{
  "schema": "tga.work.v1",
  "identifier": "dresden:vol-4:the-foundations-of-faith",
  "slug": "the-foundations-of-faith",
  "title": "The Foundations of Faith",
  "subtitle": "A systematic examination of the creed.",
  "excerpt": "A point-by-point examination of the stones on which Christian orthodoxy rests: the Old Testament, the New Testament, Jehovah, the Trinity, the theological Christ, belief, and inspiration.",
  "year": 1895,
  "volume": 4,
  "category": "Essay",
  "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/the-foundations-of-faith/",
  "wordCount": 9579,
  "body": "ONE of the foundation stones of our faith is the Old Testament. If\nthat book is not true, if its authors were unaided men, if it contains\nblunders and falsehoods, then that stone crumbles to dust.\n\nThe geologists demonstrated that the author of Genesis was mistaken as\nto the age of the world, and that the story of the universe having been\ncreated in six days, about six thousand years ago could not be true.\n\nThe theologians then took the ground that the \"days\" spoken of in\nGenesis were periods of time, epochs, six \"long whiles,\" and that the\nwork of creation might have been commenced millions of years ago.\n\nThe change of days into epochs was considered by the believers of the\nBible as a great triumph over the hosts of infidelity. The fact that\nJehovah had ordered the Jews to keep the Sabbath, giving as a reason\nthat he had made the world in six days and rested on the seventh, did\nnot interfere with the acceptance of the \"epoch\" theory.\n\nBut there is still another question. How long has man been upon the\nearth?\n\nAccording to the Bible, Adam was certainly the first man, and in his\ncase the epoch theory cannot change the account. The Bible gives the\nage at which Adam died, and gives the generations to the flood—then to\nAbraham and so on, and shows that from the creation of Adam to the birth\nof Christ it was about four thousand and four years.\n\nAccording to the sacred Scriptures man has been on this earth five\nthousand eight hundred and ninety-nine years and no more.\n\nIs this true?\n\nGeologists have divided a few years of the worlds history into periods,\nreaching from the azoic rocks to the soil of our time. With most of\nthese periods they associate certain forms of life, so that it is known\nthat the lowest forms of life belonged with the earliest periods, and\nthe higher with the more recent. It is also known that certain forms of\nlife existed in Europe many ages ago, and that many thousands of years\nago these forms disappeared.\n\nFor instance, it is well established that at one time there lived in\nEurope, and in the British Islands some of the most gigantic mammals,\nthe mammoth, the woolly-haired rhinoceros, the Irish elk, elephants and\nother forms that have in those countries become extinct. Geologists say\nthat many thousands of years have passed since these animals ceased to\ninhabit those countries.\n\nIt was during the Drift Period that these forms of life existed in\nEurope and England, and that must have been hundreds of thousands of\nyears ago.\n\nIn caves, once inhabited by men, have been found implements of flint and\nthe bones of these extinct animals. With the flint tools man had split\nthe bones of these beasts that he might secure the marrow for food.\n\nMany such caves and hundreds of such tools, and of such bones have been\nfound. And we now know that in the Drift Period man was the companion of\nthese extinct monsters.\n\nIt is therefore certain that many, many thousands of years before Adam\nlived, men, women and children inhabited the earth.\n\nIt is certain that the account in the Bible of the creation of the first\nman is a mistake. It is certain that the inspired writers knew nothing\nabout the origin of man.\n\nLet me give you another fact:\n\nThe Egyptians were astronomers. A few years ago representations of the\nstars were found on the walls of an old temple, and it was discovered\nby calculating backward that the stars did occupy the exact positions as\nrepresented about seven hundred and fifty years before Christ. Afterward\nanother representation of the stars was found, and by calculating in\nthe same way, it was found that the stars did occupy the exact positions\nrepresented about three thousand eight hundred years before Christ.\n\nAccording to the Bible the first man was created four thousand and four\nyears before Christ If this is true then Egypt was founded, its language\nformed, its arts cultivated, its astronomical discoveries made and\nrecorded about two hundred years after the creation of the first man.