Not Paul, but Jesus · Jeremy Bentham
ANANIAS: HIS VISIT TO PAUL AT DAMASCUS.
When, for affording the information--had any information been intended to be afforded--the time and place are come; when Ananias and Paul have been brought together; what is it that, from the information afforded us by the historian, we are to understand, passed? _Answer_, that, after the scales had fallen from his eyes, Paul was baptized; that he ate meat, and that after he had eaten meat he was strengthened: strengthened, we are warranted to suppose, by the meat which he had so eaten. Moreover, that somehow or other, in this large city he was certain days--number not specified,--with certain disciples--neither names nor number specified,--and preached Christ in the synagogues, saying that he was the son of God. Thus far then we are got; and, of the supposed revelation, in all this time nothing revealed. Promises, put-offs, evasions--and, after all, no performance. Among the purposes of this work, is the satisfying the reader--not only that Paul received not any revelation from the Almighty; but that, even upon his own showing, never did he receive any such revelation: that, on pretence of his having received it from the Almighty by a special revelation, he preached indeed a certain doctrine; but that this doctrine was partly one of his own, contrary to that of Jesus's apostles, and therefore contrary to that of Jesus: and that, in the way of revelation, he never did receive anything; neither that doctrine of his own which he preached, nor anything else.
TOPIC 7.--_Doctrine, supposed to be preached by Paul at Damascus in the synagogues._ Straightway, if the historian is to be believed;--straightway after being strengthened by the meat;--and straightway after he had passed the certain days with the disciples;--then did Paul preach Christ in the synagogues--preach that he is the son of God. Here, had he really preached in any such places--here would have been the time, and the best time, for telling us what, in pursuance of the supposed revelation, he preached. For, whatever it was, if anything, that he ever learnt from his supposed revelation, it was not till he had learnt it, till he made this necessary acquisition, that the time for beginning to preach in the synagogues in question or anywhere else was come. And, no sooner had he received it, than then, when it was fresh in his memory--then was the time for preaching it. But, never having received any such thing as that which he pretended, and which the historian has made so many people believe, he received,--no such thing had he to preach at any time or place. Whatever of that nature he had had, if he had had at any _time_, Damascus was not the _place_, at any rate at _that time_, for him to preach it, or anything else, in synagogues--in any receptacle so extensively open to the public eye.
Preach, in the name of Jesus--in the name of that Jesus, whose disciples, and with them whose religion, he now went thither with a commission to exterminate,--preach in that name he could not, without proclaiming his own religion--his own perfidy;--his own rebellion, against the authorities, from which, at his own solicitation, the commission so granted to him had been obtained:--his own perfidious contempt--not only of those Jerusalem rulers, but of those Damascus authorities, from whom, for that important and cruel purpose, he was sent to receive instruction and assistance. At some seven-and-twenty years distance in the field of time, and at we know not what distance in the field of space, probably that between Rome and Damascus, it was as easy for the historian to affirm the supposed preaching, as to deny it: but, as to the preaching itself, whether it was within the bounds of moral possibility, let the reader judge. TOPIC 8.--_Supposed Amazement of the People of Damascus at this Paul's supposed preaching of Christ in the Synagogues there._
Had there really been any such preaching, well might have amazement followed it. But there was no such preaching, therefore no such amazement. Had there been real preaching, and real amazement produced by it--what would have been the subject of the amazement! Not so much the audacity of the preacher--for madmen acting singly are to be seen in but too great frequency: not so much the audacity of the speaker, as the supineness of the constituted authorities; for, madmen acting in bodies in the character of public functionaries have never yet been visible. And if any such assemblage was ever seen, many such would be seen, before any one could be seen, whose madness took the course of sitting still, while an offender against their authority, coming to them single and without support,--neither bringing with him support, nor finding it there,--continued, at a public meeting, preaching against them, and setting their authority at defiance. TOPIC 9.--_Matter of the Revelation, which, in and by the supposed unpremeditated Oratorical Account, is supposed to have been made._ Forgetting what, as we have seen, he had so lately been saying in his own person--in the person of Paul,--he on this occasion, returns to the subject: and more evasive is the result. On this occasion--this proper occasion--what is it that he, Paul, takes upon him to give an account of.--That which the Lord had revealed to him?--revealed, communicated in the supernatural way of revelation, to him--Paul? No; but that which, according to him,--if he, and through him the historian, is to be believed,--the Lord communicated to Ananias concerning him--Paul. The Almighty having minded to communicate something to a man, and yet not communicating to that man any part of it, but communicating the whole of it to another! What a proceeding _this_ to attribute to the Almighty, and upon such evidence!
