There have been various species of idolatry in different ages of the world. The sun, moon, stars, beasts, crocodiles, frightful serpents, images of wood, of stone, and of brass, have been erected into gods, and worshipped by innumerable multitudes. But the system of idolatry, invented by modern christianity, far surpasses in absurdity anything that we have ever heard of. One of the celebrated worshippers of this newly-discovered god, in his "Physical Theory of Another Life," says, "A disembodied spirit, or, we should rather say, an unembodied spirit, or sheer mind, is NO WHERE. Place is a relation belonging to extension; and extension is a property of matter: but that which is wholly abstracted from matter, and in speaking of which we deny that it has any property in common therewith, can in itself be subject to none of its conditions; and we might as well say of a pure spirit that it is hard, heavy, or red, or that it is a cubic foot in dimensions, as say that it is _here_ or _there_. It is only in a popular and improper sense that any such affirmation is made concerning the Infinite Spirit, or that we speak of God as _every where_ present. God is in every place in a sense, altogether incomprehensible by finite minds, inasmuch as his relation to space and extension is peculiar to infinitude. Using the terms as we use them of ourselves, God is not _here_ or _there_, any more than he exists _now_ and _then_." This species of idolatry, according to the foregoing quotations, approaches so near to Atheism, that no one can tell the difference. Reader, can you see the difference? A god "_without a body!_" A god "_without parts!_" A god that cannot be "_here_ or _there!_" A god that is "NO WHERE!" A god that cannot exist "NOW and THEN!" A god that exists in NO TIME! A god that has no _extension_--no "_parts_"--no conceivable relation to _time_ or _space!_ O, blush for modern christianity!--a pious name for Atheism! Some perhaps may think that I have not sufficient charity. But why should I have charity for a god that has no "_parts_"--no relation to space? Let him first have charity for himself. But this would be impossible; for he is a god "_without passions_." He can have no charity nor love for himself nor any one else. There is no danger of offending him; for a passionless god is not capable of anger. One of the persons of this imaginary god is said to have been crucified. But this must be a sad mistake; for it would be impossible to crucify a portion of something that had no "_parts_." The reason, then, why the people have not received any word from the Great King, is because they have petitioned the wrong god. Would you expect her majesty, the queen of England, to answer your petition if it were directed to some African prince? Would you expect the God of heaven to answer a petition that was addressed to a Hindoo god? If, then, your petitions are addressed to the bodiless, passionless god of modern christianity, you must not