By Robert Green Ingersoll
\n(1833-1899)
\nCollected By Abu Ali
\n2008
\nThe Truth<\/p>\n
About the Holy Bible (1894)<\/p>\n
SOMEBODY ought to tell the truth about the Bible. The preachers dare not,
\nbecause they would be driven from their pulpits. Professors in colleges dare not,
\nbecause they would lose their salaries. Politicians dare not. They would be defeated.
\nEditors dare not. They would lose subscribers. Merchants dare not, because they
\nmight lose customers. Men of fashion dare not, fearing that they would lose caste.
\nEven clerks dare not, because they might be discharged. And so I thought I would do
\nit myself.<\/p>\n
There are many millions of people who believe the Bible to be the inspired word of
\nGod — millions who think that this book is staff and guide, counselor and consoler;
\nthat it fills the present with peace and the future with hope –millions who believe that
\nit is the fountain of law, Justice and mercy, and that to its wise and benign teachings
\nthe world is indebted for its liberty, wealth and civilization –millions who imagine
\nthat this book is a revelation from the wisdom and love of God to the brain and heart
\nof man –millions who regard this book as a torch that conquers the darkness of
\ndeath, and pours its radiance on another world –a world without a tear.<\/p>\n
They forget its ignorance and savagery, its hatred of liberty, its religious persecution;
\nthey remember heaven, but they forget the dungeon of eternal pain. They forget that it
\nimprisons the brain and corrupts the heart. They forget that it is the enemy of
\nintellectual freedom. Liberty is my religion. Liberty of hand and brain — of thought
\nand labor.<\/p>\n
Liberty is a word hated by kings –loathed by popes. It is a word that shatters thrones
\nand altars –that leaves the crowned without subjects, and the outstretched hand of
\nsuperstition without alms. Liberty is the blossom and fruit of justice –the perfume of
\nmercy. Liberty is the seed and soil, the air and light, the dew and rain of progress,
\nlove and joy.<\/p>\n
The Origin of the Bible.<\/p>\n
A FEW wandering families — poor, wretched, without education, art or power;
\ndescendants of those who had been enslaved for four hundred years; ignorant as the
\ninhabitants of Central Africa, had just escaped from their masters to the desert of
\nSinai.<\/p>\n
Their leader was Moses, a man who had been raised in the family of Pharaoh and had
\nbeen taught the law and mythology of Egypt. For the purpose of controlling his
\nfollowers he pretended that he was instructed and assisted by Jehovah, the God of
\nthese wanderers.<\/p>\n
Everything that happened was attributed to the interference of this God. Moses
\ndeclared that he met this God face to face; that on Sinai’s top from the hands of this
\nGod he had received the tables of stone on which, by the finger of this God, the Ten
\nCommandments had been written, and that, in addition to this, Jehovah had made
\nknown the sacrifices and ceremonies that were pleasing to him and the laws by which
\nthe people should be governed.<\/p>\n
In this way the Jewish religion and the Mosaic Code were established.<\/p>\n
It is now claimed that this religion and these laws were and are revealed and
\nestablished for all mankind.<\/p>\n
At that time these wanderers had no commerce with other nations, they had no written
\nlanguage, they could neither read nor write. They had no means by which they could
\nmake this revelation known to other nations, and so it remained buried in the jargon of
\na few ignorant, impoverished and unknown tribes for more than two thousand years.<\/p>\n
Many centuries after Moses, the leader, was dead — many centuries after all his
\nfollowers had passed away — the Pentateuch was written, the work of many writers,
\nand to give it force and authority it was claimed that Moses was the author.<\/p>\n
We now know that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses.<\/p>\n
Towns are mentioned that were not in existence when Moses lived.<\/p>\n
Money, not coined until centuries after his death, is mentioned.<\/p>\n
So, many of the laws were not applicable to wanderers on the desert –laws about
\nagriculture, about the sacrifice of oxen, sheep and doves, about the weaving of cloth,
\nabout ornaments of gold and silver, about the cultivation of land, about harvest, about
\nthe threshing of grain, about houses and temples, about cities of refuge, and about<\/p>\n
many other subjects of no possible application to a few starving wanderers over the
\nsands and rocks.<\/p>\n
It is now not only admitted by intelligent and honest theologians that Moses was not
\nthe author of the Pentateuch, but they all admit that no one knows who the authors
\nwere, or who wrote any one of these books, or a chapter or a line. We know that the
\nbooks were not written in the same generation; that they were not all written by one
\nperson; that they are filled with mistakes and contradictions.<\/p>\n
It is also admitted that Joshua did not write the book that bears his name, because it
\nrefers to events that did not happen until long after his death.<\/p>\n
No one knows, or pretends to know, the author of Judges; all we know is that it was
\nwritten centuries after all the judges had ceased to exist. No one knows the author of
\nRuth, nor of First and Second Samuel; all we know is that Samuel did not write the
\nbooks that bear his name. In the 25th chapter of First Samuel is an account of the
\nraising of Samuel by the Witch of Endor.<\/p>\n
No one knows the author of First and Second Kings or First and Second Chronicles;
\nall we know is that these books are of no value.<\/p>\n
We know that the Psalms were not written by David. In the Psalms the Captivity is
\nspoken of, and that did not happen until about five hundred years after David slept
\nwith his fathers.<\/p>\n
We know that Solomon did not write the Proverbs or the Song; that Isaiah was not the
\nauthor of the book that bears his name; that no one knows the author of Job,
\nEcclesiastes, or Esther, or of any book in the Old Testament, with the exception of
\nEzra.<\/p>\n
We know that God is not mentioned or in any way referred to in the book of Esther.
\nWe know, too, that the book is cruel, absurd and impossible.<\/p>\n
God is not mentioned in the Song of Solomon, the best book in the Old Testament.<\/p>\n
And we know that Ecclesiastes was written by an unbeliever.<\/p>\n
We know, too, that the Jews themselves had not decided as to what books were
\ninspired — were authentic — until the second century after Christ.<\/p>\n
We know that the idea of inspiration was of slow growth, and that the inspiration was
\ndetermined by those who had certain ends to accomplish.<\/p>\n
Is the Old Testament Inspired?<\/p>\n
IF it is, it should be a book that no man — no number of men — could produce.<\/p>\n
It should contain the perfection of philosophy.
\nIt should perfectly accord with every fact in nature.
\nThere should be no mistakes in astronomy, geology, or as to any subject or science.
\nIts morality should be the highest, the purest.
\nIts laws and regulations for the control of conduct should be just, wise, perfect, and<\/p>\n
perfectly adapted to the accomplishment of the ends desired.<\/p>\n
It should contain nothing calculated to make man cruel, revengeful, vindictive or
\ninfamous.
\nIt should be filled with intelligence, justice, purity, honesty, mercy and the spirit of<\/p>\n
liberty.<\/p>\n
It should be opposed to strife and war, to slavery and lust, to ignorance, credulity and
\nsuperstition.
\nIt should develop the brain and civilize the heart.
\nIt should satisfy the heart and brain of the best and wisest.
\nIt should be true.
\nDoes the Old Testament satisfy this standard?
\nIs there anything in the Old Testament –in history, in theory, in law, in government,<\/p>\n
in morality, in science — above and beyond the ideas, the beliefs, the customs and
\nprejudices of its authors and the people among whom they lived?<\/p>\n
Is there one ray of light from any supernatural source?
\nThe ancient Hebrews believed that this earth was the center of the universe, and that
\nthe sun, moon and stars were specks in the sky.<\/p>\n
With this the Bible agrees.<\/p>\n
They thought the earth was flat, with four corners; that the sky, the firmament, was
\nsolid — the floor of Jehovah’s house.<\/p>\n
The Bible teaches the same.<\/p>\n
They imagined that the sun journeyed about the earth, and that by stopping the sun the
\nday could be lengthened.<\/p>\n
The Bible agrees with this.<\/p>\n
They believed that Adam and Eve were the first man and woman; that they had been
\ncreated but a few years before, and that they, the Hebrews, were their direct
\ndescendants.<\/p>\n
This the Bible teaches.<\/p>\n
If anything is, or can be, certain, the writers of the Bible were mistaken about
\ncreation, astronomy, geology; about the causes of phenomena, the origin of evil and
\nthe cause of death.<\/p>\n
Now, it must be admitted that if an infinite Being is the author of the Bible, he knew
\nall sciences, all facts, and could not have made a mistake.<\/p>\n
If, then, there are mistakes, misconceptions, false theories, ignorant myths and
\nblunders in the Bible, it must have been written by finite beings; that is to say, by
\nignorant and mistaken men.<\/p>\n
Nothing can be clearer than this.<\/p>\n
For centuries the church insisted that the Bible was absolutely true; that it contained
\nno mistakes; that the story of creation was true; that its astronomy and geology were
\nin accord with the facts; that the scientists who differed with the Old Testament were
\ninfidels and atheists.<\/p>\n
Now this has changed. The educated Christians admit that the writers of the Bible
\nwere not inspired as to any science. They now say that God, or Jehovah, did not
\ninspire the writers of his book for the purpose of instructing the world about
\nastronomy, geology, or any science. They now admit that the inspired men who wrote
\nthe Old Testament knew nothing about any science, and that they wrote about the
\nearth and stars, the sun and moon, in accordance with the general ignorance of the
\ntime.<\/p>\n
It required many centuries to force the theologians to this admission. Reluctantly, full
\nof malice and hatred, the priests retired from the field, leaving the victory with
\nscience.<\/p>\n
They took another position:
\nThey declared that the authors, or rather the writers, of the Bible were inspired in
\nspiritual and moral things; that Jehovah wanted to make known to his children his will
\nand his infinite love for his children; that Jehovah, seeing his people wicked, ignorant<\/p>\n
and depraved, wished to make them merciful and just, wise and spiritual, and that the
\nBible is inspired in its laws, in the religion it teaches and in its ideas of government.
