Chapter III: Part 3

There is nothing that has yet taken place, of however inexplicable a nature, and nothing which even the imagination may anticipate, which is not, and will not be, easily attributable to these unseen angels. They are lying spirits; for the fundamental principle on which they are acting is a lie; but they tell enough truth to sway and captivate the minds of men. It matters not how sacred the field in which they tread, nor how hallowed the associations which they invade, they press into every spot where it is possible, by spinning another thread, to strengthen their web of deception.

And in what dulcet and siren tones they woo their victims to lay aside all resistance to their influence, to become receptive and passive, and yield themselves to their control; and when they have them thus helpless in their arms, they deliberately and cruelly instil into their minds the virus of ungovernable lust, the leprosy of unconquerable rebellion against the government of Heaven. That this language does not misrepresent nor slander them, will be shown from their own testimony, before the close of this book.

The thought is not overlooked that many even of those who do not profess to be Spiritualists, deny the existence of any such being as a personal Devil, or of personal evil angels, his agents. He is no doubt well pleased with this, as such people can the more easily be made the victims of his wiles. But these same persons would no doubt acknowledge the existence, as real beings, of God, Christ, and the good angels. This fact being established, by parity of reasoning the Devil and his angels become real beings also. The same arguments which show that God and Christ exist as personal beings may be used to show that the Devil and his angels are personal beings also. He who denies that there is a personal Devil, must be prepared also to deny that there is a personal Christ. So far as the argument for personal existence is concerned, Christ and good angels stand on one side of the equation, and the Devil and his angels on the other; and whoever would rub out the one, must rub out the other also.

Christ said that he “beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” Luke 10:18. John in the Revelation (12:7) beheld a war in heaven. “Michael [Christ] and his angels fought against the dragon [Satan]; and the dragon fought, and his angels.” On the ground that there is no Devil, this would be a wonderful battle—Christ and his angels, who are real beings, fighting furiously against myths and nonentities which have not even the substance of a phantom.

To endorse the doctrine of a personal Devil, is not to endorse the grossly absurd caricatures conjured up by morbid imaginations, and popular theology,—a being with bat’s wings, horns, hoofs, and a dart-pointed tail. Yet upon such pictorial fables he doubtless looks with complacency; as they are calculated still further to destroy faith in his existence, and enable him the better to cover his tracks and carry on his work among men. Nevertheless the only rational hypothesis on which to account for the present condition of this world (which every one must admit is full of devilishness), the existence of evil, and the presence of sickness, suffering, and death, is the account the Bible gives us of fallen angels and fallen men. Unfallen angels are beings of mighty power. One of them slew in one night 185,000 Assyrians (2 Kings 19:35); and the one who appeared at the time of Christ’s resurrection had a countenance like the lightning, and raiment white as snow, and before him the keepers of the tomb fell like dead men. Matt. 28:3, 4. A fall from their high estate, though it would impair their strength and power, cannot be supposed to have wholly deprived them of these qualities; therefore the fallen angels still have capabilities far superior to those of men. The only defense mankind has against them is found in Christ, who circumscribes their power (for they are kept in chains, 2 Peter 2:4), and makes provision by which we may resist them. Eph. 6:11; James 4:6-8; 1 John 5:18. The question why they are permitted to continue finds solution in the thought that God is consistently giving to sin time and opportunity to develop itself, fully show its nature, and manifest its works, to all created intelligences, so that when it shall finally be wiped out of existence, with all its originators, aiders, and abetters, as in God’s purpose it is to be (Rev. 20:14, 15; 2 Peter 3:7, 13; Rev. 5:13), there will ever after remain an object-lesson sufficient to safe-guard the universe against a repetition of the evil. Only some 6000 years are allotted to this work of evil; and 6000 years are as nothing compared with eternity.

Warnings Against Evil Spirits.

The Scriptures plainly point out the working of these agents of wickedness, and warn us against them. In 1 Tim. 4:1, we read: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.” This shows that these spirits make it an object to seduce, or deceive, to draw men away from the true faith, and cause them to receive, instead, the doctrines they teach, which are called “doctrines of devils;” and this scripture is written to put men on their guard against them.

Again Paul says: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness [margin, ‘wicked spirits’] in high places.” Eph. 6:12. And he adjures his readers to put on the whole armor of God to be able to resist them.

The apostle Peter exhorts to the same purpose: “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: whom resist steadfast in the faith.” 1 Peter 5:8, 9. If our ears do not deceive us, a good deal of this roaring is heard in the ranks of Spiritualists, where, by invisible rapping, agitated furniture, clairvoyance, clairaudience, writing, speaking, marvels, and wonders, he seeks to set the world on tiptoe of curiosity and expectation, and bewilder men into a departure from the faith and the acceptance of the doctrines of devils. He is cunning enough not to “roar” in a way to frighten and repel, but only to attract attention, and lead multitudes, through an overweening curiosity and wonder at the marvels, to come thoughtlessly within the sphere of his influence.