Still we shall see, supposing it communicated, and from such a source communicated--still we shall see it amounted to nothing: to nothing--always excepted the contradiction to what, in relation to this subject, had, by this same historian, been a little before asserted. Observe what were the _purposes_, for which, by this Ananias, Paul is supposed to be made to understand, that God--the God, says he, of our fathers--had chosen him. 1. Purpose the first--"To know his will." His will, respecting what? If respecting anything to the great purpose here in question, respecting the new doctrine which, to this Paul, to the exclusion of the Apostles of Jesus, is all along supposed to have been revealed. Of no such doctrine is any indication anywhere in these accounts to be found. 2. Purpose the second--"And see this just one." Meaning, we are to understand, the person all along spoken of under the name of the Lord; to wit, Jesus. But, in the vision in question, if the historian is to be believed, no Jesus did Paul see. All that he saw was a light,--an extraordinary strong light at midday; so strong, that after it, till the scales fell from his eyes, he saw not any person in any place: and this light, whatever it was, was seen by all that were with him, as well as by him.
3. Purpose the third--"And shouldest hear the voice of his mouth." Oh! yes; if what the historian says in that other place is to be believed--hear a voice he did; and if the historian is to be again believed, that voice was the Lord's. But, by hearing this voice, how was he distinguished? those that were with him, according to the historian's own account, heard it as well as he. And what was he the wiser? This also, it is hoped, has been rendered sufficiently visible--just nothing. Purpose the fourth and last--"Thou shalt be his witness (the Lord's witness), of everything thou hast seen and heard:"--that is, of that which was nothing, and that which amounted to nothing. Unhappily, even this is not all: for, before the subject is concluded, we must go back and take up once more the supposed premeditated and studied speech, which, on the second occasion, the self-constituted Apostle is supposed to have made to the Sub-king of the Jews, Agrippa, sitting by the side of his superior--the Roman Proconsul, Festus. In the course of this long-studied speech,--to whom, is the communication, such as it is,--to whom, in an immediate way, and without the intervention of any other person, is it supposed to be made? Not to Ananias;--not to any such superfluous and unknown personage;--not to Ananias, but to Paul himself: viz. to the very person _by_ whom this same communication, supposed to have been made to him, is supposed to be reported (Acts xxvi. 16 to 18): to this principal, or rather, only person concerned:--to this one person, the communication, such as it is, and to him the whole of it at once, is supposed to be made.
Here then is this Ananias discarded:--discarded with this vision of his, and that other vision which we have seen within it: the communication, which, speaking in the first place in his own person,--and then, on one occasion, in the person of this same hero of his--the historian had just been declaring, was made--not to Paul, but to Ananias;--this all-important communication, speaking again in this same third person, but on another occasion--the discourse being supposed to be a long-studied one--he makes this same Paul declare, was given--not to any Ananias, not to any other person--but directly to him, Paul, himself. Let us now see what it amounts to. In the most logical manner, it begins with declaring the _purposes_ it is made for; and, when the purposes are declared, all that it does is done. Ver. 16. "But now: rise, and stand upon thy feet; for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose."...In this purpose are several parts: let us look into them one by one. 1. Part 1. "To make thee (says the Lord) a minister and a witness, both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee." But, as to the things which he had seen, by this same account they amounted to nothing but a glare of light. Here then was the light to _bear witness of_, if it was worth while: but, as to the _ministering_, here was nothing at all to minister to: for the light was past, and it required no ministering to, when it was present. Had it been the light of a lamp--yes; but there was no lamp in the case.