\nThis is the issue now. Is the Bible any nearer right in its ideas of justice, of mercy, of<\/p>\n
morality or of religion than in its conception of the sciences?
\nIs it moral?
\nIt upholds slavery — it sanctions polygamy.
\nCould a devil have done worse?
\nIs it merciful?
\nIn war it raised the black flag; it commanded the destruction, the massacre, of all — of<\/p>\n
the old, infirm, and helpless — of wives and babes.
\nWere its laws inspired?
\nHundreds of offenses were punished with death. To pick up sticks on Sunday, to<\/p>\n
murder your father on Monday, were equal crimes. There is in the literature of the
\nworld no bloodier code. The law of revenge — of retaliation — was the law of Jehovah.
\nAn eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a limb for a limb.<\/p>\n
This is savagery — not philosophy.
\nIs it just and reasonable?
\nThe Bible is opposed to religious toleration — to religious liberty. Whoever differed<\/p>\n
with the majority was stoned to death. Investigation was a crime. Husbands were
\nordered to denounce and to assist in killing their unbelieving wives.
\nIt is the enemy of Art. “Thou shalt make no graven image.” This was the death of Art.
\nPalestine never produced a painter or a sculptor.<\/p>\n
Is the Bible civilized?
\nIt upholds lying, larceny, robbery, murder, the selling of diseased meat to strangers,
\nand even the sacrifice of human beings to Jehovah.<\/p>\n
Is it philosophical?
\nIt teaches that the sins of a people can be transferred to an animal — to a goat. It
\nmakes maternity an offence for which a sin offering had to be made.<\/p>\n
It was wicked to give birth to a boy, and twice as wicked to give birth to a girl.
\nTo make hair-oil like that used by the priests was an offence punishable with death.
\nThe blood of a bird killed over running water was regarded as medicine.
\nWould a civilized God daub his altars with the blood of oxen, lambs and doves?<\/p>\n
Would he make all his priests butchers? Would he delight in the smell of burning
\nflesh?<\/p>\n
III
\nThe Ten Commandments.<\/p>\n
SOME Christian lawyers — some eminent and stupid judges — have said and still
\nsay, that the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all law.<\/p>\n
Nothing could be more absurd. Long before these commandments were given there
\nwere codes of laws in India and Egypt –laws against murder, perjury, larceny,
\nadultery and fraud. Such laws are as old as human society; as old as the love of life; as
\nold as industry; as the idea of prosperity; as old as human love.<\/p>\n
All of the Ten Commandments that are good were old; all that were new are foolish.
\nIf Jehovah had been civilized he would have left out the commandment about keeping
\nthe Sabbath, and in its place would have said: “Thou shalt not enslave thy fellowmen.”
\nHe would have omitted the one about swearing, and said: “The man shall have
\nbut one wife, and the woman but one husband.” He would have left out the one about
\ngraven images, and in its stead would have said: “Thou shalt not wage wars of
\nextermination, and thou shalt not unsheathe the sword except in self-defense.”<\/p>\n
If Jehovah had been civilized, how much grander the Ten Commandments would
\nhave been.<\/p>\n
All that we call progress — the enfranchisement of man, of labor, the substitution of
\nimprisonment for death, of fine for imprisonment, the destruction of polygamy, the
\nestablishing of free speech, of the rights of conscience; in short, all that has tended to
\nthe development and civilization of man; all the results of investigation, observation,
\nexperience and free thought; all that man has accomplished for the benefit of man
\nsince the close of the Dark Ages — has been done in spite of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n
Let me further illustrate the morality, the mercy, the philosophy and goodness of the
\nOld Testament:<\/p>\n
The Story of Achan<\/p>\n
Joshua took the City of Jericho. Before the fall of the city he declared that all the spoil
\ntaken should be given to the Lord.<\/p>\n
In spite of this order Achan secreted a garment, some silver and gold.<\/p>\n
Afterward Joshua tried to take the city of Ai. He failed and many of his soldiers were
\nslain. Joshua sought for the cause of his defeat and he found that Achan had secreted a
\ngarment, two hundred shekels of silver and a wedge of gold. To this Achan confessed.<\/p>\n
And thereupon Joshua took Achan, his sons and his daughters, his oxen and his sheep
\n— stoned them all to death and burned their bodies.<\/p>\n
There is nothing to show that the sons and daughters had committed any crime.
\nCertainly, the oxen and sheep should not have been stoned to death for the crime of
\ntheir owner. This was the justice, the mercy, of Jehovah!<\/p>\n
After Joshua had committed this crime, with the help of Jehovah he captured the city
\nof Ai.<\/p>\n
The Story of Elisha.<\/p>\n
“And he went up thence unto Bethel, and as he was going up by the way there came
\nforth little children out of the city and mocked him, and said unto him, ‘Go up, thou
\nbaldhead.’<\/p>\n
“And he turned back and looked at them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord.
\nAnd there came forth two she-bears out of the wood and tore forty and two children of
\nthem.”<\/p>\n
This was the work of the good God — the merciful Jehovah!<\/p>\n
The Story of Daniel.<\/p>\n
King Darius had honored and exalted Daniel, and the native princes were jealous. So
\nthey induced the king to sign a decree to the effect that any man who should make a
\npetition to any god or man except to King Darius, for thirty days, should be cast into
\nthe den of lions.<\/p>\n
Afterward these men found that Daniel, with his face toward Jerusalem, prayed three
\ntimes a day to Jehovah.<\/p>\n
Thereupon Daniel was cast into the den of lions; a stone was placed at the mouth of
\nthe den and sealed with the king’s seal.<\/p>\n
The king passed a bad night. The next morning he went to the den and cried out to
\nDaniel. Daniel answered and told the king that God had sent his angel and shut the
\nmouths of the lions.<\/p>\n
Daniel was taken out alive and well, and the king was converted and believed in
\nDaniel’s God.<\/p>\n
Darius, being then a believer in the true God, sent for the men who had accused
\nDaniel, and for their wives and their children, and cast them all into the lions’ den.<\/p>\n
“And the lions had the mastery of them, and brake all their bones in pieces, or ever
\nthey came at the bottom of the pit.”<\/p>\n
What had the wives and little children done? How had they offended King Darius, the
\nbeliever in Jehovah? Who protected Daniel? Jehovah! Who failed to protect the
\ninnocent wives and children? Jehovah!<\/p>\n
The Story of Joseph.<\/p>\n
Pharaoh had a dream, and this dream was interpreted by Joseph.<\/p>\n
According to this interpretation there was to be in Egypt seven years of plenty,
\nfollowed by seven years of famine. Joseph advised Pharaoh to buy all the surplus of
\nthe seven plentiful years and store it up against the years of famine.<\/p>\n
Pharaoh appointed Joseph as his minister or agent, and ordered him to buy the grain
\nof the plentiful years.<\/p>\n
Then came the famine. The people came to the king for help. He told them to go to
\nJoseph and do as he said.<\/p>\n
Joseph sold corn to the Egyptians until all their money was gone — until he had it all.<\/p>\n
When the money was gone the people said: “Give us corn and we will give you our
\ncattle.”<\/p>\n
Joseph let them have corn until all their cattle, their horses and their flocks had been
\ngiven to him.<\/p>\n
Then the people said: “Give us corn and we will give you our lands.”<\/p>\n
So Joseph let them have corn until all their lands were gone.<\/p>\n
But the famine continued, and so the poor wretches sold themselves, and they became
\nthe servants of Pharaoh.<\/p>\n
Then Joseph gave them seed, and made an agreement with them that they should
\nforever give one-fifth of all they raised to Pharaoh.<\/p>\n
Who enabled Joseph to interpret the dream of Pharaoh? Jehovah! Did he know at the
\ntime that Joseph would use the information thus given to rob and enslave the people
\nof Egypt? Yes. Who produced the famine? Jehovah!<\/p>\n
It is perfectly apparent that the Jews did not think of Jehovah as the God of Egypt -the
\nGod of all the world. He was their God, and theirs alone. Other nations had gods,
\nbut Jehovah was the greatest of all. He hated other nations and other gods, and
\nabhorred all religions except the worship of himself.<\/p>\n
What Is it All Worth?<\/p>\n
WILL some Christian scholar tell us the value of Genesis?