The prophet Isaiah also has something to say directly upon this subject: “And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?” Isa. 8:19. That is, is it consistent for living people to go to dead ones for their knowledge? The following verse shows where we should go for light and truth: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” The time has certainly come when many are saying just what the text points out, and seeking to the dead, to familiar spirits, and wizards, for knowledge. Those practices which in the Bible are enumerated as “charming,” “enchantment,” “sorcery,” “witchcraft,” “necromancy,” “divination,” “consulting with familiar spirits,” etc., are more or less related, and are all really from one source. So in modern times different names indicate substantially the same thing. Thus Mr. Hudson, in “Psychic Phenomena,” p. v, says:—

“It has, however, long been felt by the ablest thinkers of our
time that all psychic manifestations of the human intellect,
normal or abnormal, whether designated by the name of mesmerism,
hypnotism, somnambulism, trance, spiritism, demonology, miracle,
mental therapeutics, genius, or insanity, are in some way
related.”

Seven, at least, of the foregoing names are no doubt in the warp and woof of Spiritualism; and he might have added mind-reading and Christian Science. And Spiritualists admit that their work is the same as that described by the Bible terms above quoted. Thus, Allen Putnam, a Spiritualistic writer, says:—

“The doctrine that the oracles, soothsaying, and witchcraft of
past ages were kindred to these manifestations of our day, I, for
one, most fully believe.”

In a pamphlet by the same author, entitled, “Mesmerism, Spiritualism, Witchcraft, and Miracle,” p. 6, he says:—

“As seen by me now, Mesmerism, Spiritualism, Witchcraft, Miracles,
all belong to one family, all have a common root, and are
developed by the same laws.”

To all these, therefore, the text under notice (Isa. 8:19, 20) applies. We are to bring them to the standard of “the law and the testimony,” and “if they speak not according to this word ... there is no light in them.” The living should not seek to the dead.

In Rev. 16:13, 14, the same spirits are again brought to view, and called “unclean spirits,” and “spirits of devils.” Their last work of deception is to go forth to the kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of the great day of God Almighty. Thus all that is revealed of them from beginning to end (and scriptures might be multiplied on the point) furnishes the most cogent reason why all should be keenly awake to their existence and their work, and be ever watchful against their influence and approach.

Chapter Five.

WHAT THE SPIRITS TEACH.

It has been shown in the preceding chapters that the unseen “controls” (the beings who control the mediums) in Spiritualism, are not the spirits of the dead, but are fallen angels or spirits of devils. This fact will be confirmed by a brief glance at some of their teachings; for we are to remember that if they speak not according to the law and the testimony there is no light in them. It matters not that what they teach may be supported by signs and wonders beyond the comprehension of the human mind. That is no guarantee of truth; for such phenomena are to be wrought, as will soon be shown, to prove a lie. The Lord anciently put his people on their guard in this respect. Deut. 13:1-3, 5: “If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.” “And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the Lord your God, ... out of the way which the Lord thy God commanded thee to walk in.”

Thus the fact that one who professed to be a prophet could perform a sign or wonder, showing his connection with some unseen power, was not enough to shield him from condemnation and punishment, if what he undertook to prove by that sign or wonder was contrary to the truth, and tended to lead away from God. The teaching of any system is an important part of the fruit it bears; and by that, according to our Lord’s own rule, we are to judge it, and not by any power or mighty works connected with it, however wonderful they may be.

“’Tis not the broad phylactery Nor stubborn fasts, nor stated prayers That make us saints. We judge the tree By what it bears.” —_Alice Carey._

It is therefore pertinent to look sufficiently at the teachings of the spirits to ascertain their character. Here we shall find some most damaging testimony; for—

1. _They Deny God._—It is no pleasure to transcribe the utterances of practical atheism; yet enough should be given to show what they teach on the great fundamental principles of Christianity. At a séance, reported in the _Banner of Light_, July 11, 1868, the following questions were addressed to the spirits, and the accompanying answers received:—

“_Ques._—It is said in the Bible that man is made in the image of
God. Please tell us what that image is.

“_Ans._—He is made in the image of everything that ever was, that
is, or that ever shall be. He holds within his caliber everything
that exists, that ever has existed, or that ever will exist. Now,
God is included in this. If he exists at all, he exists everywhere
(and we have taken in everything), every place, every name, every
condition. I believe that the human stands above all things else,
and holds within its embrace all the past, present, and future. In
this sense he is created and exists in the image of God.

“_Q._—What is God essentially?

“_A._—Everything. Essentially you are God, and I am God—the
flowers, the grass, the pebbles, the stars, the moon, the sun,
everything is God.”

The Devil, through the serpent in the garden, taught Adam and Eve that the soul is immortal, and has transfused the same idea very successfully through paganism, Romanism, and Protestantism; but he also said, “Ye shall be as gods;” and now, it seems, he is trying to make the world swallow this other leg of his falsehood; but by putting it forth under the form of the old pagan pantheism, that everything is God, and God is everything, he betrays the lie he uttered in Eden; for in that case, Adam and Eve were no more gods after they ate than they were before.

