{
  "schema": "tga.work.v1",
  "identifier": "dresden:vol-7:my-chicago-bible-class",
  "slug": "my-chicago-bible-class",
  "title": "My Chicago Bible Class",
  "subtitle": "A reply published in the Chicago Times, 1879.",
  "excerpt": "A Chicago Times article addressing each of the clergymen who, in turn, had taken offense at Ingersoll's earlier lectures on the Bible and its God.",
  "year": 1879,
  "volume": 7,
  "category": "Reply",
  "author": {
    "name": "Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "wikidata": "Q360326",
    "viaf": "44331023"
  },
  "isPartOf": {
    "title": "The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "edition": "Dresden Edition",
    "publisher": "C. P. Farrell",
    "year": 1900
  },
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/",
  "url": "https://thegreatagnostic.com/works/my-chicago-bible-class/",
  "wordCount": 2239,
  "body": "• Chicago Times, 1879.\n\nTo the Editor:—\n\nNOTHING is more gratifying than to see ideas that were received with\nscorn, flourishing in the sunshine of approval. Only a few weeks ago,\nI stated that the Bible was not inspired; that Moses was mistaken; that\nthe \"flood\" was a foolish myth; that the Tower of Babel existed only in\ncredulity; that God did not create the universe from nothing, that he\ndid not start the first woman with a rib; that he never upheld slavery;\nthat he was not a polygamist; that he did not kill people for making\nhair-oil; that he did not order his generals to kill the dimpled babes;\nthat he did not allow the roses of love and the violets of modesty to\nbe trodden under the brutal feet of lust; that the Hebrew language\nwas written without vowels; that the Bible was composed of many books,\nwritten by unknown men; that all translations differed from each other;\nand that this book had filled the world with agony and crime.\n\nAt that time I had not the remotest idea that the most learned clergymen\nin Chicago would substantially agree with me—in public. I have read\nthe replies of the Rev. Robert Collyer, Dr. Thomas, Rabbi Kohler, Rev.\nBrooke Herford, Prof. Swing and Dr. Ryder, and will now ask them a few\nquestions, answering them in their own words.\n\nFirst. Rev. Robert Collyer.\n\nQuestion. What is your opinion of the Bible? Answer. \"It is a splendid\nbook. It makes the noblest type of Catholics and the meanest bigots.\nThrough this book men give their hearts for good to God, or for evil to\nthe devil. The best argument for the intrinsic greatness of the book\nis that it can touch such wide extremes, and seem to maintain us in the\nmost unparalleled cruelty, as well as the most tender mercy; that it can\ninspire purity like that of the great saints, and afford arguments in\nfavor of polygamy. The Bible is the text book of ironclad Calvinism and\nsunny Universalism. It makes the Quaker quiet, and the Millerite crazy.\nIt inspired the Union soldier to live and grandly die for the right, and\nStonewall Jackson to live nobly, and die grandly for the wrong.\"\n\nQuestion. But, Mr. Collyer, do you really think that a book with as\nmany passages in favor of wrong as right, is inspired?\n\nAnswer. \"I look upon the Old Testament as a rotting tree. When it\nfalls it will fertilize a bank of violets.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you believe that God upheld slavery and polygamy? Do\nyou believe that he ordered the killing of babes and the violation of\nmaidens?\n\nAnswer. \"There is threefold inspiration in the Bible, the first,\npeerless and perfect, the word of God to man; _the second, simply and\npurely human, and then below this again, there is an inspiration born of\nan evil heart, ruthless and savage there and then as anything well can\nbe_. A threefold inspiration, of heaven first, then of the earth, and\nthen of hell, all in the same book, all sometimes in the same chapter,\nand then, besides, a great many things that need no inspiration.\"\n\nQuestion. Then after all you do not pretend that the Scriptures are\nreally inspired?\n\nAnswer. \"The Scriptures make no such claim for themselves as the\nchurch makes for them. They leave me free to say this is false, or this\nis true. The truth even within the Bible, dies and lives, makes on this\nside and loses on that.\"\n\nQuestion. What do you say to the last verse in the Bible, where a\ncurse is threatened to any man who takes from or adds to the book?\n\nAnswer. \"I have but one answer to this question, and it is: Let who\nwill have written this, I cannot for an instant believe that it was\nwritten by a divine inspiration. Such dogmas and threats as these are\nnot of God, but of man, and not of any man of a free spirit and heart\neager for the truth, but a narrow man who would cripple and confine the\nhuman soul in its quest after the whole truth of God, and back those who\nhave done the shameful things in the name of the most high.