\nWe know that it is not true — that it contradicts itself. There are two accounts of the
\ncreation in the first and second chapters. In the first account birds and beasts were
\ncreated before man.
\nIn the second, man was created before the birds and beasts.
\nIn the first, fowls are made out of the water.
\nIn the second, fowls are made out of the ground.
\nIn the first, Adam and Eve are created together.
\nIn the second, Adam is made; then the beasts and birds, and then Eve is created from
\none of Adam’s ribs.
\nThese stories are far older than the Pentateuch.
\nPersian: God created the world in six days, a man called Adama, a woman called
\nEvah, and then rested.
\nThe Etruscan, Babylonian, Phoenician, Chaldean and the Egyptian stories are much
\nthe same.
\nThe Persians, Greeks, Egyptians, Chinese and Hindus have their Garden of Eden and
\nthe Tree of Life.
\nSo the Persians, the Babylonians, the Nubians, the people of Southern India, all had
\nthe story of the fall of man and the subtle serpent.
\nThe Chinese say that sin came into the world by the disobedience of woman. And
\neven the Tahitians tell us that man was created from the earth, and the first woman
\nfrom one of his bones.
\nAll these stories are equally authentic and of equal value to the world, and all the
\nauthors were equally inspired.
\nWe know also that the story of the flood is much older than the book of Genesis, and
\nwe know besides that it is not true.
\nWe know that this story in Genesis was copied from the Chaldean. There you find all
\nabout the rain, the ark, the animals, the dove that was sent out three times, and the
\nmountain on which the ark rested.<\/p>\n
So the Hindus, Chinese, Parsees, Persians, Greeks, Mexicans and Scandinavians have
\nsubstantially the same story.<\/p>\n
We also know that the account of the Tower of Babel is an ignorant and childish
\nfable.<\/p>\n
What then is left in this inspired book of Genesis? Is there a word calculated to
\ndevelop the heart or brain? Is there an elevated thought — any great principle -anything
\npoetic — any word that bursts into blossom?<\/p>\n
Is there anything except a dreary and detailed statement of things that never
\nhappened?<\/p>\n
Is there anything in Exodus calculated to make men generous, loving and noble?<\/p>\n
Is it well to teach children that God tortured the innocent cattle of the Egyptians -bruised
\nthem to death with hailstones — on account of the sins of Pharaoh?<\/p>\n
Does it make us merciful to believe that God killed the firstborn of the Egyptians -the
\nfirstborn of the poor and suffering people — of the poor girl working at the mill -because
\nof the wickedness of the king?<\/p>\n
Can we believe that the gods of Egypt worked miracles? Did they change water into
\nblood, and sticks into serpents?<\/p>\n
In Exodus there is not one original thought or line of value.<\/p>\n
We know, if we know anything, that this book was written by savages — savages who
\nbelieved in slavery, polygamy and wars of extermination. We know that the story told
\nis impossible, and that the miracles were never performed. This book admits that there
\nare other gods besides Jehovah. In the 17th chapter is this verse: “Now I know that the
\nLord is greater than all gods, for, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly, he was
\nabove them.”<\/p>\n
So, in this blessed book is taught the duty of human sacrifice — the sacrifice of babes.<\/p>\n
In the 22d chapter is this command: “Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe
\nfruits and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt give unto me.”<\/p>\n
Has Exodus been a help or a hindrance to the human race?<\/p>\n
Take from Exodus the laws common to all nations, and is there anything of value left?<\/p>\n
Is there anything in Leviticus of importance? Is there a chapter worth reading? What
\ninterest have we in the clothes of priests, the curtains and candles of the tabernacle,
\nthe tongs and shovels of the altar or the hair-oil used by the Levities?<\/p>\n
Of what use the cruel code, the frightful punishments, the curses, the falsehoods and
\nthe miracles of this ignorant and infamous book?<\/p>\n
And what is there in the book of Numbers — with its sacrifices and water of jealousy,
\nwith its shewbread and spoons, its kids and fine flour, its oil and candlesticks, its
\ncucumbers, onions and manna — to assist and instruct mankind? What interest have
\nwe in the rebellion of Korah, the water of separation, the ashes of a red heifer, the
\nbrazen serpent, the water that followed the people uphill and down for forty years, and
\nthe inspired donkey of the prophet Balaam? Have these absurdities and cruelties -these
\nchildish, savage superstitions — helped to civilize the world?<\/p>\n
Is there anything in Joshua — with its wars, its murders and massacres, its swords
\ndripping with the blood of mothers and babes, its tortures, maimings and mutilations,
\nits fraud and fury, its hatred and revenge — calculated to improve the world?<\/p>\n
Does not every chapter shock the heart of a good man? Is it a book to be read by
\nchildren?<\/p>\n
The book of Joshua is as merciless as famine, as ferocious as the heart of a wild beast.
\nIt is a history — a justification — a sanctification of nearly every crime.<\/p>\n
The book of Judges is about the same, nothing but war and bloodshed; the horrible
\nstory of Jael and Sisera; of Gideon and his trumpets and pitchers; of Jephtha and his
\ndaughter, whom he murdered to please Jehovah.<\/p>\n
Here we find the story of Samson, in which a sun-god is changed to a Hebrew giant.<\/p>\n
Read this book of Joshua — read of the slaughter of women, of wives, of mothers and
\nbabes –read its impossible miracles, its ruthless crimes, and all done according to the
\ncommands of Jehovah, and tell me whether this book is calculated to make us
\nforgiving, generous and loving.<\/p>\n
I admit that the history of Ruth is in some respects a beautiful and touching story; that
\nit is naturally told, and that her love for Naomi was deep and pure. But in the matter
\nof courtship we would hardly advise our daughters to follow the example of Ruth.