Another séance, reported in the _Banner_ about twenty years later than the one quoted above, April 28, 1888; an inquirer addressed to the “spirits” a question about God, and received answer, a portion of which is presented below:—

“_Ques._—Some Spiritualists, I learn, believe in a God; otherwise
they would not pray to him—taking for granted that there is such a
being. Please enlighten us.

“_Ans._—We have yet to come in contact with a thorough
Spiritualist, one who understands something of spiritual life and
the revelations made by returning spirits, who directly believes
in a personal God. True, many Spiritualists and many returning
spirits offer their invocations to the ‘Great Supreme Spirit of
all life and intelligence,’ not because they expect to change the
order of law, or to come into direct communication with, or
nearness to, a Great Supreme Being, clothed in the image of man,
but because they desire to enter an atmosphere of harmony, to
uplift their own souls to a plane of thought which will bring
spiritual inspiration to their minds. We make a distinction
between that Great Supreme Overruling Force which we may call the
Superior Spirit of Intelligence, Wisdom, and Love, and the
personal Deity, clothed in the image of man, gigantic in stature,
jealous and revengeful by nature, which has been set up and
worshiped as the Christian Jehovah. We know of no Spiritualist—let
us repeat it—who believes in such a personal God; but we can
believe and accept the idea, though it may pass beyond almost our
finite comprehension, that there is a grand universal Spirit
permeating all forms of existence; that this great source of
light, of activity and vitality vibrates with intelligence, and
that it is superior to all organic forms, however grand they may
prove to be.”

The same views have been taught all along by the “spirits” of Spiritualism, as could be shown by extracts dating as far back as 1858, only ten years after the “Rochester Knockings.” And though Spiritualism is now assuming more of the sedate speech of organized Christianity, the spirits do not modify their teaching in respect to God. In “Automatic, or Spirit, Writing,” p. 148 (1896), are given many messages from the spirits through the mediumship of Mrs. S. A. Underwood, wife of the editor of the _Philosophical Journal_, Chicago. The “spirits” set forth their teaching in answer to questions by the medium, some of which have reference to God, though his name is not used. Thus on page 148, this conversation is given:—

“_Ques._—You often in these communications speak of the binding
laws of spiritual life—that because of them you cannot give us
such and such information, etc. Now who makes those laws, and
whence came they, and how are they taught?

“_Ans._—Thou say’st ‘who’—therefore we cannot answer. Go back to
the first question and ask one at a time.

“_Q._—Well, who makes the laws?

“_A._—Spirits are not bondaged by _persons_.

“_Q._—Then how do you come to know those laws?

“_A._—Pharos will now answer. Spiritual laws are spiritually
perceived, as soon as the physical perceptions are got rid of.

“_Q._—Could you explain to us those laws?

“_A._—Courses of teaching from our side are as necessary for you
to understand even the rudimentary laws of Being, as courses in
your colleges; and guessed-at spirit knowledge from your bounded
view must always fail in accurate wording.”

It will be perceived that the answers to these questions are, from the beginning, evasive; but the real idea entertained clearly shines through the thin veil drawn over to conceal it. The questions pertain to the source, or authorship, of the “laws of spiritual life;” and this would generally be understood to be God. But on a technicality the spirits refuse to answer. The question is made plainer, and the answer is that “spirits are not bondaged by _persons_;” that is to say that spirits have nothing to do with personalities, and that no personal being has anything to do with those laws. There is therefore no God who formulates and promulgates them. No wonder the question followed, how they came to know these laws; and it was a very convenient answer that we will know when we get there and have lost all physical perceptions. A desire for some explanation of those laws is met with the not very satisfactory information that they (the spirits) would have to give those in our sphere a course of teaching, like a college course, before we could understand even the rudimentary laws of Being. The only thing clear in all this is that there is no God; at least no personal God such as the Bible reveals. To the “grand whole,” whatever that may be, they give the name of the “All of Being.” In answer to a question concerning “personalities,” they are called “atoms emanating from the same source—parts of the great All of Being, partaking of the general characteristics of the grand whole.”—_Page 149._

Reader, how does all this compare in your own mind with the God of the Bible, the Creator of all things, the loving Father of us all, who has for his creatures more tender regard and pity than a father can feel for his own children, whose very name and nature is Love, and who has purposed infinite good for all men, and will carry it out unless they, as free moral agents, by their own sin, prevent his doing for them what he desires to do? The Bible is not responsible for the aspersions cast upon God by a false theology, which misrepresent his character and give occasion for the charges of vindictiveness and vengeance and awful tyranny, so freely made by fallen angels and wicked men. They do not belong to him who is the source of all goodness and mercy; and we would labor to bring those who have perverted views of God back to a right conception of the great Friend of sinners, as he has revealed himself in his holy word.

