The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1870-04-13

the star in the "East." The author proves
that these phrases are here used idiomati
cally; that they had as distinct a local ap
plication in Palestine and the farther orien
tai regions, as "West" and "Far West
have had in America; or "East" and "dowr
East" in respect to New England and Maine
The "far East" meant distinctively Persia
or the region beyond Mesopotamia; beyond
the zagros range. The argument is here
strikingly critical and conclusive, and it de-
.ermines the nationality of the "wise men
as Persians and Zoroastrians. The priests
and sages of this faith were, however, scat
tered through the neigbboring countries
particularly in Babylonia, and it was here
in the "East," as distinguished from the
"far East" that they saw the miraculous
token of the Advent.
The Persians had always been the friends
of the Jews; their religions go strikingly
Enthusiastically the san4e, indeed, il
most fundamental points; the sages and
priests of the former had intercourse with
Daniel and other representative Hebrews in
the East Under their administration, after
their conquest of Babylonia, the Jews had
been liberated from their captivity, and their
hierarchy and temple restored in Jerusalem
The Zoroastrian King, Cyrus, expressly &C
knowledged the identity of the respective
deities of the two peoples--"The Lord God
of Heaven hath given me all the kingdoms
of the earth, and he hath charged me to
build for him house in Jerusalem;" and
the previous proclamation of Darius, the
Mede, commanded that "In every dominion
of my kingdom men fear and tremble before
the God of Daniel, for he is the living God. y
These declarations, says our author, "were
authoritative recognitions of Jehovah as the
same with Ormuzd, the god of the Persians. y
Daniels peculiarly distinct predictions Of
the advent of the Messiah could hardly have
been unknown to them; for these were in
spired and recorded in their very presence,
and their own sacred writings-the "Zend-
Avesta"-predicted similar divine deliver.
er. the Sosiosh. At the period of the Ad'
vent, all the oriental world was more or less
pervaded with the expectation as well as the
"desire" of coming deliverer-the Mes.
siah of the Jews, the Sosiosh of the Per.
slams. The primeval religion of the world
still fingered, though somewhat dimmed, in
many parts of the East as late as the day
of Abraham. He recognized it in the per-
son of Melchisedec. In the time of the
Exodus it still appeared beyond the Hebrew
limits. Zoroastrianism was an example
the purest religious trace of the Vedic, or
rather ante Vedic times of the Aryans, from
whom it was evidently derived. AT the Ex.
odus, prophet (Balaam) from Mesopota.
mia, and therefore near the Zoroastrians,
and retaining the primeval faith, predicted
the Messiah. '.I shall see him, but not now
[ shall behold him, but not nigh. There
shall come star out of Jacob, and scep.
ire shall rise out of Israel" This oracle
could hardly have failed to. arrest the atten.
ton of the Zoroastrian sages, the Magi; it
told them whence the Sosiosh should come.
Its astronomic sign appealed to their favor
ite science. In the fulness of time, God ia
vored this comparatively pure people, who
had always favored his people, with the
looked-for portent, and thus led them to the
recognition of his Christ.
The argument depends largely, though not
absolutely, on the real character of the 70
roastrian religion, and this, fortunately, has
been remarkably cleared up by the oriental
scholarship of our own age. Haug has, as
late as 1862, explored perhaps the last re-
sources of our knowledge on the subject,
and though the old German rationalistic at
tribution of the chief ideas of Judaism to
Zoroastrianism need not be accepted, yet the
resemblances of the two are surprising, and
prove an Identical origin. The Zoroastrians
taught the spirituality of God, the immor-
tality of the soul, the resurrection of the
dead, the personality of the devil, angels,
and demons, like those of the Jewish sys-
TEN was not in its purest form idolatrous
it had no temples, no altars, no idols, as
Herodotus himself says. They differed from
the Jews, however, in believing that the
devil was from eternity sort of deity,
therefore, but that Ormuzd, the good god,
would finally defeat Ahriman, the evil one
devil, and deliver all souls. The good and
evil principles; in conflict, but with the as
sured triumph of the former, was the char.
acteristic feature of their faith. Even the
Indian Parsees of to-day deny that they
worship fire; expressly deny it in their cat
echism; they use fire or light only as sym.
bol, and sensible help to the spiritual wor.
ship of God.
We have but traced an outline of this able
book-suficiently we hope, however, to in
dicate to the reader its sterling quality. 1t
has been commended by Professors Lewis
and Crosby. Though suited to the highest
critical demands, it is well adapted to the
popular mind, and should be in our Sunday
School libraries and families. 1t proves
that the faith of the Church is as intelligent
as it is to the unbelever mysterious.
Methodist.