\n\nIn other words, Adam was two or three hundred years old when the\nEgyptian astronomers made these representations.\n\nNothing can be more absurd.\n\nAgain I say that the writers of the Bible were mistaken.\n\nHow do I know?\n\nAccording to that same Bible there was a flood some fifteen or sixteen\nhundred years after Adam was created that destroyed the entire human\nrace with the exception of eight persons, and according to the Bible\nthe Egyptians descended from one of the sons of Noah. How then did\nthe Egyptians represent the stars in the position they occupied twelve\nhundred years before the flood?\n\nNo one pretends that Egypt existed as a nation before the flood. Yet\nthe astronomical representations found, must have been made more than a\nthousand years before the world was drowned.\n\nThere is another mistake in the Bible.\n\nAccording to that book the sun was made after the earth was created.\n\nIs this true?\n\nDid the earth exist before the sun?\n\nThe men of science are believers in the exact opposite. They believe\nthat the earth is a child of the sun—that the earth, as well as the\nother planets belonging to our constellation, came from the sun.\n\nThe writers of the Bible were mistaken.\n\nThere is another point:\n\nAccording to the Bible, Jehovah made the world in six days, and the work\ndone each day is described. What did Jehovah do on the second day?\n\nThis is the record:\n\n\"And God said: Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and\nlet it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament and\ndivided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which\nwere above the firmament. And it was so, and God called the firmament\nheaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.\"\n\nThe writer of this believed in a solid firmament—the floor of Jehovah's\nhouse. He believed that the waters had been divided, and that the\nrain came from above the firmament. He did not understand the fact\nof evaporation—did not know that the rain came from the water on the\nearth.\n\nNow we know that there is no firmament, and we know that the waters are\nnot divided by a firmament. Consequently we know that, according to the\nBible, Jehovah did nothing on the second day. He must have rested on\nTuesday. This being so, we ought to have two Sundays a week.\n\nCan we rely on the historical parts of the Bible?\n\nSeventy souls went down into Egypt, and in two hundred and fifteen years\nincreased to three millions. They could not have doubled more than four\ntimes a century. Say nine times in two hundred and fifteen years.\n\nThis makes thirty-five thousand eight hundred and forty, (35,840.)\ninstead of three millions.\n\nCan we believe the accounts of the battles?\n\nTake one instance:\n\nJereboam had an army of eight hundred thousand men, Abijah of four\nhundred thousand. They fought. The Lord was on Abijah's side, and he\nkilled five hundred thousand of Jereboam's men.\n\nAll these soldiers were Jews—all lived in Palestine, a poor miserable\nlittle country about one-quarter as large as the State of New York. Yet\none million two hundred thousand soldiers were put in the field. This\nrequired a population in the country of ten or twelve millions. Of\ncourse this is absurd. Palestine in its palmiest days could not have\nsupported two millions of people.\n\nThe soil is poor.\n\nIf the Bible is inspired, is it true?\n\nWe are told by this inspired book of the gold and silver collected\nby King David for the temple—the temple afterward completed by the\nvirtuous Solomon.\n\nAccording to the blessed Bible, David collected about two thousand\nmillion dollars in silver, and five thousand million dollars in gold,\nmaking a total of seven thousand million dollars.\n\nIs this true?\n\nThere is in the bank of France at the present time (1895) nearly six\nhundred million dollars, and so far as we know, it is the greatest\namount that was ever gathered together. All the gold now known, coined\nand in bullion, does not amount to much more than the sum collected by\nDavid.\n\nSeven thousand millions. Where did David get this gold? The Jews had\nno commerce. They owned no ships. They had no great factories, they\nproduced nothing for other countries. There were no gold or silver mines\nin Palestine. Where then was this gold, this silver found? I will\ntell you: In the imagination of a writer who had more patriotism than\nintelligence, and who wrote, not for the sake of truth, but for the\nglory of the Jews.\n\nIs it possible that David collected nearly eight thousand tons of\ngold—that he by economy got together about sixty thousand tons of\nsilver, making a total of gold and silver of sixty-eight thousand tons?