2. _They Deny Jesus Christ._—Christ is revealed as the divine Son of the Father; and to deny that he was or is any more than any other man is surely to deny him; and the scripture says that “whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.” 1 John 2:23. The following is what the “spirits” began to teach in the earliest stages of Spiritualism concerning Christ:—

“What is the meaning of the word Christ?—’Tis not, as generally
supposed, the Son of the Creator of all things. Any just and
perfect being is Christ. The crucifixion of Christ is nothing more
than the crucifixion of the spirit, which all have to contend with
before becoming perfect and righteous. The miraculous conception
of Christ is merely a fabulous tale.”—_Spiritual Telegraph, No.
37._

How fully does this declaration that any good man is Christ open the way for the fulfilment of the Saviour’s prophecy that in the last days many false Christs and false prophets shall arise, and shall deceive many. See Matt. 24:24. A prospectus of the _Truth Seeker_ contained these words: “It shall be the organ through which the christs of the last dispensation will choose to speak.”

A little later, July 19, 1862, there was published in the _Banner of Light_ a lecture on Spiritualism by Mrs. C. L. V. Hatch, in which she spoke of Christ as follows:—

“Of Jesus of Nazareth, personally, we have but little to say.
Certain it is, we find sufficient that is divine in his life and
teachings, without professing to believe in the fables of
theologians respecting his birth and parentage. We are content to
take the simple record as it stands, and to regard him as the son
of Joseph and Mary, endowed with such purity and harmony of
character as fitted him to be the Apostle and Revelator of the
highest wisdom ever taught to man. It is the fundamental article
in the creed of modern Christianity, that Jesus was divine in his
nature, and of miraculous origin and nativity. Now, no human being
of ordinary intelligence, unwarped by educational bias, would ever
profess to believe in such a monstrous figment, which only shows
the blindness of superstitious prejudice.”

Here is something twenty-four years later. A séance reported in the _Banner of Light_, Oct. 9, 1886, gives the following questions and answer:—

“_Ques._—Do ‘spirits’ generally believe in the divinity of Jesus
Christ; that he was the Son of God; that he was crucified, dead,
and buried, and rose again the third day for the saving of all who
should believe in him?

“_Ans._—No; spirits generally—advanced spirits, those who are
intelligent, having studied deeply into the principles of life—do
not accept the theory of the divinity of Jesus Christ; they do not
believe that he was crucified for mankind, in the accepted
understanding of that term.”

Some years ago a class was formed in New York City for the purpose of investigating what is called the spiritual philosophy. Before that class, Dr. Weisse said:—

“Friend Orton seems to make rather light of the communications
from spirits concerning Christ. It seems, nevertheless, that all
the testimony received from advanced spirits only shows that
Christ was a medium and reformer in Judea; that he now is an
advanced spirit in the sixth sphere; but that he never claimed to
be God, and does not at present. I have had two communications to
that effect. I have also read some that Dr. Hare had. If I am
wrong in my views of the Bible, I should like to know it, for the
spirits and mediums _do not contradict me_.”

The peculiar insult here purposely offered to the Saviour will be appreciated when it is noted that at about the same time the spirits located Thomas Paine, the well-known skeptic, in the seventh sphere, one sphere above that of Christ. He must therefore have progressed very rapidly, seeing he so quickly surpassed Christ, who had over 1700 years the start of him.

Before the same class Dr. Hare is reported to have spoken as follows, which we give without assuming any responsibility for the spiritual grammar therein exhibited:—

“He said that he had been thus protected from deception by the
spirits of Washington and Franklin, and that they had brought
Jesus Christ to him, with whom he had also communicated. He had
first repelled him as an impostor; but became convinced afterward
that it was really him. He related that he had learned from that
high and holy spirit, that he was not the character that
Christendom had represented him to be, and not responsible for the
errors connected with his name, but that he was, while on earth, a
medium of high and extraordinary powers, and that it was solely
through his mediumistic capabilities that he attained so great
knowledge, and was enabled to practice such apparent wonders.”

When Christ was upon earth, it was envy, jealousy, and malice that moved the Pharisees against him (Matt 27:18); and it seems that he is followed by the same feelings in the spirit world. This is natural; for he who fired the hearts of the Pharisees with their malignant spirit, is the same one, as we have seen, who is working through the powers of darkness in the unseen world to-day. Any way to degrade Christ in the minds of men to a level with, or below, the mediums of our time, and make it appear that they can do as great wonders as he, seems to be the object in view.

There is plainly manifest an irrepressible desire on the part of spirits and mediums to show Christ to be inferior to the leaders of other great religions of the world, as Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, etc. Thus, at a seance held in 1864 (_Banner of Light_, June 4), the spirits were questioned as follows:—

“_Ques._—Have you ever seen Confucius or Zoroaster?

“_Ans._—Yes, many times.

“_Q._—In the order of degree, which stands the higher in moral
excellence—Jesus Christ, Confucius, or Zoroaster?

“_A._—Confucius stands in morality higher than the other two....
Jesus himself claims to have been inspired to a large extent, by
this same Confucius. And if we are to place reliance upon the
records concerning each individual, we shall find that Jesus spoke
the truth when he tells us that he was inspired by Confucius.”