\nStill, we must remember that Ruth was a widow.<\/p>\n
Is there anything worth reading in the first and second books of Samuel? Ought a
\nprophet of God to hew a captured king in pieces? Is the story of the ark, its capture
\nand return of importance to us? Is it possible that it was right, just and merciful to kill
\nfifty thousand men because they had looked into a box? Of what use to us are the
\nwars of Saul and David, the stories of Goliath and the Witch of Endor? Why should
\nJehovah have killed Uzzah for putting forth his hand to steady the ark, and forgiven
\nDavid for murdering Uriah and stealing his wife?<\/p>\n
According to “Samuel,” David took a census of the people. This excited the wrath of
\nJehovah, and as a punishment he allowed David to choose seven years of famine, a
\nflight of three months from pursuing enemies, or three days of pestilence. David,
\nhaving confidence in God, chose the three days of pestilence; and, thereupon, God,
\nthe compassionate, on account of the sin of David, killed seventy thousand innocent
\nmen!<\/p>\n
Under the same circumstances, what would a devil have done?<\/p>\n
Is there anything in first and Second Kings that suggests the idea of inspiration?<\/p>\n
When David is dying he tells his son Solomon to murder Joab — not to let his hoar
\nhead go down to the grave in peace. With his last breath he commands his son to
\nbring down the hoar head of Shimei to the grave with blood. Having uttered these
\nmerciful words, the good David, the man after God’s heart, slept with his fathers.<\/p>\n
Was it necessary to inspire the man who wrote the history of the building of the
\ntemple, the story of the visit of the Queen of Sheba, or to tell the number of Solomon’s
\nwives?<\/p>\n
What care we for the withering of Jeroboam’s hand, the prophecy of Jehu, or the story
\nof Elijah and the ravens?<\/p>\n
Can we believe that Elijah brought flames from heaven, or that he went at last to
\nParadise in a chariot of fire?<\/p>\n
Can we believe in the multiplication of the widow’s oil by Elisha, that an army was
\nsmitten with blindness, or that an axe floated in the water?<\/p>\n
Does it civilize us to read about the beheading of the seventy sons of Ahab, the
\nputting out of the eyes of Zedekiah and the murder of his sons? Is there one word in
\nFirst and Second Kings calculated to make men better?<\/p>\n
First and Second Chronicles is but a re-telling of what is told in First and Second
\nKings. The same old stories — a little left out, a little added, but in no respect made
\nbetter or worse.<\/p>\n
The book of Ezra is of no importance. He tells us that Cyrus, King of Persia, issued a
\nproclamation for building a temple at Jerusalem, and that he declared Jehovah to be
\nthe real and only God.<\/p>\n
Nothing could be more absurd. Ezra tells us about the return from captivity, the
\nbuilding of the Temple, the dedication, a few prayers, and this is all. This book is of
\nno importance, of no use.<\/p>\n
Nehemiah is about the same, only it tells of the building of the wall, the complaints of
\nthe people about taxes, a list of those who returned from Babylon, a catalogue of
\nthose who dwelt at Jerusalem, and the dedication of the walls.<\/p>\n
Not a word in Nehemiah worth reading.<\/p>\n
Then comes the book of Esther:<\/p>\n
In this we are told that King Ahasueras was intoxicated; that he sent for his Queen,
\nVashti, to come and show herself to him and his guests. Vashti refused to appear.<\/p>\n
This maddened the king, and he ordered that from every province the most beautiful
\ngirls should be brought before him that he might choose one in place of Vashti.<\/p>\n
Among others was brought Esther, a Jewess. She was chosen and became the wife of
\nthe king. Then a gentleman by the name of Haman wanted to have all the Jews killed,
\nand the king, not knowing that Esther was of that race, signed a decree that all the
\nJews should be killed.<\/p>\n
Through the efforts of Mordecai and Esther the decree was annulled and the Jews
\nwere saved.<\/p>\n
Haman prepared a gallows on which to have Mordecai hanged, but the good Esther so
\nmanaged matters that Haman and his ten sons were hanged on the gallows that Haman
\nhad built, and the Jews were allowed to murder more than seventy-five thousand of
\nthe king’s subjects.<\/p>\n
This is the inspired story of Esther.<\/p>\n
In the book of Job we find some elevated sentiments, some sublime and foolish
\nthoughts, something of the wonder and sublimity of nature, the joys and sorrows of
\nlife; but the story is infamous.<\/p>\n
Some of the Psalms are good, many are indifferent, a few are infamous. In them are
\nmingled the vices and virtues. There are verses that elevate, verses that degrade. There
\nare prayers for forgiveness and revenge. In the literature of the world there is nothing
\nmore heartless, more infamous, than the 109th Psalm.<\/p>\n
In the Proverbs there is much shrewdness, many pithy and prudent maxims, many
\nwise sayings. The same ideas are expressed in many ways — the wisdom of economy
\nand silence, the dangers of vanity and idleness. Some are trivial, some are foolish, and
\nmany are wise. These proverbs are not generous — not altruistic. Sayings to the same
\neffect are found among all nations.<\/p>\n
Ecclesiastes is the most thoughtful book in the Bible. It was written by an unbeliever<\/p>\n
– a philosopher –an agnostic. Take out the interpolations, and it is in accordance with
\nthe thought of the nineteenth century. In this book are found the most philosophic and
\npoetic passages in the Bible.
\nAfter crossing the desert of death and crime — after reading the Pentateuch, Joshua,
\nJudges, Samuel, Kings and Chronicles –it is delightful to reach this grove of palms,
\ncalled the “Song of Solomon.” A drama of love — of human love; a poem without
\nJehovah –a poem born of the heart and true to the divine instincts of the soul.<\/p>\n
“I sleep, but my heart waketh.”<\/p>\n
Isaiah is the work of several. Its swollen words, its vague imagery, its prophecies and
\ncurses, its ravings against kings and nations, its laughter at the wisdom of man, its
\nhatred of joy, have not the slightest tendency to increase the well-being of man.<\/p>\n
In this book is recorded the absurdist of all miracles. The shadow on the dial is turned
\nback ten degrees, in order to satisfy Hezekiah that Jehovah will add fifteen years to
\nhis life.<\/p>\n
In this miracle the world, turning from west to east at the rate of more than a thousand
\nmiles an hour, is not only stopped, but made to turn the other way until the shadow on
\nthe dial went back ten degrees! Is there in the whole world an intelligent man or
\nwoman who believes this impossible falsehood?<\/p>\n
Jeremiah contains nothing of importance — no facts of value; nothing but faultfinding,
\nlamentations, croakings, wailings, curses and promises; nothing but famine
\nand prayer, the prosperity of the wicked, the ruin of the Jews, the captivity and return,
\nand at last Jeremiah, the traitor, in the stocks and in prison.<\/p>\n
And Lamentations is simply a continuance of the ravings of the same insane
\npessimist; nothing but dust and sackcloth and ashes, tears and howls, railings and
\nrevilings.<\/p>\n
And Ezekiel — eating manuscripts, prophesying siege and desolation, with visions of
\ncoals of fire, and cherubim, and wheels with eyes, and the type and figure of the
\nboiling pot, and the resurrection of dry bones — is of no use, of no possible value.<\/p>\n
With Voltaire, I say that any one who admires Ezekiel should be compelled to dine
\nwith him.<\/p>\n
Daniel is a disordered dream — a nightmare.<\/p>\n
What can be made of this book with its image with a golden head, with breast and
\narms of silver, with belly and thighs of brass, with legs of iron, and with feet of iron
\nand clay; with its writing on the wall, its den of lions, and its vision of the ram and
\ngoat?<\/p>\n
Is there anything to be learned from Hosea and his wife? Is there anything of use in
\nJoel, in Amos, in Obadiah? Can we get any good from Jonah and his gourd? Is it
\npossible that God is the real author of Micah and Nahum, of Habakkuk and
\nZephaniah, of Haggai and Malachi and Zechariah, with his red horses, his four horns,
\nhis four carpenters, his flying roll, his mountains of brass and the stone with four
\neyes?<\/p>\n
Is there anything in these “inspired” books that has been of benefit to man?<\/p>\n
Have they taught us how to cultivate the earth, to build houses, to weave cloth, to
\nprepare food? Have they taught us to paint pictures, to chisel statues, to build bridges,
\nor ships, or anything of beauty or of use? Did we get our ideas of government, of
\nreligious freedom, of the liberty of thought, from the Old Testament? Did we get from
\nany of these books a hint of any science? Is there in the “sacred volume” a word, a
\nline, that has added to the wealth, the intelligence and the happiness of mankind? Is
\nthere one of the books of the Old Testament as entertaining as “Robinson Crusoe,”
\n“The Travels of Gulliver,” or “Peter Wilkins and his Flying Wife”? Did the author of
\nGenesis know as much about nature as Humboldt, or Darwin, or Haeckel? Is what is
\ncalled the Mosaic Code as wise or as merciful as the code of any civilized nation?
\nWere the writers of Kings and Chronicles as great historians, as great writers, as
\nGibbon and Draper? Is Jeremiah or Habakkuk equal to Dickens or Thackeray? Can<\/p>\n
the authors of Job and the Psalms be compared with Shakespeare? Why should we
\nattribute the best to man and the worst to God?<\/p>\n
Was Jehovah a God of Love?<\/p>\n
DID these words come from the heart of love? -”
\nWhen the Lord thy God shall drive them before thee, thou shalt smite them and
\nutterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, or show mercy unto
\nthem.”
\n“I will heap mischief upon them. I will send mine arrows upon them; they shall be
\nburned with hunger and devoured with burning heat and with bitter destruction.”
\n“I will send the tooth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust.”
\n“The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the
\nvirgin; the suckling also with the man of gray hairs.”
\n“Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow; let his children be continually
\nvagabonds and beg; let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places; let the
\nextortioner catch all that he hath, and let the stranger spoil his labor; let there be none
\nto extend mercy unto him, neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children.”
\n“And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body — the flesh of thy sons and daughters.”
\n“And the heaven that is over thee shall be brass, and the earth that is under thee shall
\nbe iron.”
\n“Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.”
\n“I will make my arrows drunk with blood.”
\n“I will laugh at their calamity.”
\nDid these curses, these threats, come from the heart of love or from the mouth of
\nsavagery?
\nWas Jehovah god or devil?
\nWhy should we place Jehovah above all the gods?
\nHas man in his ignorance and fear ever imagined a greater monster?<\/p>\n
Have the barbarians of any land, in any time, worshiped a more heartless god?<\/p>\n
Brahma was a thousand times nobler, and so was Osiris and Zeus and Jupiter. So was
\nthe supreme god of the Aztecs, to whom they offered only the perfume of flowers.