Thus much, as to these things which he had seen. Thereupon comes the mention of those things "in the which, the Lord is supposed to say, I will appear unto thee!" Here, as before, we have another put-off. If, in the way in question, and of the sort in question, there had been anything said, here was the time, the only time, for saying it. For immediately upon the mention of this communication, such as it is, follows the mention of what was due in consequence of it, in obedience to the commands supposed to be embodied in it, and by the light of the information supposed to be conveyed by it. "Whereupon, says he, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision..." Part 2. The purpose continued.--"Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom I now send thee." This, we see, is but a continuation of the same put-off: no revelation, no doctrine, no Gospel here. As to the doctrine--the Gospel--that Gospel which he preached, and which he said was his own, no such Gospel is on this occasion given to him; and, not being so much as reported to have been given to him on any other occasion, was it not therefore of his own making, and without any such supernatural assistance, as Christians have been hitherto made to believe was given to him?
As to the deliverance from the people and from the Gentiles, this is a clause, put in with reference to the dangers, into which the intemperance of his ambition had plunged him, and from whence in part it had been his lot to escape. Here then the sub-king and his Roman superior were desired to behold the accomplishment of a prophecy: but the prophecy was of that sort which came after the fact.--"Unto whom now I send thee..." In this they were desired to see a continuation of the prophecy: for, as to this point, it was, in the hope of the prophet, of the number of those, which not only announce, but by announcing contribute to, their own accomplishment. Part 3. The purpose continued.--"To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God..." Still the same nothingness: to his life's end a man might be hearing stories such as these, and still at the end of it be none the wiser:--no additional doctrine--no additional gospel--no declaration at all--no gospel at all--here. Part 4. The purpose continued and concluded... "that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me." Good. But this is not doctrine; this is not gospel; this is not itself the promised doctrine: but it is a description of the effect, of which the promised doctrine was to be the cause.
Now it is, as we have just seen, that Paul is represented as commencing his preaching, or sallying forth upon his mission; preaching, from _instructions_ received in a supernatural way--received by revelation. Yet, after all, no such _instructions_ has he received. Thrice has the historian--once in his own person, twice in that of his hero--undertaken to produce those instructions. But by no one, from first to last, have they anywhere been produced. Truly, then, of his own making was this Gospel which Paul went preaching; of his own making, as well as of his own using; that Gospel, which he himself declares to his Galatians was not of man, was not, therefore, of those Apostles, to whom the opposition made by him is thus proclaimed.
When, after having given in his own person an account of a supposed occurrence,--an historian, on another occasion, takes up the same occurrence; and, in the person of another individual, gives of that same occurrence another account different from, and so different from, as to be irreconcileable with it; can this historian, with any propriety, be said to be himself a believer in this second account which he thus gives? Instead of giving it as a true account, does he not, at any rate, in respect of all the several distinguishable circumstances in which it differs from the account given in his own person--give it in the character of a fable? a fable invented on the occasion on which the other person is supposed to speak--invented in the intent that it shall promote the purpose for which this speech is supposed to be made? Yet this account, which in the eyes of the very man by whom it is delivered to us, is but a fable, even those to whom in this same character of a fable it is delivered--this account it is that _Christians_ have thus long persisted in regarding, supporting, and acting upon, as if it were from beginning to end, a truth--a great body of truth!--O Locke! O Newton! where was your discernment! On such evidence would any Judge fine a man a shilling? Would he give effect to a claim to that amount? Yet such is the evidence, on the belief of which the difference between happiness and misery, both in intensity as well as duration, infinite, we are told, depends!
Text from Project Gutenberg, public domain in the United States.