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you not regard such talk as \"slang\"?\n\n(Supposed) Answer. If an infidel had said that the writer of Revelation\nwas narrow and bigoted, I might have denounced his discourse as \"slang,\"\nbut I think that Unitarian ministers can do so with the greatest\npropriety.\n\nQuestion. Do you believe in the stories of the Bible, about Jael, and\nthe sun standing still, and the walls falling at the blowing of horns?\n\nAnswer. \"They may be legends, myths, poems, or what they will, but\nthey are not the word of God. So I say again, it was not the God and\nFather of us all, who inspired the woman to drive that nail crashing\nthrough the king's temple after she had given him that bowl of milk and\nbid him sleep in safety, but a very mean devil of hatred and revenge,\nthat I should hardly expect to find in a squaw on the plains. It was not\nthe ram's horns and the shouting before which the walls fell flat. If\nthey went down at all, it was through good solid pounding. And not for\nan instant did the steady sun stand still or let his planet stand still\nwhile barbarian fought barbarian. He kept just the time then he keeps\nnow. They might believe it who made the record. I do not. And since the\nwhole Christian world might believe it, still we do not who gather in\nthis church. A free and reasonable mind stands right in our way. Newton\nmight believe it as a Christian, and disbelieve it as a philosopher.\nWe stand then with the philosopher against the Christian, for we must\nbelieve what is true to us in the last test, and these things are not\ntrue.\"\n\nSecond. Rev. Dr. Thomas.\n\nQuestion. What is your opinion of the Old Testament?\n\nAnswer. \"My opinion is that it is not one book, but many—thirty-nine\nbooks bound up in one. The date and authorship of most of these books\nare wholly unknown. The Hebrews wrote without vowels, and without\ndividing the letters into syllables, words, or sentences. The books\nwere gathered up by Ezra. At that time only two of the Jewish tribes\nremained. All progress has ceased. In gathering up the sacred book,\ncopyists exercised great liberty in making changes and additions.\"\n\nQuestion. Yes, we know all that, but is the Old Testament inspired?\n\nAnswer. \"There maybe the inspiration of art, of poetry, or oratory;\nof patriotism—and there are such inspirations. There are moments when\ngreat truths and principles come to men. They seek the man, and not the\nman them.\"\n\nQuestion. Yes, we all admit that, but is the Bible inspired?\n\nAnswer. \"But still I know of no way to convince anyone of spirit, and\ninspiration, and God, only as his reason may take hold of these things.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you think the Old Testament true?\n\nAnswer. \"The story of Eden may be an allegory. The history of the\nchildren of Israel may have mistakes.\"\n\nQuestion. Must inspiration claim infallibility? Answer. \"It is a\nmistake to say that if you believe one part of the Bible you must\nbelieve all. Some of the thirty-nine books may be inspired, others not;\nor there may be degrees of inspiration.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you believe that God commanded the soldiers to kill the\nchildren and the married women, and save for themselves, the maidens, as\nrecorded in Numbers xxxi, 2,\n\nDo you believe that God upheld slavery?\n\nDo you believe that God upheld polygamy?\n\nAnswer. \"The Bible may be wrong in some statements. God and right\ncannot be wrong. We must not exalt the Bible above God. It may be that\nwe have claimed too much for the Bible, and thereby given not a little\noccasion for such men as Mr. Ingersoll to appear at the other extreme,\ndenying too much.\"\n\nQuestion. What then shall be done?\n\nAnswer. \"We must take a middle ground. It is not necessary to believe\nthat the bears devoured the forty-two children, nor that Jonah was\nswallowed by the whale.\"\n\nThird. Rev. Dr. Kohler.\n\nQuestion. What is your opinion about the Old Testament?\n\nAnswer. \"I will not make futile attempts of artificially interpreting\nthe letter of the Bible so as to make it reflect the philosophical,\nmoral and scientific views of our time. The Bible is a sacred record of\nhumanity's childhood.\"\n\nQuestion. Are you an orthodox Christian?\n\nAnswer. \"No. Orthodoxy, with its face turned backward to a ruined\ntemple or a dead Messiah, is fast becoming like Lot's wife, a pillar of\nsalt.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you really believe the Old Testament was inspired?