\n\nThe average freight car carries about fifteen tons—David's gold and\nsilver would load about four thousand five hundred and thirty-three\ncars, making a train about thirty-two miles in length. And all this for\nthe temple at Jerusalem, a building ninety feet long and forty-five feet\nhigh and thirty wide, to which was attached a porch thirty feet wide,\nninety feet long and one hundred and eighty feet high.\n\nProbably the architect was inspired.\n\nIs there a sensible man in the world who believes that David collected\nseven thousand million dollars worth of gold or silver?\n\nThere is hardly five thousand million dollars of gold now used as\nmoney in the whole world. Think of the millions taken from the mines of\nCalifornia, Australia and Africa during the present century and yet the\ntotal scarcely exceeds the amount collected by King David more than\na thousand years before the birth of Christ. Evidently the inspired\nhistorian made a mistake.\n\nIt required a little imagination and a few ciphers to change seven\nmillion dollars or seven hundred thousand dollars into seven thousand\nmillion dollars. Drop four ciphers and the story becomes fairly\nreasonable.\n\nThe Old Testament must be thrown aside. It is no longer a foundation. It\nhas crumbled.\n\nII. The New Testament\n\nBUT we have the New Testament, the sequel of the Old, in which\nChristians find the fulfillment of prophecies made by inspired Jews.\n\nThe New Testament vouches for the truth, the inspiration, of the Old,\nand if the old is false, the New cannot be true.\n\nIn the New Testament we find all that we know about the life and\nteachings of Jesus Christ.\n\nIt is claimed that the writers were divinely inspired, and that all they\nwrote is true.\n\nLet us see if these writers agree.\n\nCertainly there should be no difference about the birth of Christ.\nFrom the Christian's point of view, nothing could have been of greater\nimportance than that event.\n\nMatthew says: \"Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the\ndays of Herod the King, behold there came wise men from the east to\nJerusalem.\n\n\"Saying, where is he that is born king of the Jews? for we have seen his\nstar in the east and are come to worship him.\"\n\nMatthew does not tell us who these wise men were, from what country they\ncame, to what race they belonged. He did not even know their names.\n\nWe are also informed that when Herod heard these things he was troubled\nand all Jerusalem with him; that he gathered the chief priests and asked\nof them where Christ should be born and they told him that he was to be\nborn in Bethlehem.\n\nThen Herod called the wise men and asked them when the star appeared,\nand told them to go to Bethlehem and report to him.\n\nWhen they left Herod, the star again appeared and went before them until\nit stood over the place where the child was.\n\nWhen they came to the child they worshiped him,—gave him gifts, and\nbeing warned by God in a dream, they went back to their own country\nwithout calling on Herod.\n\nThen the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and told him to\ntake Mary and the child into Egypt for fear of Herod.\n\nSo Joseph took Mary and the child to Egypt and remained there until the\ndeath of Herod.\n\nThen Herod, finding that he was mocked by the wise men, \"sent forth\nand slew all the children that were in Bethlehem and in all the coasts\nthereof from two years old and under.\"\n\nAfter the death of Herod an angel again appeared in a dream to Joseph\nand told him to take mother and child and go back to Palestine.\n\nSo he went back and dwelt in Nazareth.\n\nIs this story true? Must we believe in the star and the wise men? Who\nwere these wise men? From what country did they come? What interest had\nthey in the birth of the King of the Jews? What became of them and their\nstar?\n\nOf course I know that the Holy Catholic Church has in her keeping the\nthree skulls that belonged to these wise men, but I do not know where\nthe church obtained these relics, nor exactly how their genuineness has\nbeen established.\n\nMust we believe that Herod murdered the babes of Bethlehem?\n\nIs it not wonderful that the enemies of Herod did not charge him with\nthis horror? Is it not marvelous that Mark and Luke and John forgot to\nmention this most heartless of massacres?\n\nLuke also gives an account of the birth of Christ. He says that there\nwent out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be\ntaxed; that this was when Cyrenius was governor of Syria; that in\naccordance with this decree, Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem to be\ntaxed; that at that place Christ was born and laid in a manger. He also\nsays that shepherds, in the neighborhood, were told of the birth by\nan angel, with whom was a multitude of the heavenly host; that these\nshepherds visited Mary and the child, and told others what they had seen\nand heard.