Indeed! Where are the records referred to? Where and when did Jesus “speak” the words attributed to him? And where does he tell _us_, that he was inspired by Confucius? So we are to believe, are we, that the gospel of Jesus Christ, is only a rehash of what was originally wrought out in the brain of Confucius, and not words fresh from the fountain of light given him by his Father in heaven, to speak, as he claimed them to be? Yet he was a high and _holy_ medium. We wonder what standard of holiness and perfection the spirits can have.

But still later, in 1896, we find the spirits putting forth the same teaching in reference to Jesus Christ. In “Automatic, or Spirit Writing,” pp. 148, 149, we have this:—

“_Ques._—Do you accept Jesus as the model of spiritual knowledge?

“_Ans._—Shall you give us a better example?

“_Q._—Well, we are willing to accept him as one of many, but not
as chief.

“_A._—Change the name. Call him by other names—Buddha, Krishna, or
Mohammed, the spirit is one—is ever and ever the same. Spirit is
one, not many, however often the name is changed.

“_Q._—Were not Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed distinct personalities?

“_A._—No more than all atoms emanating from the same source—parts
of the great All of Being, partaking of the general
characteristics of the grand whole—but yielding to environments,
showed marked individualism, such as the force of the times in
which they appeared would create in their characters.

“_Q._—Are these leaders of religious thought not distinct
individualities now?

“_A._—No, not on spiritual planes, which do not recognize any
now.”

Thus they persist in denying that Jesus holds any pre-eminent position as a religious teacher. He may as well be called Buddha, Krishna, or Mohammed as Jesus. They are all the same spirit, all atoms of the great “All of Being,” all as much alike as three drops of water from the same ocean, and what is more bewildering still, they have now all lost their individuality in the spirit world. How, then, can it be told that Christ is in the sixth sphere, and Paine in the seventh? Such teachers, though they may claim to be good spirits, are branded as antichrist by both John and Jude. John says: “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son.” 1 John 2:22. Again, “Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God.” 1 John 4:3. According to the spirits, Jesus Christ has no more come in the flesh than have Buddha, Mohammed, Confucius, Zoroaster, or any other religious teacher. They all simply yielded to their environments, and showed marked individualism while on this earth, and have now become absorbed in the “great whole” in the spirit world. Thus, as Jude says (verse 4), they deny “the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.”

So much for their denial of Christ in his person. They also deny him in his offices; for to deny and ridicule what he came to do, is one of the most effectual ways of denying him. The great work of Christ was the shedding of his blood to atone for the sins of the world; and the spirits are particularly bitter in denouncing that idea. If such sentiments were uttered only by open and professed scoffers, it would not do so much harm; but it is not unusual to find those bearing the title of “Reverend” descanting on these themes in a manner to show themselves antichrist, according to the definition of that term by John. And even this need not surprise us; for the sure word of prophecy has foretold that some who have once held the true faith will depart therefrom to give heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils. 1 Tim. 4:1.

One R. P. Wilson, to whose name is attached the ministerial title, in his lectures on “Spiritual Science,” said:—

“Although as a believer in true spiritual philosophy, we cannot
receive the orthodox views of salvation, yet we recognize the
birth of a Saviour and Redeemer into the universal hearts of
humanity, _wherein truly the deity is incarnate_, dwelling in the
interior of man’s spirit. We believe that each soul of man is born
with his or her Saviour within them; for as man is an embodiment
of the universe in epitome, he contains in his central nature an
incarnation of deity. The germ of immortal unfoldings resides
within the spirit of it, which needs only appropriate conditions
to call forth the expanding and elevating powers of the soul.”

In “Spiritual Science Demonstrated,” p. 229, Dr. Hare said:—

“Since my spirit sister’s translation to the spheres, she has
risen from the fifth to the sixth sphere. It has been alleged by
her that her ascent was retarded by her belief in the atonement.”

A “spirit” calling himself Deacon John Norton, as reported in the _Banner of Light_, said:—

“I used to believe in the atonement; I honestly believed that
Christ died to save the world, and that by and through his death
all must be saved if saved at all. Now I see that this is folly—it
cannot be so. The light through Christ, the Holy One, shone in
darkness; the darkness could not comprehend it; and thus it
crucified the body, and Christ died a martyr. He was not called in
that way, that by the shedding of his blood, the vast multitude
coming after him should find salvation. Everything in nature
proves this false. They tell me here that Christ was the most
perfect man of his time. I am told here also that he is worthy to
be worshiped, because of his goodness; and where man finds
goodness he may worship. God’s face is seen in the violet, and man
may well worship this tiny flower.”

In the pantheism of Spiritualism, every object in nature, the tiny flower, the pebbles, the trees, the birds and bees, are worthy to be worshiped as much as Christ. In one breath the spirits extol him as a most perfect man, pre-eminent in goodness and worthy to be worshiped, and in the next, place him in a position which would make him the greatest fraud and impostor that ever lived. Such inconsistencies show that Christ is a miracle which evil men and evil angels know not how to dispose of.