\nThe worst god of the Hindus, with his necklace of skulls and his bracelets of living
\nsnakes, was kind and merciful compared with Jehovah.<\/p>\n
Compared with Marcus Aurelius, how small Jehovah seems. Compared with
\nAbraham Lincoln, how cruel, how contemptible, is this god.<\/p>\n
Jehovah’s Administration.<\/p>\n
HE created the world, the hosts of heaven, a man and woman — placed them in a
\ngarden. Then the serpent deceived them, and they were cast out and made to earn their
\nbread.<\/p>\n
Jehovah had been thwarted.<\/p>\n
Then he tried again. He went on for about sixteen hundred years trying to civilize the
\npeople.<\/p>\n
No schools, no churches, no Bible, no tracts — nobody taught to read or write. No Ten
\nCommandments. The people grew worse and worse, until the merciful Jehovah sent
\nthe flood and drowned all the people except Noah and his family, eight in all.<\/p>\n
Then he started again, and changed their diet. At first Adam and Eve were
\nvegetarians. After the flood Jehovah said: “Every moving thing that liveth shall be
\nmeat for you” — snakes and buzzards.<\/p>\n
Then he failed again, and at the Tower of Babel he dispersed and scattered the people.<\/p>\n
Finding that he could not succeed with all the people, he thought he would try a few,
\nso he selected Abraham and his descendants. Again he failed, and his chosen people
\nwere captured by the Egyptians and enslaved for four hundred years.<\/p>\n
Then he tried again — rescued them from Pharaoh and started for Palestine.<\/p>\n
Then he changed their diet, allowing them to eat only the beasts that parted the hoof
\nand chewed the cud. Again he failed. The people hated him, and preferred the slavery
\nof Egypt to the freedom of Jehovah. So he kept them wandering until nearly all who
\ncame from Egypt had died. Then he tried again — took them into Palestine and had
\nthem governed by Judges.<\/p>\n
This, too, was a failure — no schools, no Bible. Then he tried kings, and the kings
\nwere mostly idolaters.<\/p>\n
Then the chosen people were conquered and carried into captivity by the Babylonians.<\/p>\n
Another failure.<\/p>\n
Then they returned, and Jehovah tried prophets — howlers and wailers — but the
\npeople grew worse and worse. No schools, no sciences, no arts, no commerce. Then
\nJehovah took upon himself flesh, was born of a woman, and lived among the people
\nthat he had been trying to civilize for several thousand years. Then these people,
\nfollowing the law that Jehovah had given them in the wilderness, charged this
\nJehovah-man — this Christ — with blasphemy; tried, convicted and killed him.<\/p>\n
Jehovah had failed again.<\/p>\n
Then he deserted the Jews and turned his attention to the rest of the world.<\/p>\n
And now the Jews, deserted by Jehovah, persecuted by Christians, are the most
\nprosperous people on the earth. Again has Jehovah failed.<\/p>\n
What an administration!<\/p>\n
VII
\nThe New Testament.<\/p>\n
WHO wrote the New Testament?<\/p>\n
Christian scholars admit that they do not know. They admit that, if the four gospels
\nwere written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, they must have been written in
\nHebrew. And yet a Hebrew manuscript of any one of these gospels has never been
\nfound. All have been and are in Greek. So, educated theologians admit that the
\nEpistles, James and Jude, were written by persons who had never seen one of the four
\ngospels. In these Epistles — in James and Jude –no reference is made to any of the
\ngospels, nor to any miracle recorded in them.<\/p>\n
The first mention that has been found of one of our gospels was made about one
\nhundred and eighty years after the birth of Christ, and the four gospels were first
\nnamed and quoted from at the beginning of the third century, about one hundred an
\nseventy years after the death of Christ.<\/p>\n
We now know that there were many other gospels besides our four, some of which
\nhave been lost. There were the gospels of Paul, of the Egyptians, of the Hebrews, of
\nPerfection, of Judas, of Thaddeus, of the Infancy, of Thomas, of Mary, of Andrew, of
\nNicodemus, of Marcion and several others.<\/p>\n
So there were the Acts of Pilate, of Andrew, of Mary, of Paul and Thecla and of many
\nothers; also a book called the Shepherd of Hermas.<\/p>\n
At first not one of all the books was considered as inspired. The Old Testament was
\nregarded as divine; but the books that now constitute the New Testament were
\nregarded as human productions. We now know that we do not know who wrote the
\nfour gospels.<\/p>\n
The question is, Were the authors of these four gospels inspired?<\/p>\n
If they were inspired, then the four gospels mast be true. If they are true, they mast
\nagree.<\/p>\n
The four gospels do not agree.<\/p>\n
Matthew, Mark and Luke knew nothing of the atonement, nothing of salvation by
\nfaith. They knew only the gospel of good deeds — of charity. They teach that if we
\nforgive others God will forgive us.<\/p>\n
With this the gospel of John does not agree.<\/p>\n
In that gospel we are taught that we must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ; that we
\nmust be born again; that we must drink the blood and eat the flesh of Christ. In this
\ngospel we find the doctrine of the atonement and that Christ died for us and suffered
\nin our place.<\/p>\n
This gospel is utterly at variance with the other three. If the other three are true, the
\ngospel of John is false. If the gospel of John was written by an inspired man, the
\nwriters of the other three were uninspired. From this there is no possible escape. The
\nfour cannot be true.<\/p>\n
It is evident that there are many interpolations in the four gospels.<\/p>\n
For instance, in the 28th chapter of Matthew is an account to the effect that the
\nsoldiers at the tomb of Christ were bribed to say that the disciples of Jesus stole away
\nhis body while they, the soldiers, slept.<\/p>\n
This is clearly an interpolation. It is a break in the narrative.<\/p>\n
The 10th verse should be followed by the 16th. The 10th verse is as follows:<\/p>\n
“Then Jesus said unto them, ‘Be not afraid; go tell my brethren that they go unto
\nGalilee and there shall they see me.'”<\/p>\n
The 16th verse:<\/p>\n
“Then the eleven disciples went away unto Galilee into a mountain, where Jesus had
\nappointed them.”<\/p>\n
The story about the soldiers contained in the 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th and 15th verses is
\nan interpolation — an afterthought –long after. The 15th verse demonstrates this.<\/p>\n
Fifteenth verse: “So they took the money and did as they were taught. And this saying
\nis commonly reported among the Jews until this day.”<\/p>\n
Certainly this account was not in the original gospel, and certainly the 15th verse was
\nnot written by a Jew. No Jew could have written this: “And this saying is commonly
\nreported among the Jews until this day.”<\/p>\n
Mark, John and Luke never heard that the soldiers had been bribed by the priests; or,
\nif they had, did not think it worth while recording. So the accounts of the Ascension
\nof Jesus Christ in Mark and Luke are interpolations. Matthew says nothing about the
\nAscension.<\/p>\n
Certainly there never was a greater miracle, and yet Matthew, who was present — who
\nsaw the Lord rise, ascend and disappear — did not think it worth mentioning.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, the last words of Christ, according to Matthew, contradict the
\nAscension: “Lo I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.”<\/p>\n
John, who was present, if Christ really ascended, says not one word on the subject.<\/p>\n
As to the Ascension, the gospels do not agree.<\/p>\n
Mark gives the last conversation that Christ had with his disciples, as follows:<\/p>\n
“Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth
\nand is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these
\nsigns shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall
\nspeak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly
\nthing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. So,
\nthen, after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven and sat on
\nthe right hand of God.”<\/p>\n
Is it possible that this description was written by one who witnessed this miracle?<\/p>\n
This miracle is described by Luke as follows.<\/p>\n
“And it came to pass while he blessed them he was parted from them and carried up
\ninto heaven.”<\/p>\n
“Brevity is the soul of wit.”<\/p>\n
In the Acts we are told that: “When he had spoken, while they beheld, he was taken
\nup, and a cloud received him out of their sight.”<\/p>\n
Neither Luke, nor Matthew, nor John, nor the writer of the Acts, heard one word of
\nthe conversation attributed to Christ by Mark. The fact is that the Ascension of Christ
\nwas not claimed by his disciples.<\/p>\n
At first Christ was a man — nothing more. Mary was his mother, Joseph his father.