\n\nHe tells us that after eight days the child was named, Jesus; that forty\ndays after his birth he was taken by Joseph and Mary to Jerusalem,\nand that after they had performed all things according to the law they\nreturned to Nazareth. Luke also says that the child grew and waxed\nstrong in spirit, and that his parents went every year to Jerusalem.\n\nDo the accounts in Matthew and Luke agree? Can both accounts be true?\n\nLuke never heard of the star, and Matthew knew nothing of the heavenly\nhost. Luke never heard of the wise men, nor Matthew of the shepherds.\nLuke knew nothing of the hatred of Herod, the murder of the babes or\nthe flight into Egypt. According to Matthew, Joseph, warned by an angel,\ntook Mary and the child and fled into Egypt. According to Luke they all\nwent to Jerusalem, and from there back to Nazareth.\n\nBoth of these accounts cannot be true. Will some Christian scholar tell\nus which to believe?\n\nWhen was Christ born?\n\nLuke says that it took place when Cyrenius was governor. Here is another\nmistake. Cyrenius was not appointed governor until after the death of\nHerod, and the taxing could not have taken place until ten years after\nthe alleged birth of Christ.\n\nAccording to Luke, Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth, and for the\npurpose of getting them to Bethlehem, so that the child could be born\nin the right place, the taxing under Cyrenius was used, but the writer,\nbeing \"inspired\" made a mistake of about ten years as to the time of the\ntaxing and of the birth.\n\nMatthew says nothing about the date of the birth, except that he was\nborn when Herod was king. It is now known that Herod had been dead ten\nyears before the taxing under Cyrenius. So, if Luke tells the truth,\nJoseph, being warned by an angel, fled from the hatred of Herod ten\nyears after Herod was dead. If Matthew and Luke are both right Christ\nwas taken to Egypt ten years before he was born, and Herod killed the\nbabes ten years after he was dead.\n\nWill some Christian scholar have the goodness to harmonize these\n\"inspired\" accounts?\n\nThere is another thing.\n\nMatthew and Luke both try to show that Christ was of the blood of David,\nthat he was a descendant of that virtuous king.\n\nAs both of these writers were inspired and as both received their\ninformation from God, they ought to agree.\n\nAccording to Matthew there was between David and Jesus twenty-seven\ngenerations, and he gives all the names.\n\nAccording to Luke there were between David and Jesus forty-two\ngenerations, and he gives all the names.\n\nIn these genealogies—both inspired—there is a difference between David\nand Jesus, a difference of some fourteen or fifteen generations.\n\nBesides, the names of all the ancestors are different, with two\nexceptions.\n\nMatthew says that Joseph's father was Jacob. Luke says that Heli was\nJoseph's father.\n\nBoth of these genealogies cannot be true, and the probability is that\nboth are false.\n\nThere is not in all the pulpits ingenuity enough to harmonize these\nignorant and stupid contradictions.\n\nThere are many curious mistakes in the words attributed to Christ.\n\nWe are told in Matthew, chapter xxiii, verse 35, that Christ said:\n\n\"That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth\nfrom the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, son of\nBarachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.\"\n\nIt is certain that these words were not spoken by Christ. He could not\nby any possibility have known that the blood of Zacharias had been shed.\nAs a matter of fact, Zacharias was killed by the Jews, during the seige\nof Jerusalem by Titus, and this seige took place seventy-one years after\nthe birth of Christ, thirty-eight years after he was dead.\n\nThere is still another mistake.\n\nZacharias was not the son of Barachias—no such\n\nZacharias was killed. The Zacharias that was slain was the son of\nBaruch.\n\nBut we must not expect the \"inspired\" to be accurate.\n\nMatthew says that at the time of the crucifixion—\"the graves were\nopened and that many bodies of the saints which slept arose and came out\nof their graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city\nand appeared unto many.\"\n\nAccording to this the graves were opened at the time of the crucifixion,\nbut the dead did not arise and come out until after the resurrection of\nChrist.