The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1868-03-18
ANSWER ~ ARIEL 3.


We shall not follow the confused arrangs-
ment under which the author conducts his dis
cussion, but take up some of his points In
their natural order. 1t has been shown how
worthless his foundation is, in asserting without
a particle of proof, that because God said on
the sixth day "let us make man Tor as he al
leges, "the man. in our likeness he had
made on the fifth day another being called
man." who was not in his likeness and who
was the beast now known as the negro. Let US
see how his Biblical attachments are shown in
other particulars
l. The curse upon Ham, 1t will be found,
that Ariel spends large part of his labor In.
showing that Ham was not made negro,
neither (he means, ether by his name nor Che
means, orr by the curse, or supposed curse Of
his father Noah" That he was so made we
are informed is the doctrine of "the clergy"
1t is enough to say that while there may be .
general opinion that the descendants of Ham
settled Africa, and that therefore the Negro
sprung from that stock, there has been no
prevalent opinion in the Church or its minis
try that Ham was made black in consequence
Of any supposed curse. There was in fact no
curse at all upon Ham, Nor that the black
ness Of the negro race, suppcsing them to he
his descendants, resulted from the real curse
pronounce upon canaan. A few persons'
have thas writtSn, but 40 swallows hardiSss
make sulnucS The~facs>s4sn - lSos eHs
ss,itsr has simpsy SET ~ stIgw Of hIs own
ignorance, and after battering it with great la
Dor, expects the admiration of the world for
his generalship.
.. Interpretation Of Jeremiah.-It is anus
ing TO see how an ignoramus pretending to
profound scholarship, who talks fippantly
about the Hebrew, Arabic Coptic Syro
Chaldaic, and other ancient tongues, trips up
his own heels and falls headlong. Take for
instance his quotation of jeremiah, "Caa The
Ethiopian change has skin or the leopard has
spots?" both beasts he adds, page 10.
His argument runs thus Il, Ariel, have now
proved to you that all the descendants of Ham,
and in fact all of Noah, (Cush included) have
always had straight hair, high foreheads, high
noses and thin lips, while on the other hand,
the negro has always been kinky-headed,
low forehead, fiat nose, thick lip, black skin;
that he is black, and Ham is white. The
prophet jeremiah told the exact truth that
the Ethiopian (who is Negro can't change
his skin, any more than the leopard his spots.
Therefore this Ethiopian negro must have
come from some other stock than from Noah.
But what will the reader think when told
that this word in jeremiah here translated
Ethiopian" is in the original Hebrew, "he
Cushite, meaning Of course descendant OF
Cush, from whose family the Philippians are
generally thought to have come. So at last
Ariel brings out his negro-beast as the progeny
of Cash, a white mani
8. Adam "the man. He asserts that
whenever Adam is personally spoken of in
the Hebrew Scriptures, Invariably his name
has the prefix, the man, to contradistinguish
him from the negro, who is called man simply,
and was so named by Adam By inattention
to this distinction, made by God himself, the
world is indebted for the confusion that exists
regarding Adam and his race aud the negro.
1t tries ones patience to deal with such
simpleton. The assertion is utterly untrue.
Any one who can read Hebrew 6iay turn 10
the 5th chapter of Genesis, and in the /, ?, 5,
4, and 5th verses, where Adam is specially re-
ferred to-, the prefix the is wanting in every
instance. This, according to Ariel, would
make Adam also beast. Here again his
whole argument from the Bible comes tumb-
ling down in ridiculous confusion.
In this connection it is proper to notice what
our Hebrew scholarly says on page &c, about
Genesis, chapter vi 2, where the Sons Of
God saw the daughters of men," &c. On
this he remarks: GA word or two of criticism
before we proceed. In this quotation, the
word men is correctly translated from the He
brew, and as it applies to the negro, it is not
in the original applied to Adam, for then it
would be the man. Adam and his race being
so distinguished by God himself"
He then goes on to give this account: These
daughters of men, :" were negro women with
whom "the Sons of Cod intermarried, white
mel with black. beast women and this horrid
crime brought on the deluge. We were about
to ask the reader whether he would believe
that the Hebrew prefxe Is found before the
word linen" here. 1t is the men. Ariel says it
is not: we knol0 he states what is absolutely
untrue, and he may help himself out of his
difficulty by getting any man if he can, who
knows the Hebrew alphabet (which he does
not) to back him in his reckless hardihood of
assertion. Yet ne talks sneeringly aboit the
of the learned world" in setting
up an opinion as to the meaning of the Bible
different from his own!
But there is still another thorn in his side;
that word "fair" diStresses him. 'This rem
dering," he tells us, is not correct, except as
it covers the simple idea of captivating entic-
ing, seductive" Now we shall not insist |