\nThe genealogy of his father, Joseph, was given to show that he was of the blood of
\nDavid.<\/p>\n
Then the claim was made that he was the son of God, and that his mother was a
\nvirgin, and that she remained a virgin until her death.<\/p>\n
Then the claim was made that Christ rose from the dead and ascended bodily to
\nheaven.<\/p>\n
It required many years for these absurdities to take possession of the minds of men.<\/p>\n
If Christ rose from the dead, why did he not appear to his enemies? Why did he not
\ncall on Caiaphas, the high priest? Why did he not make another triumphal entry into
\nJerusalem?<\/p>\n
If he really ascended, why did he not do so in public, in the presence of his
\npersecutors? Why should this, the greatest of miracles, be done in secret, in a corner?<\/p>\n
It was a miracle that could have been seen by a vast multitude — a miracle that could
\nnot be simulated — one that would have convinced hundreds of thousands.<\/p>\n
After the story of the Resurrection, the Ascension became a necessity. They had to
\ndispose of the body.<\/p>\n
So there are many other interpolations in the gospels and epistles.<\/p>\n
Again I ask: Is the New Testament true? Does anybody now believe that at the birth
\nof Christ there was a celestial greeting; that a star led the Wise Men of the East; that
\nHerod slew the babes of Bethlehem of two years old and under?<\/p>\n
The gospels are filled with accounts of miracles. Were they ever performed?<\/p>\n
Matthew gives the particulars of about twenty-two miracles, Mark of about nineteen,
\nLuke of about eighteen and John of about seven.<\/p>\n
According to the gospels, Christ healed diseases, cast out devils, rebuked the sea,
\ncured the blind, fed multitudes with five loaves and two fishes, walked on the sea,
\ncursed a fig tree, turned water into wine and raised the dead.<\/p>\n
Matthew is the only one that tells about the Star and the Wise Men –the only one that
\ntells about the murder of babes.<\/p>\n
John is the only one who says anything about the resurrection of Lazarus, and Luke is
\nthe only one giving an account of the rising from the dead the widow of Nain’s son.<\/p>\n
How is it possible to substantiate these miracles?<\/p>\n
The Jews, among whom they were said to have been performed, did not believe them.
\nThe diseased, the palsied, the leprous, the blind who were cured, did not become
\nfollowers of Christ. Those that were raised from the dead were never heard of again.<\/p>\n
Does any intelligent man believe in the existence of devils? The writer of three of the
\ngospels certainly did. John says nothing about Christ having cast out devils, but
\nMatthew, Mark and Luke give many instances.<\/p>\n
Does any natural man now believe that Christ cast out devils? If his disciples said he
\ndid, they were mistaken. If Christ said he did, he was insane or an impostor.<\/p>\n
If the accounts of casting out devils are false, then the writers were ignorant or
\ndishonest. If they wrote through ignorance, then they were not inspired. If they wrote
\nwhat they knew to be false, they were not inspired. If what they wrote is untrue,
\nwhether they knew it or not, they were not inspired.<\/p>\n
At that time it was believed that palsy, epilepsy, deafness, insanity and many other
\ndiseases were caused by devils; that devils took possession of and lived in the bodies
\nof men and women. Christ believed this, taught this belief to others, and pretended to
\ncure diseases by casting devils out of the sick and insane. We know now, if we know
\nanything, that diseases are not caused by the presence of devils. We know, if we know
\nanything, that devils do not reside in the bodies of men.<\/p>\n
If Christ said and did what the writers of the three gospels say he said and did, then
\nChrist was mistaken. If he was mistaken, certainly he was not God. And if he was
\nmistaken, certainly he was not inspired.<\/p>\n
Is it a fact that the Devil tried to bribe Christ?<\/p>\n
Is it a fact that the Devil carried Christ to the top of the temple and tried to induce him
\nto leap to the ground?<\/p>\n
How can these miracles be established?<\/p>\n
The principals have written nothing, Christ has written nothing, and the Devil has
\nremained silent.<\/p>\n
How can we know that the Devil tried to bribe Christ? Who wrote the account? We do
\nnot know. How did the writer get his information? We do not know.<\/p>\n
Somebody, some seventeen hundred years ago, said that the Devil tried to bribe God;
\nthat the Devil carried God to the top of the temple and tried to induce him to leap to
\nthe earth and that God was intellectually too keen for the Devil.<\/p>\n
This is all the evidence we have.<\/p>\n
Is there anything in the literature, of the world more perfectly idiotic?<\/p>\n
Intelligent people no longer believe in witches, wizards, spooks and devils, and they
\nare perfectly satisfied that every word in the New Testament about casting out devils
\nis utterly false.<\/p>\n
Can we believe that Christ raised the dead?<\/p>\n
A widow living in Nain is following the body of her son to the tomb. Christ halts the
\nfuneral procession and raises the young man from the dead and gives him back to the
\narms of his mother.<\/p>\n
This young man disappears. He is never heard of again. No one takes the slightest
\ninterest in the man who returned from the realm of death. Luke is the only one who
\ntells the story. Maybe Matthew, Mark and John never heard of it, or did not believe it
\nand so failed to record it.<\/p>\n
John says that Lazarus was raised from the dead; Matthew, Mark and Luke say
\nnothing about it.<\/p>\n
It was more wonderful than the raising of the widow’s son. He had not been laid in the
\ntomb for days. He was only on his way to the grave, but Lazarus was actually dead.
\nHe had begun to decay.<\/p>\n
Lazarus did not excite the least interest. No one asked him about the other world. No
\none inquired of him about their dead friends.<\/p>\n
When he died the second time no one said: “He is not afraid. He has traveled that road
\ntwice and knows just where he is going.”<\/p>\n
We do not believe in the miracles of Mohammed, and yet they are as well attested as
\nthis. We have no confidence in the miracles performed by Joseph Smith, and yet the
\nevidence is far greater, far better. If a man should go about now pretending to raise the
\ndead, pretending to cast out devils, we would regard him as insane. What, then, can
\nwe say of Christ? If we wish to save his reputation we are compelled to say that he
\nnever pretended to raise the dead; that he never claimed to have cast out devils.<\/p>\n
We must take the ground that these ignorant and impossible things were invented by
\nzealous disciples, who sought to deify their leader.<\/p>\n
In those ignorant days these falsehoods added to the fame of Christ. But now they put
\nhis character in peril and belittle the authors of the gospels.<\/p>\n
Can we now believe that water was changed into wine? John tells of this childish
\nmiracle, and says that the other disciples were present, yet Matthew, Mark and Luke
\nsay nothing about it.<\/p>\n
Take the miracle of the man cured by the pool of Bethseda. John says that an angel
\ntroubled the waters of the pool of Bethseda, and that whoever got into the pool first
\nafter the waters were troubled was healed.<\/p>\n
Does anybody now believe that an angel went into the pool and troubled the waters?
\nDoes anybody now think that the poor wretch who got in first was healed? Yet the
\nauthor of the gospel according to John believed and asserted these absurdities. If he
\nwas mistaken about that he may have been about all the miracles he records.<\/p>\n
John is the only one who tells about this pool of Bethseda. Possibly the other disciples
\ndid not believe the story.<\/p>\n
How can we account for these pretended miracles?<\/p>\n
In the days of the disciples, and for many centuries after, the world was filled with the
\nsupernatural. Nearly everything that happened was regarded as miraculous. God was
\nthe immediate governor of the world. If the people were good, God sent seed time and
\nharvest; but if they were bad he sent flood and hail, frost and famine. If anything
\nwonderful happened it was exaggerated until it became a miracle.<\/p>\n
Of the order of events –of the unbroken and the unbreakable chain of causes and
\neffects — the people had no knowledge and no thought.<\/p>\n
A miracle is the badge and brand of fraud. No miracle ever was performed. No
\nintelligent, honest man ever pretended to perform a miracle, and never will.<\/p>\n
If Christ had wrought the miracles attributed to him; if he had cured the palsied and
\ninsane; if he had given hearing to the deaf, vision to the blind; if he had cleansed the
\nleper with a word, and with a touch had given life and feeling to the withered limb; if
\nhe had given pulse and motion, warmth and thought, to cold and breathless clay; if he
\nhad conquered death and rescued from the grave its pallid prey — no word would have
\nbeen uttered, no hand raised, except in praise and honor. In his presence all heads
\nwould have been uncovered –all knees upon the ground.<\/p>\n
Is it not strange that at the trial of Christ no one was found to say a word in his favor?
\nNo man stood forth and said: “I was a leper, and this man cured me with a touch.” No
\nwoman said: “I am the widow of Nain and this is my son whom this man raised from
\nthe dead.”<\/p>\n
No man said: “I was blind, and this man gave me sight.”<\/p>\n
All silent.<\/p>\n
VIII
\nThe Philosophy of Christ.<\/p>\n
MILLIONS assert that the philosophy of Christ is perfect — that he was the wisest
\nthat ever uttered speech.<\/p>\n
Let us see:<\/p>\n
Resist not evil. If smitten on one cheek turn the other.<\/p>\n
Is there any philosophy, any wisdom in this? Christ takes from goodness, from virtue,
\nfrom the truth, the right of self-defence. Vice becomes the master of the world, and
\nthe good become the victims of the infamous.<\/p>\n
No man has the right to protect himself, his property, his wife and children.