As they deny Christ, they must, logically, deny the doctrine of his second coming. This doctrine is made of especial importance and prominence in the New Testament. The nature of that coming, its manner, and the circumstances attending it are so fully described, that no one who adopts the Bible view can possibly be deceived by false christs. But the church and the world have been turned away from the true doctrine of the second advent, and the way is thus prepared for the great deceptions of the last days. Spiritualism is one of these, and claims that it is itself that second coming. Joel Tiffany, a former celebrated teacher of Spiritualism, has said:—

“I must look for the coming of my Lord in my own affection. He
must come in the clouds of my spiritual heavens, or he cannot come
for any benefit to me.”

And through Mrs. Conant, a famous medium of the early days of Spiritualism, the controlling spirit said:—

“This second coming of Christ means simply the second coming of
truths that are not themselves new, that have always existed....
He said, ‘When I come again, I shall not be known to you.’
Spiritualism is that second coming of Christ.”—_Banner of Light,
Nov. 18, 1865._

But the Bible description of this event is, the revelation of the Lord himself in the clouds of heaven in the glory of the Father, the reverberating shout of triumph, the voice of the archangel, the trump of God, the flash of his presence like that of the lightning, the wailing of the tribes of the earth, as they thus behold him, while unprepared to meet him, and the resurrection of the righteous dead. And where and when have these inseparable accompaniments of that event been seen? They do not occur when a person is converted from sin, nor do they occur in the dying chamber, nor have they occurred in Spiritualism; and until they do take place, the second coming of Christ is not accomplished.

Many seek to dispose of such testimony as this, by making it all figurative, or meeting it with a bold denial, as in the case of the resurrection of the body. And the way has been too well prepared for this condition of things, by much of the teaching of popular orthodoxy, which turns the early records of the Bible into childish allegory, perverts the true doctrine of the coming and kingdom of Christ, and denies the resurrection of the dead, by destroying its necessity through the immortality of the soul. On the vital point of the resurrection, Dr. Clarke makes this noteworthy remark:—

“One remark I cannot help making,—The doctrine of the resurrection
appears to have been thought of much more consequence among the
primitive Christians than it is _now_! How is this?—The apostles
were continually insisting on it, and exciting the followers of
God to diligence, obedience, and cheerfulness through it. And
their successors in the present day seldom mention it! So the
apostles preached, and so the primitive Christians believed; so we
preach and so our hearers believe. There is not a doctrine in the
gospel on which more stress is laid; and there is not a doctrine
in the present system of preaching which is treated with more
neglect.”—_On 1 Corinthians 15_ (_original edition_).(3)

In view of the way the Bible has been treated by its professed friends, it is no wonder that infidelity prevails, and Spiritualism prospers.

3. _They Deny the Bible._—The denial of God and Christ, as set forth above is, of course, a denial of the Bible; and not much need therefore be added on this point. We quote only a few representative utterances. Doctor Hare (“Spiritual Science Demonstrated,” p. 209) says:—

“The Old Testament does not impart a knowledge of immortality,
without which religion were worthless. The notions derived from
the gospels are vague, disgusting, inaccurate, and difficult to
believe.”

As to the Old Testament, it would seem doubtful whether Mr. Hare ever read far enough to find (1) Job exclaiming: “For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me” (or, as the margin reads: “My reins within me are consumed with earnest desire [for that day];”) or (2) David: “I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness;” or (3) Isaiah: “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust;” or (4) Ezekiel: “Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves;” or (5) Daniel: “Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt;” and (6) Hosea: “I will ransom them from the power of the grave, I will redeem them from death.” Job 19:25-27; Ps. 17:15; Isa. 26:19; Eze. 37:12; Dan. 12:2; Hosea 13:14. And as for the New Testament, it is no doubt “disgusting” to many Spiritualists to read that “the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death;” and that without the city “are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” Rev. 21:8; 22:15.

Communications from spirits are offered in place of the Bible as a better source of instruction, the Bible being denounced, as above quoted, as “vague, inaccurate, and difficult to believe.” A brief comparison of the two will furnish pertinent evidence on this point. Take, on the Bible side, for example, a portion of the record of creation (Gen. 1:1-5):—

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the
earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face
of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the
waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And
God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light
from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness
he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first
day.”

The facts stated in this record, the profoundest minds can never comprehend; the language in which they are expressed, a little child can understand. The statements are plain and simple, a perfect model of perspicuous narrative. Place by the side of this an account of the same event, as given us from the “spheres.” The spirits have undertaken to produce a new Bible, beginning, like the old, with the creation; and this is the way it starts out, through the mediumship of “Rev.” T. L. Harris:—

“1. In the beginning God, the Life in God, the Lord in God, the
Holy Procedure, inhabited the dome, which, burning in magnificence
primeval, and revolving in prismatic and undulatory spiral,
appeared, and was the pavilion of the Spirit: In glory
inexhaustible and inconceivable, in movement spherical, unfolded
in harmonious procedure disclosive.

“2. And God said, Let good be manifest! and good unfolded and
moral-mental germs, ovariums of heavens, descended from the
Procedure. And the dome of disclosive magnificence was heaven, and
the expanded glory beneath was the germ of creation. And the
divine Procedure inbreathed upon the disclosure, and the
disclosure became the universe.”