\n\nThey were polite enough to sit in their open graves and wait for Christ\nto rise first.\n\nTo whom did these saints appear? What became of them? Did they slip back\ninto their graves and commit suicide?\n\nIs it not wonderful that Mark, Luke and John never heard of these\nsaints?\n\nWhat kind of saints were they? Certainly they were not Christian saints.\n\nSo, the inspired writers do not agree in regard to Judas.\n\nCertainly the inspired writers ought to have known what happened to\nJudas, the betrayer. Matthew being duly \"inspired\" says that when Judas\nsaw that Jesus had been condemned, he repented and took back the money\nto the chief priests and elders, saying that he had sinned in betraying\nthe innocent blood. They said to him: \"What is that to us? See thou to\nthat.\" Then Judas threw down the pieces of silver and went and hanged\nhimself.\n\nThe chief priests then took the pieces of silver and bought the potter's\nfield to bury strangers in, and it is called the field of blood.\n\nWe are told in Acts of the apostles that Peter stood up in the midst of\nthe disciples and said: \"Now this man, (Judas) purchased a field with\nthe reward of iniquity—and falling headlong he burst asunder and all\nhis bowels gushed out—that field is called the field of blood.\"\n\nMatthew says Judas repented and gave back the money.\n\nPeter says that he bought a field with the money.\n\nMatthew says that Judas hanged himself. Peter says that he fell down and\nburst asunder. Which of these accounts is true?\n\nBesides, it is hard to see why Christians hate, loathe and despise\nJudas. According to their scheme of salvation, it was absolutely\nnecessary that Christ should be killed—necessary that he should be\nbetrayed, and had it not been for Judas, all the world, including\nChrist's mother, and the part of Christ that was human, would have gone\nto hell.\n\nYet, according to the New Testament, Christ did not know that one of his\ndisciples was to betray him.\n\nJesus, when on his way to Jerusalem, for the last time, said, speaking\nto the twelve disciples, Judas being present, that they, the disciples\nshould thereafter sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of\nIsrael.\n\nYet, more than a year before this journey, John says that Christ said,\nspeaking to the twelve disciples: \"Have not I chosen you twelve, and one\nof you is a devil.\" And John adds: \"He spake of Judas Iscariot, for it\nwas he that should betray him.\"\n\nWhy did Christ a year afterward, tell Judas that he should sit on a\nthrone and judge one of the tribes of Israel?\n\nThere is still another trouble.\n\nPaul says that Jesus after his resurrection appeared to the twelve\ndisciples. According to Paul, Jesus appeared to Judas with the rest.\n\nCertainly Paul had not heard the story of the betrayal.\n\nWhy did Christ select Judas as one of his disciples, knowing that he\nwould betray him? Did he desire to be betrayed? Was it his intention to\nbe put to death?\n\nWhy did he fail to defend himself before Pilate?\n\nAccording to the accounts, Pilate wanted to save him. Did Christ wish to\nbe convicted?\n\nThe Christians are compelled to say that Christ intended to be\nsacrificed—that he selected Judas with that end in view, and that he\nrefused to defend himself because he desired to be crucified. All this\nis in accordance with the horrible idea that without the shedding of\nblood there is no remission of sin.\n\nIII. Jehovah.\n\nGOD the Father.\n\nThe Jehovah of the Old Testament is the God of the Christians.\n\nHe it was who created the Universe, who made all substance, all force,\nall life, from nothing. He it is who has governed and still governs the\nworld. He has established and destroyed empires and kingdoms, despotisms\nand republics. He has enslaved and liberated the sons of men. He has\ncaused the sun to rise on the good and on the evil, and his rain to fall\non the just and the unjust.\n\nThis shows his goodness.\n\nHe has caused his volcanoes to devour the good and the bad, his cyclones\nto wreck and rend the generous and the cruel, his floods to drown the\nloving and the hateful, his lightning to kill the virtuous and the\nvicious, his famines to starve the innocent and criminal and his plagues\nto destroy the wise and good, the ignorant and wicked. He has allowed\nhis enemies to imprison, to torture and to kill his friends. He has\npermitted blasphemers to flay his worshipers alive, to dislocate their\njoints upon racks, and to burn them at the stake. He has allowed men to\nenslave their brothers and to sell babes from the breasts of mothers.\n\nThis shows his impartiality.