; the one that is checked by America is de veloped into the Galf Stream; while the one checked by Japan develops into the Japan Current. So I assert that my critic has made a mistake about the equatorial currents. No game yet. As one who has, to the best of his ability, always advocated the cause of the borrower, I ask space in your pa per to give what I know to be the status of this interest and usury ques tion in the Western part of Minnesota. We have tried the present law that forfeits both principle and interest, and the only effect it has on the mon ey question has been to make bankers and money-loaners law-breakers. No borrower has reaped any benefit from it. On the contrary, it makes an army of “ innocent purchasers,” that are growing rich out of the poor, debt and usury burdened borrower. Irre sponsible parties loan money, sell the notes and mortgages and tell the man who has been swindled to “sue and be d—d. ” Under this law, I have known farmers to pay 100 per cent for mon ey. I stand ready to prove this as sertion. It seems to me th at yon did n ot write this article w ith yonr nsnal clearness. If one «imn M see only th at No. of the Flaming Swobd the desire for further knowledge on th at subject m ight n ot be excited. If one goes o ut intend ing to bring down game should he n ot go with a full stock of am m unition? I hope th at you w ill accept th is criticism in the sp irit of brotherly love, for in reality it is the criticism which people of some power of thought m ake against your article. Her third and last criticism is al ready answered in her own admis sions. She asks why not apply to the earth the two laws of motion as observed in the cannon ball. Said ball has the double motion. I admit it. Yours Truly, M. A. H. My critic in the above letter has asked that I take her criticism in the true spirit of brotherly love. I have done so. As I am well acquainted with Mrs. H-------- I accept her criti cism as one intended to do good. I shall ask in return that she accept my reply, or review of her letter, in the spirit of sweet, sisterly affection. Now, I ask her to name the cannon out of which the earth was shot: also, who made the twist of the bore of that wondrous cannon; also, who made the powder that exploded, by which was generated the dynamis that compelled the earth to leave her cannon’s mouth with the double motion? Also, by what law does the earth continue in her double motion? We know a cannon ball stops as soon as it loses the force of the dynamis which was imparted to the ball by the explosion of the powder. You ask these men why they do not repudiate such detestable . con tracts and they tell you: “ Why, I had to do that or worse, and if I don’t pay as I agreed to I can never borrow again.” Every man who has ever raised his voice against this unholy state of things is blacklisted. A money shark in a neighboring town did me the honor to say that “ they would drive me out of the country” for writing and talking against their schemes. I publish her letter and my reply theretointhe Sword,becausethe article on which she passes judgment appeared therein. If I have made a mistake in the statement of the facts and have misled her thereby, then I have misled others. This last question of my critic does not need special attention, because there are no facts to give as evidence of these two motions in their relation to the earth. I hope the readers will re-read the article on the last page of No.28ofthe Sword.—Vulcan. My critic thinks, and says what she thinks, that I have misstated tire facts concerning the modern theory of the curve of the earth. I stated Now, if our legislature would give us a law that would lock up these
The Flaming Sword · Vol. 2, No. 26 · May 30, 1891 · PDF p. 2