\nGovernment becomes impossible, and the world is at the mercy of criminals. Is there
\nany absurdity beyond this?<\/p>\n
Love your enemies.<\/p>\n
Is this possible? Did any human being ever love his enemies? Did Christ love his,
\nwhen he denounced them as whited sepulchers, hypocrites and vipers?<\/p>\n
We cannot love those who hate us. Hatred in the hearts of others does not breed love
\nin ours. Not to resist evil is absurd; to love your enemies is impossible.<\/p>\n
Take no thought for the morrow.<\/p>\n
The idea was that God would take care of us as he did of sparrows and lilies. Is there
\nthe least sense in that belief?<\/p>\n
Does God take care of anybody?<\/p>\n
Can we live without taking thought for the morrow? To plow, to sow, to cultivate, to
\nharvest, is to take thought for the morrow. We plan and work for the future, for our
\nchildren, for the unborn generations to come. Without this forethought there could be
\nno progress, no civilization. The world would go back to the caves and dens of
\nsavagery.<\/p>\n
If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out. If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off.<\/p>\n
Why? Because it is better that one of our members should perish than that the whole
\nbody should be cast into hell.<\/p>\n
Is there any wisdom in putting out your eyes or cutting off your hands? Is it possible
\nto extract from these extravagant sayings the smallest grain of common sense?<\/p>\n
Swear not at all; neither by Heaven, for it is God’s throne; nor by the Earth,
\nfor it is his footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is his holy city.<\/p>\n
Here we find the astronomy and geology of Christ. Heaven is the throne of God, the
\nmonarch; the earth is his footstool. A footstool that turns over at the rate of a thousand
\nmiles an hour, and sweeps through space at the rate of over a thousand miles a
\nminute!<\/p>\n
Where did Christ think heaven was? Why was Jerusalem a holy city? Was it because
\nthe inhabitants were ignorant, cruel and superstitious?<\/p>\n
If any man will sue thee at the law and take away thy coat let him have thy
\ncloak also.<\/p>\n
Is there any philosophy, any good sense, in that commandment? Would it not be just
\nas sensible to say: “If a man obtains a judgment against you for one hundred dollars,
\ngive him two hundred.”<\/p>\n
Only the insane could give or follow this advice.<\/p>\n
Think not I am come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace, but a
\nsword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
\ndaughter against her mother.<\/p>\n
If this is true, how much better it would have been had he remained away.<\/p>\n
Is it possible that he who said, “Resist not evil,” came to bring a sword? That he who
\nsaid, “Love your enemies,” came to destroy the peace of the world?<\/p>\n
To set father against son, and daughter against father — what a glorious mission!<\/p>\n
He did bring a sword, and the sword was wet for a thousand years with innocent
\nblood. In millions of hearts he sowed the seeds of hatred and revenge. He divided
\nnations and families, put out the light of reason, and petrified the hearts of men.<\/p>\n
And every one that hath forsaken house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or
\nmother, or wife, or chil dren, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an
\nhundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.<\/p>\n
According to the writer of Matthew, Christ, the compassionate, the merciful, uttered
\nthese terrible words. Is it possible that Christ offered the bribe of eternal joy to those
\nwho would desert their fathers, their mothers, their wives and children? Are we to win
\nthe happiness of heaven by deserting the ones we love? Is a home to be ruined here
\nfor the sake of a mansion there?<\/p>\n
And yet it is said that Christ is an example for all the world. Did he desert his father
\nand mother? He said, speaking to his mother: “Woman, what have I to do with thee?”<\/p>\n
The Pharisees said unto Christ: “Is it lawful to pay tribute unto Caesar?<\/p>\n
Christ said: “Show me the tribute money.”They brought him a penny. And he saith
\nunto them: “Whose is the image and the superscription? “They said: “Caesar’s.” And
\nChrist said: “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.”<\/p>\n
Did Christ think that the money belonged to Caesar because his image and
\nsuperscription were stamped upon it? Did the penny belong to Caesar or to the man
\nwho had earned it? Had Caesar the right to demand it because it was adorned with his
\nimage?<\/p>\n
Does it appear from this conversation that Christ understood the real nature and use of
\nmoney?<\/p>\n
Can we now say that Christ was the greatest of philosophers?<\/p>\n
Is Christ Our Example?<\/p>\n
HE never said a word in favor of education. He never even hinted at the existence of
\nany science. He never uttered a word in favor of industry, economy or of any effort to
\nbetter our condition in this world. He was the enemy of the successful, of the wealthy.
\nDives was sent to hell, not because he was bad, but because he was rich. Lazarus went
\nto heaven, not because he was good, but because he was poor.<\/p>\n
Christ cared nothing for painting, for sculpture, for music — nothing for any art. He
\nsaid nothing about the duties of nation to nation, of king to subject; nothing about the
\nrights of man; nothing about intellectual liberty or the freedom of speech. He said
\nnothing about the sacredness of home; not one word for the fireside; not a word in
\nfavor of marriage, in honor of maternity.<\/p>\n
He never married. He wandered homeless from place to place with a few disciples.
\nNone of them seem to have been engaged in any useful business, and they seem to
\nhave lived on alms.<\/p>\n
All human ties were held in contempt; this world was sacrificed for the next; all
\nhuman effort was discouraged. God would support and protect.<\/p>\n
At last, in the dusk of death, Christ, finding that he was mistaken, cried out: “My God
\nMy God! Why hast thou forsaken me?”<\/p>\n
We have found that man must depend on himself. He must clear the land; he must
\nbuild the home; he must plow and plant; he must invent; he must work with hand and
\nbrain; he must overcome the difficulties and obstructions; he must conquer and
\nenslave the forces of nature to the end that they may do the work of the world.<\/p>\n
X
\nWhy Should We Place Christ at the Top
\nand Summit of the Human Race?<\/p>\n
29<\/p>\n
WAS he kinder, more forgiving, more self-sacrificing than Buddha? Was he wiser,
\ndid he meet death with more perfect calmness, than Socrates? Was he more patient,
\nmore charitable, than Epictetus? Was he a greater philosopher, a deeper thinker, than
\nEpicurus? In what respect was he the superior of Zoroaster? Was he gentler than Laotsze,
\nmore universal than Confucius? Were his ideas of human rights and duties
\nsuperior to those of Zeno? Did he express grander truths than Cicero? Was his mind
\nsubtler than Spinoza’s? Was his brain equal to Kepler’s or Newton’s? Was he grander
\nin death — a sublimer martyr than Bruno? Was he in intelligence, in the force and
\nbeauty of expression, in breadth and scope of thought, in wealth of illustration, in
\naptness of comparison, in knowledge of the human brain and heart, of all passions,
\nhopes and fears, the equal of Shakespeare, the greatest of the human race?<\/p>\n
If Christ was in fact God, he knew all the future. Before him like a panorama moved
\nthe history yet to be. He knew how his words would be interpreted. He knew what
\ncrimes, what horrors, what infamies, would be committed in his name. He knew that
\nthe hungry flames of persecution would climb around the limbs of countless martyrs.
\nHe knew that thousands and thousands of brave men and women would languish in
\ndungeons in darkness, filled with pain. He knew that his church would invent and use
\ninstruments of torture; that his followers would appeal to whip and fagot, to chain and
\nrack. He saw the horizon of the future lurid with the flames of the auto da fe. He knew
\nwhat creeds would spring like poisonous fungi from every text. He saw the ignorant
\nsects waging war against each other. He saw thousands of men, under the orders of
\npriests, building prisons for their fellow-men. He saw thousands of scaffolds dripping
\nwith the best and bravest blood. He saw his followers using the instruments of pain.
