<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0015" id="link2H_4_0015"></SPAN></p>
<br/>
<h2> PIOUS PUERILITIES. </h2>
<p>Faith and credulity are the same thing with different names. When a man
has plenty of faith he is ready to believe anything. However fantastic it
may be, however childish, however infantile, he accepts it with gaping
wonder. His imagination is not necessarily strong, but it is easily
excited. Macaulay held that savages have stronger imaginations than
civilised men, and that as the reason developes the imagination decays.
But, in our opinion, he was mistaken. The imagination does not wither
under the growth of reason; on the contrary, it flourishes more strongly.
It is, however, disciplined by reason, and guided by knowledge; and it
only appears to be weaker because the relation between it and other
faculties has changed. The imagination of the savage seems powerful
because his other faculties are weak. In the absence of knowledge it cuts
the most astonishing capers, just as a bird would if it were suddenly
deprived of sight. Now the savage is a mental child, and the ignorant and
thoughtless are mental savages. They credit the absurdest stories, and
indulge in the most ridiculous speculations. When religion ministers to
their weakness, as it always does, they gravely discuss the most
astonishing puerilities. Indeed, the history of religious thought—that
is, of the infantile vagaries of the human mind—is full of
puerilites. There is hardly an absurdity which learned divines have not
debated as seriously as scientists discuss the nebular hypothesis or the
evolution theory. They have argued how many angels could dance on the
point of a needle; whether Adam had a navel; whether ghosts and demons
could cohabit with women; whether animals could sin; and what was to be
done with a rat that devoured a holy wafer. We believe the decision of the
last weighty problem, after long debate, was that the rat, having the body
of Christ in its body, was sanctified, and that it had to be eaten by the
priest, by which means the second person of the Trinity was saved from
desecration.</p>
<p>But of all the pious puerilities on record, probably the worst are
ascribed to the rabbis. The faith of those gentlemen was unbounded, and
they were so fond of trivialities, that where they found none they
manufactured them. The rabbis belonged to the most credulous race of
antiquity. "Tell that to the Jews," as we see from Juvenal, was as common
as our saying, "Tell that to the marines." The chosen people were
infinitely superstitious. They had no head for science, nor have they to
this day; but they were past-masters in every magical art, and
connoisseurs in amulets and charms. Their rabbis were the hierophants of
their fanatical folly. They devoted amazing industry, and sometimes
remarkable ingenuity, to its development; frequently glossing the very
scriptures of their religion with dexterious imbecilities that raise a
sinister admiration in the midst of our laughter. This propensity is most
noticeable in connection with Bible stories. When the chroniclers and
prophets record a good solemn wonder, which reads as though it ought to be
true if it is not, they allege or suggest little additions that give it an
air of ostentatious silliness. Hundreds of such instances have come under
my eyes in foraging for extra-Biblical matter for my <i>Bible Heroes</i>,
but I have only room for one or two specimens.</p>
<p>King Nimrod was jealous of young Abraham, as Herod was jealous of young
Jesus. He tried various methods to get rid of the boy, but all in vain. At
last he resolved to burn Abraham alive. This would have made a striking
scene, but the pious puerility of the sequel spoils it all. The king
issued a decree, ordering every man in his kingdom to bring wood to heat
the kiln. What a laughable picture! Behold every adult subject wending his
way to the crematorium with a bundle of sticks on his back—"For
Abraham." The The Mussulman tradition (Mohammedans and Jews are much
alike, and both their religions are Semitic) informs us that Nimrod
himself died in the most extraordinary manner. A paltry little gnat, with
a game leg and one eye, flew up his nostril, and lodged in his brain,
where it tormented him for five hundred years. During the whole of that
period, in which the gnat displayed a longevity that casts Methuselah's
into the shade, the agonising king could only obtain repose by being
struck on the head; and relays of men were kept at the palace to pound his
royal skull with a blacksmith's hammer. The absurdity of the story is
transcendent. One is charitably tempted to believe, for the credit of
human nature, that it was the work of a subtle, solemn wag, who thought it
a safe way of satirising the proverbial thick-headedness of kings.</p>
<p>What reader of the Bible does not remember the pathetic picture of Esau
falling on Jacob's neck and weeping, in a paroxysm of brotherly love and
forgiveness? But the rabbis daub it over with their pious puerilities.
They solemnly inform us that Esau was a trickster, as though Jacob's
qualities were catching? and that he tried to bite his brother's neck, but
God turned it into marble, and he only broke his teeth. Esau wept for the
pain in his grinders. But why did Jacob weep? This looks like a poser, yet
later rabbis surmounted the difficulty. Jacob's neck was not turned into
marble, but toughened. It was hard enough to-hurt Esau's teeth, and still
tender enough to make Jacob suffer, so they cried in concert, though for
different reasons.</p>
<p>Satyrs are mentioned in the Bible, although they never existed outside the
superstitious imagination. The rabbis undertook to explain the peculiar
structure of these fabulous creatures, as well as of fauns, who somewhat
resemble them. The theory was started, therefore, that God was overtaken
by the Sabbath, while he was creating them, and was obliged to postpone
finishing them till the next day. Hence they are misshapen! The rabbis
also say that God cut off Adam's tail to make Eve of. The Bible origin of
woman is low, but this is lower still. However, if Adam exchanged his tail
for a wife he made a very good bargain, despite the apple and the Devil.</p>
<p>Captain Noah, says the Talmud, could not take the rhinoceros into the ark
because it was too big. Rabbi Jannai solemnly asserts that he saw a young
rhinoceros, only a day old, as big as Mount Tabor. Its neck was three
miles long, its head half a mile, and the river Jordan was choked by its
excrement. Let us pause at this stretcher, which "stands well for high."</p>
<p>Perhaps the Christian will join us in laughing at such pious puerilities.
But he should remember that the Bible is loaded with absurdities that are
little inferior. Ravens bring a prophet sandwiches, another prophet
besieges a tile, an axe swims on the water, a man slays a thousand men in
battle with the jawbone of a donkey, an ass speaks, and a whale swallows
and vomits a man. Had these pious puerilities occurred in any other book,
they would have been laughed to scorn; but being in the Bible, they must
be credited on pain of eternal damnation.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />