The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1873-03-29
For The Cecil Wing.
FUI IIU VrIII W
The Essay and the Bible.

portions of the Bible and some of the
sacred writers. This feeling is intensified
by learning that the writer is an instructor
of youth, that it was read before a Teach
ers' Association and that it was published
; by request.
According to this writer the Bible &C
count of the creation of our first parents,
is ''an old Hebrew myth - unworthy of
credit, which represents God as laundering
in creating Adam alone at the first and
then Eve to mend the matter. David is
styled ga bloody despot," and Solomon, ga
gilded coward
"Moses made the same mistake of most
old time lawgivers in teaching the subjec-
ton of women; permitting the husband to
divorce the wife at will while she had no
remedy against him. Christ was a true
philosopher and taught the equality of
women. but christianity borrowing as much
of its faith from judaism and paganism as
from Christ, forgot this part of histeaching;
and Paul, forgetting his great exempler,
surrendered coward like (?) to the dictum
of Apollo and accepted the very principle
which wrought the ruin of Greece, female
subserviency.'
Now, though it sounds ra ther sophomore
to ascribe the downfall of the ancient en-
pires to "female subserviuacy," we do not
deny that it existed as one of many causes.
We also heartily concur in his demand
of equally educational advantages for males
and females. But we solemnly and earn
estly protest against such gross and gratui
tous denunciation of sa cred writer's, and
against such attempts TO set them so at
variance with Christ as is calculated, if not
intended, to bring discredit upon the whole
of divine revelation.
The writer is evidently unwilling to
appear teacher of blank infidelty, for he
advocates certain SO broad, christianity"
and, in opposition to Moses and Paul, he
applauds our Saviour as 50 true philoso- |
pher," because he taught the equality of
women and forbade divorce, except for one |
cause. But if the essayist will use little |
more biblical research and will compare
Mat. KIN. and Mark Y. with the latter |
part of the second chapter of Genesis, he |
will find our Saviour appealing to Moses,
and quoting the words of that so-called |
"old Hebrew myth to convince the Phar-
isees and to sustain his own doctrine of
the equality of the sexes and the unlawful
ness of divorce.
Knowing what he had taught in his ser
mon on the Mount, ON this subject while
| IL. .,,I
them from their false constructions, the
Pharsees came tempting and asking, i" Is
it lawful for a man to put away his wife for
any cause??" Evidently their design was
to show that he taught a doctrine on this
subject different from that of Moses that
they mi ght accuse him of heresy.
" He answered and said unto them,
| What did Moses command you? And they
said Moses suffered to write bill of di.
vorcement and to put her away.
And he answered and said unto them,
Have We not read that he which made them
at the beginning, made them male and
feualeo And said, For this cause shall
man leave father and mother and shall
cleave unto his wife, and they twain shall
be one flesh. Wherefore they are no more
twain but one flesh What therefore God
hath Joined together let not man put asun-
| der.
They say unto him, Why then did Moses
command to give writing of enforcement
and to put her away? He said unto them,
Moses because of the hardness of your
hearts suffered you to put away your wives;
but from the beginning it was not 500
Thus our Saviour disposes of the appar-
ent difference between him and Moses, by
saying that Moses gave them that law of
of divorce not to express his own views, or
to encourage the sundering of the marriage
tie, but "because of the hardness of their
hearts, and to regulate and restrain an
evil which he could not abolish, owing to
the practice and character of the Jewish
people, Then for ascertaining the real
views of Moses on this subject he refers to
and quotes from the Second chapter of
Genesis, where Moses represents God as
creating one man and forming from him,
and for him, one woman only; thus afford
ing no opportunity either for polygamy or
for divorce with the hope of second mar
riage-and as pronouncing the welded pair
one and inseparable in the bonds of we'd
lock. Thus our Lord represents the view
of creation and marriage given by Moses
in the Book of Genesis as high authority
and in perfect harmony with his own.-
| Thus he bafied his willy foes in their de-
sign of setting his doctrines in opposition
to those of Moses.
With what consistency then does the
writer referred to reject and denounce
Moses and accept Christ where Christ him
self shows that his own teaching agrees
and is the same with that of Moses?
Did Christ thus quote and refer to the
second chapter of Genesis as to an incredi-
| BILE myth, or as to an inspired narrative,
which Pharisees and all others should
accept as indicating the will of God with
respect to marriage? Let it be remember
ed that Christ always spoke Of Moses with
the highest respect, quoted him as tho
highest authority and showed that his own
teaching agreed with his, so that the rejec-
ton of the one is also the rejection of the
other.
"They have Moses and the prophets, let
them hear them. If they hear not Moses
and the prophets, neither will they be per-
suaded though one rose from the dead.
Had ye believed Moses, we would have
believed me. But if We believe not his
writings how can We believe my words"
The essayist will do well to ponder this
question. For our own part we are we'll
satisfied with our Saviour's good opinion
of the authority of Moses, and we think
that his account of woman as formed from
Adam, who was created in the image of
God, quite as honoring to the fair sex, as
that of some would be philosophers who
derive her remotely from the ShellfiSh and