\n\nAnswer. \"I greatly acknowledge our indebtedness to men like Voltaire\nand Thomas Paine, whose bold denial and cutting wit were so instrumental\nin bringing about this glorious era of freedom, so congenial and\nblissful, particularly to the long-abused Jewish race.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you believe in the inspiration of the Bible?\n\nAnswer. \"Of course there is a destructive axe needed to strike down\nthe old building in order to make room for the grander new. The divine\norigin claimed by the Hebrews for their national literature, was claimed\nby all nations for their old records and laws as preserved by the\npriesthood. As Moses, the Hebrew law-giver, is represented as having\nreceived the law from God on the holy mountain, so is Zoroaster the\nPersian, Manu the Hindoo, Minos the Cretan, Lycurgus the Spartan, and\nNuma the Roman.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you believe all the stories in the Bible?\n\nAnswer. \"All that can and must be said against them is that they have\nbeen too long retained around the arms and limbs of grown-up manhood, to\ncheck the spiritual progress of religion; that by Jewish ritualism and\nChristian dogmatism they became fetters unto the soul, turning the light\nof heaven into a misty haze to blind the eye, and even into a hell-fire\nof fanaticism to consume souls.\"\n\nQuestion. Is the Bible inspired?\n\nAnswer. \"True, the Bible is not free from errors, nor is any work of\nman and time. It abounds in childish views and offensive matter. I\ntrust that it will in a time not far off be presented for common use in\nfamilies, schools, synagogues and churches, in a refined shape, cleansed\nfrom all dross and chaff, and stumbling blocks in which the scoffer\ndelights to dwell.\"\n\nFourth. Rev. Mr. Herford.\n\nQuestion. Is the Bible true?\n\nAnswer. \"Ingersoll is very fond of saying 'The question is not, is\nthe Bible inspired, but is it true?' That sounds very plausible, but you\nknow as applied to any ancient book it is simply nonsense.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you think the stories in the Bible exaggerated?\n\nAnswer. \"I dare say the numbers are immensely exaggerated.\"\n\nQuestion. Do you think that God upheld polygamy?\n\nAnswer. \"The truth of which simply is, that four thousand years ago\npolygamy existed among the Jews, as everywhere else on earth then, and\neven their prophets did not come to the idea of its being wrong. _But\nwhat is there to be indignant_ about in that?\"\n\nQuestion. And so you really wonder why any man should be indignant\nat the idea that God upheld and sanctioned that beastliness called\npolygamy?\n\nAnswer. \"What is there to be indignant about in that?\"\n\nFifth. Prof. Swing.\n\nQuestion. What is your idea of the Bible?\n\nAnswer. \"I think it is a poem.\"\n\nSixth. Rev. Dr. Ryder.\n\nQuestion. And what is your idea of the sacred Scriptures?\n\nAnswer. \"Like other nations, the Hebrews had their patriotic,\ndescriptive, didactic and lyrical poems in the same varieties as other\nnations; but with them, unlike other nations, whatever may be the form\nof their poetry, it always possesses the characteristic of religion.\"\n\nQuestion. I suppose you fully appreciate the religious characteristics\nof the Song of Solomon.\n\nNo answer.\n\nQuestion. Does the Bible uphold polygamy?\n\nAnswer. \"The law of Moses did not forbid it, but contained many\nprovisions against its worst abuses, and such as were intended to\nrestrict it within narrow limits.\"\n\nQuestion. So you think God corrected some of the worst abuses of\npolygamy, but preserved the institution itself?\n\nI might question many others, but have concluded not to consider those\nas members of my Bible Class who deal in calumnies and epithets.\nFrom the so-called \"replies\" of such ministers, it appears that while\nChristianity changes the heart, it does not improve the manners, and\nthat one can get into heaven in the next world without having been a\ngentleman in this.\n\nIt is difficult for me to express the deep and thrilling satisfaction\nI have experienced in reading the admissions of the clergy of Chicago.\nSurely, the battle of intellectual liberty is almost won, when ministers\nadmit that the Bible is filled with ignorant and cruel mistakes;\nthat each man has the right to think for himself, and that it is not\nnecessary to believe the Scriptures in order to be saved. From the\nbottom of my heart I congratulate my pupils on the advance they have\nmade, and hope soon to meet them on the serene heights of perfect\nfreedom.\n\nRobert G. Ingersoll.\n\nWashington, D. C., May 7, 1879.\n"
}