We will inflict no more of this “undulatory spiral” nonsense on the reader. He now has both records before him, and can judge for himself which is the more worthy of his regard. There have been Spiritualists who, writing in their normal state, and not yet fully divorced from the influence of their former education, have acknowledged the authenticity of the Bible, and the doctrines of Jesus as recorded in the gospels. But these, it is claimed, are to be understood according to a spiritual meaning which underlies the letter; and this spiritual meaning generally turns out to be contrary to the letter, which is a virtual denial of the record itself. But the quotations here given (only a specimen of the multitudes that might be presented) are given on the authority of the “spirits,” whose teachings are what we wish to ascertain.

They Deny All Distinction Between Right And Wrong.

There is implanted in the hearts of men by nature, a sense of right and a sense of wrong. Even those who know not God, nor Christ, nor the gospel, possess this power of discrimination. This is what Paul, in Rom. 2:15, calls “the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another.” That this distinction should now be denied by a class in a civilized community, professing to be advanced thinkers and teachers, among whom are found the learned, the refined, and the professedly pious, shows that we have fallen upon strange times. To be sure, many of them talk fluently of the beauty and perfection of divine laws; but in the sense in which they would have them understood, they rob them of all characteristics of law. The first great essential of law is authority; but this they take away from it; the next is penalty for its violation; but this they deny, and thus degrade the law to a mere piece of advice. The “Healing of the Nations,” an authoritative work among Spiritualists, pp. 163, 164, says:—

“Thus thy body needs no laws, having been in its creation supplied
with all that could be necessary for its government. Thy spirit is
above all laws, and above all essences which flow therein. God
created thy spirit from within his own, and surely the Creator of
law is above it; the Creator of essences must be above all essence
created. And if thou hast what may be or might be termed laws,
they are always subservient to thy spirit. Good men need no laws,
and laws will do bad or ignorant men no good. If a man be above
law, he should never be governed by it. If he be below, what good
can dead, dry words do him?

“True knowledge removeth all laws from power by placing the spirit
of man above it.”

A correspondent of the _Telegraph_ said of this work, “The Healing of the Nations:”—

“According to its teaching, no place is found in the universe for
divine wrath and vengeance. All are alike and forever the object
of God’s love, pity, and tender care—the difference between the
two extremes of human character on earth, being as a mere atom
when compared with perfect wisdom.”

This is a favorite comparison with them,—that the difference between God and the best of men is so much greater than the extremes of character among men,—the most upright and the most wicked,—that the latter is a mere atom, and not accounted of in God’s sight. That there is an infinite difference between God and the best of men, is all true; for God is infinite in all his attributes, and man is very imperfect at the best. But to argue from this that God is inferior to man, so that he cannot discern difference in character here, even as man can plainly discern it, seems but mad-house reasoning. What would we think of the man who had the same regard for the thief as for the honest man, for the murderer as for the philanthropist? To ignore such distinctions as even men are able to discern would destroy the stability of all human governments; what then would be the effect on the divine government? God has given his law—holy, just, and good—to men, and commanded obedience. He has attached the penalty to disobedience: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die,” “The wages of sin is death.” Eze. 18:20; Rom. 6:23. And in the judgment, the distinction God makes in character will be plainly declared; for he will set the righteous on his right hand, but the wicked on the left. Matt. 25:32, 33.

This view of the failure of law, and the absence of all human accountability, naturally leads to a bold denial of sin and the existence of crime. The “Healing of the Nations,” p. 169, says: “Unto God there is no error; all is comparatively good.” The same work says that God views error as “undeveloped good.” A. J. Davis (“Nature of Divine Revelation,” p. 521) says: “Sin, indeed, in the common acceptation of that term, does not really exist.”

A discourse from J. S. Loveland, once a minister, reported in the _Banner of Light_, contained this paragraph:—

“With God there is no crime; with man there is. Crime does not
displease God, but it does man. God is in the darkest crime, as in
the highest possible holiness. He is equally pleased in either
case. Both harmonize equally with his attributes—they are only
different sides of the same Deity.”

In “Automatic Writing” (1896), p. 139, a question was asked concerning evil, meaning sin and crimes among men. The spirit answered that these were conditions of progress, and were so necessary to elevation that they were to be welcomed, not hated. The questions and answers are as follows:—

“_Ques._—Can you give us any information in regard to the
so-called Devil—once so firmly believed in?

“_Ans._—Devil is a word used to conjure with.

“_Q._—Well, then, as the word itself doubtless arose from the word
‘evil,’ which means to us unhappiness, can you give us an
explanation of the existence of evil?

“_A._—Evil—as you who are the greatest sufferers from it, name one
of the conditions of progress—is as necessary, aye, more so, than
what you call good, to your and our elevation to higher spheres.
It is not to be hated, but welcomed. It is the winnowing of the
grain from the chaff. Children of truth, don’t worry over what to
you seems evil; soon you will be of us and will understand, and be
rejoiced that what you call evil persists and works as leaven in
the great work of mind versus matter.

