Of course, the critics were denounced from most of the pulpits, and the religious papers, edited generally by men who had failed as preachers, were filled with bitter denials and vicious attacks. The religious editors refused to be enlightened. They fought under the old flag. When dogmas became too absurd to be preached, they were taught in the Sunday schools; when worn out there, they were given to the missionaries; but the dear old religious weeklies, the Banners, the Covenants, the Evangelists, continued to feed their provincial subscribers with known mistakes and refuted lies.
There is another fact that should be taken into consideration. All religions are provincial. Mingled with them all and at the foundation of all are the egotism of ignorance, of isolation, the pride of race, and what is called patriotism. Every religion is a natural product--the result of conditions. When one tribe became acquainted with another, the ideas of both were somewhat modified. So when nations and races come into contact a change in thought, in opinion, is a necessary result.
A few years ago nations were strangers, and consequently hated each other"s inst.i.tutions and religions. Commerce has done a great work in destroying provincialism. To trade commodities is to exchange ideas.
So the press, the steamships, the railways, cables, and telegraphs have brought the nations together and enabled them to compare their prejudices, their religions, laws and customs.
Recently many scholars have been studying the religions of the world and have found them much the same. They have also found that there is nothing original in Christianity; that the legends, miracles, Christs, and conditions of salvation, the heavens, h.e.l.ls, angels, devils, and G.o.ds were the common property of the ancient world. They found that Christ was a new name for an old biography; that he was not a life, but a legend; not a man, but a myth.
People began to suspect that our religion had not been supernaturally revealed, while others, far older and substantially the same, had been naturally produced. They found it difficult to account for the fact that poor, ignorant savages had in the darkness of nature written so well that Jehovah thousands of years afterwards copied it and adopted it as his own. They thought it curious that G.o.d should be a plagiarist.
These scholars found that all the old religions had recognized the existence of devils, of evil spirits, who sought in countless ways to injure the children of men. In this respect they found that the sacred books of other nations were just the same as our Bible, as our New Testament.
Take the Devil from our religion and the entire fabric falls. No Devil, no fall of man. No Devil, no atonement. No Devil, no h.e.l.l.
The Devil is the keystone of the arch.
And yet for many years the belief in the existence of the Devil--of evil spirits--has been fading from the minds of intelligent people. This belief has now substantially vanished. The minister who now seriously talks about a personal Devil is regarded with a kind of pitying contempt.
The Devil has faded from his throne and the evil spirits have vanished from the air.
The man who has really given up a belief in the existence of the Devil cannot believe in the inspiration of the New Testament--in the divinity of Christ. If Christ taught anything, if he believed in anything, he taught a belief in the existence of the Devil..His princ.i.p.al business was casting out devils. He himself was taken possession of by the Devil and carried to the top of the temple.
Thousands and thousands of people have ceased to believe the account in the New Testament regarding devils, and yet continue to believe in the dogma of "inspiration" and the divinity of Christ.
In the brain of the average Christian, contradictions dwell in unity.
While a belief in the existence of the Devil has almost faded away, the belief in the existence of a personal G.o.d has been somewhat weakened.
The old belief that back of nature, back of all substance and force, was and is a personal G.o.d, an infinite intelligence who created and governs the world, began to be questioned. The scientists had shown the indestructibility of matter and force. Buchner"s great work had convinced most readers that matter and force could not have been created. They also became satisfied that matter cannot exist apart from force and that force cannot exist apart from matter.
They found, too, that thought is a form of force, and that consequently intelligence could not have existed before matter, because without matter, force in any form cannot and could not exist.
The creator of anything is utterly unthinkable.
A few years ago G.o.d was supposed to govern the world. He rewarded the people with sunshine, with prosperity and health, or he punished with drought and flood, with plague and storm. He not only attended to the affairs of nations, but he watched the actions of individuals. He sank ships, derailed trains, caused conflagrations, killed men and women with his lightnings, destroyed some with earthquakes, and tore the homes and bodies of thousands into fragments with his cyclones.
In spite of the church, in spite of the ministers, the people began to lose confidence in Providence. The right did not seem always to triumph.
Virtue was not always rewarded and vice was not always punished. The good failed; the vicious succeeded; the strong and cruel enslaved the weak; toil was paid with the lash; babes were sold from the b.r.e.a.s.t.s of mothers, and Providence seemed to be absolutely heartless.
In other words, people began to think that the G.o.d of the Christians and the G.o.d of nature were about the same, and that neither appeared to take any care of the human race.
The Deists of the last century scoffed at the Bible G.o.d. He was too cruel, too savage. At the same time they praised the G.o.d of nature. They laughed at the idea of inspiration and denied the supernatural origin of the Scriptures.
Now, if the Bible is not inspired, then it is a natural production, and nature, not G.o.d, should be held responsible for the Scriptures. Yet the Deists denied that G.o.d was the author and at the same time a.s.serted the perfection of nature.
This shows that even in the minds of Deists contradictions dwell in unity.
Against all these facts and forces, these theories and tendencies, the clergy fought and prayed. It is not claimed that they were consciously dishonest, but it is claimed that they were prejudiced--that they were incapable of examining the other side--that they were utterly dest.i.tute of the philosophic spirit. They were not searchers for the facts, but defenders of the creeds, and undoubtedly they were the product of conditions and surroundings, and acted as they must.
In spite of everything a few rays of light penetrated the orthodox mind.
Many ministers accepted some of the new facts, and began to mingle with Christian mistakes a few scientific truths. In many instances they excited the indignation of their congregations. Some were tried for heresy and driven from their pulpits, and some organized new churches and gathered about them a few people willing to listen to the sincere thoughts of an honest man.