\nHe heard the groans — saw the faces white with agony. He heard the shrieks and sobs
\nand cries of all the moaning, martyred multitudes. He knew that commentaries would
\nbe written on his words with swords, to be read by the light of fagots. He knew that
\nthe Inquisition would be born of the teachings attributed to him.<\/p>\n
He saw the interpolations and falsehoods that hypocrisy would write and tell. He saw
\nall wars that would be waged, and he knew that above these fields of death, these
\ndungeons, these rackings, these burnings, these executions, for a thousand years
\nwould float the dripping banner of the cross.<\/p>\n
He knew that hypocrisy would be robed and crowned — that cruelty and credulity
\nwould rule the world; knew that liberty would perish from the earth; knew that popes
\nand kings in his name would enslave the souls and bodies of men; knew that they
\nwould persecute and destroy the discoverers, thinkers and inventors; knew that his
\nchurch would extinguish reason’s holy light and leave the world without a star.<\/p>\n
He saw his disciples extinguishing the eyes of men, flaying them alive, cutting out
\ntheir tongues, searching for all the nerves of pain.<\/p>\n
He knew that in his name his followers would trade in human flesh; that cradles
\nwould be robbed and women’s breasts unbabed for gold.<\/p>\n
And yet he died with voiceless lips.<\/p>\n
Why did he fail to speak? Why did he not tell his disciples, and through them the
\nworld: “You shall not burn, imprison and torture in my name. You shall not persecute
\nyour fellow-men.”<\/p>\n
Why did he not plainly say: “I am the Son of God,” or, “I am God”? Why did he not
\nexplain the Trinity? Why did he not tell the mode of baptism that was pleasing to
\nhim? Why did he not write a creed? Why did he not break the chains of slaves? Why
\ndid he not say that the Old Testament was or was not the inspired word of God? Why
\ndid he not write the New Testament himself? Why did he leave his words to
\nignorance, hypocrisy and chance? Why did he not say something positive, definite
\nand satisfactory about another world? Why did he not turn the tear-stained hope of
\nheaven into the glad knowledge of another life? Why did he not tell us something of
\nthe rights of man, of the liberty of hand and brain?<\/p>\n
Why did he go dumbly to his death, leaving the world to misery and to doubt?<\/p>\n
I will tell you why. He was a man, and did not know.<\/p>\n
Inspiration.<\/p>\n
NOT before about the third century was it claimed or believed that the books
\ncomposing the New Testament were inspired.<\/p>\n
It will be remembered that there were a great number of books, of Gospels, Epistles
\nand Acts, and that from these the “inspired” ones were selected by “uninspired” men.<\/p>\n
Between the “Fathers” there were great differences of opinion as to which books were
\ninspired; much discussion and plenty of hatred. Many of the books now deemed
\nspurious were by many of the “Fathers” regarded as divine, and some now regarded as
\ninspired were believed to be spurious. Many of the early Christians and some of the
\n“Fathers” repudiated the Gospel of John, the Epistle to the Hebrews, Jude, James,
\nPeter, and the Revelation of St. John. On the other hand, many of them regarded the
\nGospel of the Hebrews, of the Egyptians, the Preaching of Peter, the Shepherd of
\nHermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Pastor of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the
\nRevelation of Paul, the Epistle of Clement, the Gospel of Nicodemus, inspired books,
\nequal to the very best.<\/p>\n
From all these books, and many others, the Christians selected the inspired ones.<\/p>\n
The men who did the selecting were ignorant and superstitious. They were firm
\nbelievers in the miraculous. They thought that diseases had been cured by the aprons
\nand handkerchiefs of the apostles, by the bones of the dead. They believed in the fable
\nof the Phoenix, and that the hyenas changed their sex every year.<\/p>\n
Were the men who through many centuries made the selections inspired? Were they -ignorant,
\ncredulous, stupid and malicious — as well qualified to judge of “inspiration”
\nas the students of our time? How are we bound by their opinion? Have we not the
\nright to judge for ourselves?<\/p>\n
Erasmus, one of the leaders of the Reformation, declared that the Epistle to the
\nHebrews was not written by Paul, and he denied the inspiration of Second and Third
\nJohn, and also of Revelation. Luther was of the same opinion. He declared James to
\nbe an epistle of straw, and denied the inspiration of Revelation. Zwinglius rejected the
\nbook of Revelation, and even Calvin denied that Paul was the author of Hebrews.<\/p>\n
The truth is that the Protestants did not agree as to what books are inspired until 1647,
\nby the Assembly of Westminster.<\/p>\n
To prove that a book is inspired you must prove the existence of God. You must also
\nprove that this God thinks, acts, has objects, ends and aims. This is somewhat
\ndifficult.<\/p>\n
It is impossible to conceive of an infinite being. Having no conception of an infinite
\nbeing, it is impossible to tell whether all the facts we know tend to prove or disprove
\nthe existence of such a being.<\/p>\n
God is a guess. If the existence of God is admitted, how are we to prove that he
\ninspired the writers of the books of the Bible?<\/p>\n
How can one man establish the inspiration of another? How can an inspired man
\nprove that he is inspired? How can he know himself that he is inspired? There is no
\nway to prove the fact of inspiration. The only evidence is the word of some man who
\ncould by no possibility know anything on the subject.<\/p>\n
What is inspiration? Did God use men as instruments? Did he cause them to write his
\nthoughts? Did he take possession of their minds and destroy their wills?<\/p>\n
Were these writers only partly controlled, so that their mistakes, their ignorance and
\ntheir prejudices were mingled with the wisdom of God?<\/p>\n
How are we to separate the mistakes of man from the thoughts of God? Can we do
\nthis without being inspired ourselves? If the original writers were inspired, then the
\ntranslators should have been, and so should be the men who tell us what the Bible
\nmeans.<\/p>\n
How is it possible for a human being to know that he is inspired by an infinite being?
\nBut of one thing we may be certain: An inspired book should certainly excel all the
\nbooks produced by uninspired men. It should, above all, be true, filled with wis dom,
\nblossoming in beauty –perfect.<\/p>\n
Ministers wonder how I can be wicked enough to attack the Bible.<\/p>\n
I will tell them:<\/p>\n
This book, the Bible, has persecuted, even unto death, the wisest and the best. This
\nbook stayed and stopped the onward movement of the human race. This book
\npoisoned the fountains of learning and misdirected the energies of man.<\/p>\n
This book is the enemy of freedom, the support of slavery. This book sowed the seeds
\nof hatred in families and nations, fed the flames of war, and impoverished the world.
\nThis book is the breastwork of kings and tyrants — the enslaver of women and
\nchildren. This book has corrupted parliaments and courts. This book has made
\ncolleges and universities the teachers of error and the haters of science. This book has
\nfilled Christendom with hateful, cruel, ignorant and warring sects. This book taught
\nmen to kill their fellows for religion’s sake. This book funded the Inquisition, invented
\nthe instruments of torture, built the dungeons in which the good and loving
\nlanguished, forged the chains that rusted in their flesh, erected the scaffolds whereon
\nthey died. This book piled fagots about the feet of the just. This book drove reason
\nfrom the minds of millions and filled the asylums with the insane.<\/p>\n
This book has caused fathers and mothers to shed the blood of their babes. This book
\nwas the auction block on which the slave-mother stood when she was sold from her
\nchild. This book filled the sails of the slave-trader and made merchandise of human
\nflesh. This book lighted the fires that burned “witches” and “wizards.” This book
\nfilled the darkness with ghouls and ghosts, and the bodies of men and women with
\ndevils. This book polluted the souls of men with the infamous dogma of eternal pain.
\nThis book made credulity the greatest of virtues, and investigation the greatest of
\ncrimes. This book filled nations with hermits, monks and nuns — with the pious and
\nthe useless. This book placed the ignorant and unclean saint above the philosopher
\nand philanthropist. This book taught man to despise the joys of this life, that he might
\nbe happy in another –to waste this world for the sake of the next.<\/p>\n
I attack this book because it is the enemy of human liberty –the greatest obstruction
\nacross the highway of human progress.<\/p>\n
Let me ask the ministers one question: How can you be wicked enough to defend this
\nbook?<\/p>\n
XII
\nThe Real Bible.<\/p>\n
FOR thousands of years men have been writing the real Bible, and it is being written
\nfrom day to day, and it will never be finished while man has life. All the facts that we
\nknow, all the truly recorded events, all the discoveries and inventions, all the
\nwonderful machines whose wheels and levers seem to think, all the poems, crystals
\nfrom the brain, flowers from the heart, all the songs of love and joy, of smiles and
\ntears, the great dramas of Imagination’s world, the wondrous paintings, miracles of
\nform and color, of light and shade, the marvelous marbles that seem to live and
\nbreathe, the secrets told by rock and star, by dust and flower, by rain and snow, by
\nfrost and flame, by winding stream and desert sand, by mountain range and billowed
\nsea.<\/p>\n
All the wisdom that lengthens and ennobles life — all that avoids or cures disease, or
\nconquers pain — all just and perfect laws and rules that guide and shape our lives, all
\nthoughts that feed the flames of love, the music that transfigures, enraptures and
\nenthralls, the victories of heart and brain, the miracles that hands have wrought, the
\ndeft and cunning hands of those who worked for wife and child, the histories of noble
\ndeeds, of brave and useful men, of faithful loving wives, of quenchless mother-love,
\nof conflicts for the right, of sufferings for the truth, of all the best that all the men and
\nwomen of the world have said, and thought and done through all the years.<\/p>\n
These treasures of the heart and brain — these are the Sacred Scriptures of the human
\nrace.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
By Robert Green Ingersoll (1833-1899) Collected By Abu Ali 2008 The Truth About the Holy Bible (1894) SOMEBODY ought to tell the truth about the Bible. The preachers dare not, because they would be driven from their pulpits. Professors in colleges dare not, because they would lose their salaries. Politicians dare not. They would be … <\/p>\n