“_Q._—But it seems to us impossible that brutal crimes like
murder, assassinations, or great catastrophes, by which the
innocent are made to suffer at the hands of malicious and cruel
persons, should work for ultimate good?

“_A._—Percipients of the grand whole of Being can understand but
may not state to those on your plane, the underlying good making
itself asserted even through such dreadful manifestations of human
imperfections as the crimes you name.

“When asked why certain wrongs were allowed to be perpetuated,
this answer was given:—

“There is a law of psychical essence which makes necessary all
these ephemeral entanglements which to you seem so severe, and you
will yet see from your own standpoint of reason why such hardships
must be endured by questioning souls on the highway of progress.

“_Q._—But do you from your vantage ground of larger knowledge grow
careless that such injustice is done?

“_A._—We do care, but cannot remedy.

“_Q._—Why can’t you remedy?

“_A._—Because humanity is but an embryo of existence.

“_Q._—If you can perceive the trials and sorrows of mortals, and
can interfere to save them, why do you not more often do so?

“_A._—When undeveloped souls pay the price of development, we
stand aloof, and let the play go on. Interference will do no
good.”

In view of such a confession, what becomes of the many claims put forth by other spirits that they are ever hovering near their friends to assist and guard them, to help and inspire them, and keep them from evil and danger? These say that those terrible crimes (and this would include all crimes) are all necessary, that they are tending to develop souls, and bring them to higher spheres, and thus are just as laudable as good actions; so they settle back in a gleeful mood, and “let the play go on;” let wicked men cultivate and develop and practice their evil propensities, and the innocent suffer. Well may men pray to be delivered from such a spirit assembly as that.

In “Healing of the Nations,” p. 402, Dr. Hare says:—

“That anything should, even for an instant, be contrary to his
will, is inconsistent with his foresight and omnipotency. It would
be a miracle that anything counter to his will should exist.”

A lecture on the “Philosophy of Reform,” given by A. J. Davis, in New York City, bears testimony to the same effect:—

“In the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, it is affirmed that sin
is the transgression of the law. But by an examination of nature,
the true and only Bible, it will be seen that this statement is
erroneous. It gives a wrong idea of both man and law.... It will
be found impossible for man to transgress a law of God.”

Thus they very illogically assume that if God has the will or the power to prevent evil, it could not exist, and therefore, if there is such a God, he is responsible, forgetting that God is long-suffering, and bears long with vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, before they pass beyond the limits of his mercy and perish. But Mr. Davis says further:—

“Reformers need to understand that war is as natural to one stage
of human development as peace is natural to another. My brother
has the spirit of revenge. Shall I call him a demon? Is not his
spirit natural to his condition? War is not evil or repulsive
except to a man of peace. Who made the non-resistant? Polygamy is
as natural to one stage of development as oranges are natural to
the South. Shall I grow indignant, and because I am a monogamist,
condemn my kinsman of yore? Who made him? Who made me? We both
came up under the confluence of social and political
circumstances; and we both represent our conditions and our
teachers. The doctrine of blame and praise is natural only to an
unphilosophical condition of mind. The spirit of complaint—of
attributing ‘evil’ to this and that plane of society—is natural;
but is natural only to undeveloped minds. It is a profanation—a
sort of atheism of which I would not be guilty.”

The Bible says, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light and light for darkness.” Isa. 5:20. And it makes another declaration which finds abundant confirmation in the sentiments quoted above: “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” Eccl. 8:11.

Having thus attempted to destroy in the minds of men all distinction between good and evil, all being alike in God’s sight, and all equally good, they try to make the way a little broader and easier for men to give full rein to all the propensities and inclinations of an evil heart, by teaching that there is no Lawgiver and Judge before whom men must appear to give an account of their deeds, but that they are responsible to themselves alone, and must give account only to their own natures. Thus Hon. J. B. Hall, in a lecture reported in the _Banner of Light_, Feb. 6, 1864, said:—

“I believe that man is amenable to no law not written upon his own
nature, no matter by whom given.... By his own nature he must be
tried—by his own acts he must stand or fall. True, man must give
an account to God for all his deeds; but how?—Solely by giving
account to his own nature—to himself.”

At a séance reported in the _Banner of Light_, May 28, 1864, the following question was proposed, and the answer was by the communicating spirit:—

“_Ques._—To whom or to what is the soul accountable?

“_Ans._—To no Deity outside the realm of its own being, certainly;
to no God which is a creation of fancy; to no Deity who dwells in
a far-off heaven, and sits upon a white throne; to no Jesus of
Nazareth; to no patron saint; to no personality; to no principle
outside our own individual selves.”

The “Healing of the Nations,” p. 74, says:—

“Man is his own saviour, his own redeemer. He is his own judge—in
his own scales weighed.”

A little over twenty years after the birth of Spiritualism, Aug. 25, 1868, the Fifth National Convention of Spiritualists was held in Corinthian hall, Rochester, N. Y., at which a formal “Declaration of Principles” was set forth. From the seventh and eighth paragraphs, under principle 20, we quote the following:—