The great body of the church, however, held to the creed--not quite believing it, but still insisting that it was true.
In private conversation they would apologize and admit that the old ideas were outgrown, but in public they were as orthodox as ever. In every church, however, there were many priests who accepted the new gospel; that is to say, welcomed the truth.
To-day it may truthfully be said that the Bible in the old sense is no longer regarded as the inspired word of G.o.d. Jehovah is no longer accepted or believed in as the creator of the universe. His place has been taken by the Unknown, the Unseen, the Invisible, the Incomprehensible Something, the Cosmic Dust, the First Cause, the Inconceivable, the Original Force, the Mystery. The G.o.d of the Bible, the gentleman who walked in the cool of the evening, who talked face to face with Moses, who revenged himself on unbelievers and who gave laws written with his finger on tables of stone, has abdicated. He has become a myth.
So, too, the New Testament has lost its authority. People reason about it now as they do about other books, and even orthodox ministers pick out the miracles that ought to be believed, and when anything is attributed to Christ not in accordance with their views, they take the liberty of explaining it away by saying "interpolation."
In other words, we have lived to see Science the standard instead of the Bible. We have lived to see the Bible tested by Science, and, what is more, we have lived to see reason the standard not only in religion, but in all the domain of science. Now all civilized scientists appeal to reason. They get their facts, and then reason from the foundation.
Now the theologian appeals to reason. Faith is no longer considered a foundation. The theologian has found that he must build upon the truth and that he must establish this truth by satisfying human reason.
This is where we are now.
What is to be the result? Is progress to stop? Are we to retrace our steps? Are we going back to superst.i.tion? Are we going to take authority for truth?
Let me prophesy.
In modern times we have slowly lost confidence in the supernatural and have slowly gained confidence in the natural. We have slowly lost confidence in G.o.ds and have slowly gained confidence in man. For the cure of disease, for the stopping of plague, we depend on the natural--on science. We have lost confidence in holy water and religious processions. We have found that prayers are never answered.
In my judgment, all belief in the supernatural will be driven from the human mind. All religions must pa.s.s away. The augurs, the soothsayers, the seers, the preachers, the astrologers and alchemists will all lie in the same cemetery and one epitaph will do for them all. In a little while all will have had their day. They were naturally produced and they will be naturally destroyed. Man at last will depend entirely upon himself--on the development of the brain--to the end that he may take advantage of the forces of nature--to the end that he may supply the wants of his body and feed the hunger of his mind.
In my judgment, teachers will take the place of preachers and the interpreters of nature will be the only priests.
POLITICAL MORALITY.
THE room of the House Committee on Elections was crowded this morning with committeemen and spectators to listen to an argument by Col. Robert G. Ingersoll in the contested election case of Strobach against Herbert, of the IId Alabama district. Colonel Ingersoll appeared for Strobach, the contestant. While most of his argument was devoted to the dry details of the testimony, he entered into some discussion of the general principles involved in contested election cases, and spoke with great eloquence and force.
The mere personal controversy, as between Herbert and Strobach, is not worth talking about. It is a question as to whether or not the republican system is a failure. Unless the will of the majority can be ascertained, and surely ascertained, through the medium of the ballot, the foundation of this Government rests upon nothing--the Government ceases to be. I would a thousand time rather a Democrat should come to Congress from this district, or from any district, than that a Republican should come who was not honestly elected. I would a thousand times rather that this country should honestly go to destruction than dishonestly and fraudulently go anywhere. We want it settled whether this form of government is or is not a failure. That is the real question, and it is the question at issue in every one of these cases.
Has Congress power and has Congress the sense to say to-day, that no man shall sit as a maker of laws for the people who has not been honestly elected? Whenever you admit a man to Congress and allow him to vote and make laws, you poison the source of justice--you poison the source of power; and the moment the people begin to think that many members of Congress are there through fraud, that moment they cease to have respect for the legislative department of this Government--that moment they cease to have respect for the sovereignty of the people represented by fraud.
Now, as I have said, I care nothing about the personal part of it, and, maybe you will not believe me, but I care nothing about the political part. The question is, Who has the right on his side? Who is honestly ent.i.tled to this seat? That is infinitely more important than any personal or party question. My doctrine is that a majority of the people must control--that we have in this country a king, that we have in this country a sovereign, just as truly as they can have in any other, and, as a matter of fact, a republic is the only country that does in truth have a sovereign, and that sovereign is the legally expressed will of the people. So that any man that puts in a fraudulent vote is a traitor to that sovereign; any man that knowingly counts an illegal vote is a traitor to that sovereign, and is not fit to be a citizen of the great Republic. Any man who fraudulently throws out a vote, knowing it to be a legal vote, tampers with the source of power, and is, in fact, false to our inst.i.tutions. Now, these are the questions to be decided, and I want them decided, not because this case happens to come from the South any more than if it came from the North. It is a matter that concerns the whole country. We must decide it. There must be a law on the subject. We have got to lay down a stringent rule that shall apply to these cases.
There should be--there must be--such a thing as political morality so far as voting is concerned.--New York Tribune, May 13, 1883.
A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.
* Printed from ma.n.u.script notes found among Colonel Ingersoll"s papers, evidently written in the early "80"s.
While much of the argument and criticism will be found embodied in his various lectures magazine articles and contributions to the press, it was thought too valuable in its present form to be left out of a complete edition of his works, on account of too much repet.i.tion. Undoubtedly it was the author"s intention to go through the Bible in this same manner and to publish in book form. "A few Reasons for doubting the Inspiration of the Bible."