\n\nThe pious negro who commenced his prayer: \"O thou great and unscrupulous\nGod,\" was nearer right than he knew.\n\nMinisters ask: Is it possible for God to forgive man?\n\nAnd when I think of what has been suffered—of the centuries of agony\nand tears, I ask: Is it possible for man to forgive God?\n\nHow do Christians prove the existence of their God? Is it possible to\nthink of an infinite being? Does the word God correspond with any image\nin the mind? Does the word God stand for what we know or for what we do\nnot know?\n\nIs not this unthinkable God a guess, an inference?\n\nCan we think of a being without form, without body, without parts,\nwithout passions? Why should we speak of a being without body as of the\nmasculine gender?\n\nWhy should the Bible speak of this God as a man?—of his walking in the\ngarden in the cool of the evening—of his talking, hearing and smelling?\nIf he has no passions why is he spoken of as jealous, revengeful, angry,\npleased and loving?\n\nIn the Bible God is spoken of as a person in the form of man, journeying\nfrom place to place, as having a home and occupying a throne. These\nideas have been abandoned, and now the Christian's God is the infinite,\nthe incomprehensible, the formless, bodiless and passionless.\n\nOf the existence of such a being there can be, in the nature of things,\nno evidence.\n\nConfronted with the universe, with fields of space sown thick with\nstars, with all there is of life, the wise man, being asked the origin\nand destiny of all, replies: \"I do not know. These questions are beyond\nthe powers of my mind.\" The wise man is thoughtful and modest. He clings\nto facts. Beyond his intellectual horizon he does not pretend to see.\nHe does not mistake hope for evidence or desire for demonstration. He is\nhonest. He neither deceives himself nor others.\n\nThe theologian arrives at the unthinkable, the inconceivable, and\nhe calls this God. The scientist arrives at the unthinkable, the\ninconceivable, and calls it the Unknown.\n\nThe theologian insists that his inconceivable governs the world, that\nit, or he, or they, can be influenced by prayers and ceremonies, that\nit, or he, or they, punishes and rewards, that it, or he, or they, has\npriests and temples.\n\nThe scientist insist that the Unknown is not changed so far as he knows\nby prayers of people or priests. He admits that he does not know whether\nthe Unknown is good or bad—whether he, or it, wants or whether he, or\nit, is worthy of worship. He does not say that the Unknown is God, that\nit created substance and force, life and thought. He simply says that of\nthe Unknown he knows nothing.\n\nWhy should Christians insist that a God of infinite wisdom, goodness and\npower governs the world?\n\nWhy did he allow millions of his children to be enslaved? Why did\nhe allow millions of mothers to be robbed of their babes? Why has he\nallowed injustice to triumph? Why has he permitted the innocent to be\nimprisoned and the good to be burned? Why has he withheld his rain\nand starved millions of the children of men? Why has he allowed the\nvolcanoes to destroy, the earthquakes to devour, and the tempest to\nwreck and rend?\n\nIV. The Trinity\n\nTHE New Testament informs us that Christ was the son of Joseph and the\nson of God, and that Mary was his mother.\n\nHow is it established that Christ was the son of God?\n\nIt is said that Joseph was told so in a dream by an angel.\n\nBut Joseph wrote nothing on that subject—said nothing so far as we\nknow. Mary wrote nothing, said nothing. The angel that appeared to\nJoseph or that informed Joseph said nothing to anybody else. Neither has\nthe Holy Ghost, the supposed father, ever said or written one word.\nWe have received no information from the parties who could have known\nanything on the subject. We get all our facts from those who could not\nhave known.\n\nHow is it possible to prove that the Holy Ghost was the father of\nChrist?\n\nWho knows that such a being as the Holy Ghost ever existed?\n\nHow was it possible for Mary to know anything about the Holy Ghost?\n\nHow could Joseph know that he had been visited by an angel in a dream?\n\nCould he know that the visitor was an angel? It all occurred in a dream\nand poor Joseph was asleep. What is the testimony of one who was asleep\nworth?\n\nAll the evidence we have is that somebody who wrote part of the New\nTestament says that the Holy Ghost was the father of Christ, and that\nsomebody who wrote another part of the New Testament says that Joseph\nwas the father of Christ.\n\nMatthew and Luke give the genealogy and both show that Christ was the\nson of Joseph.\n\nThe \"Incarnation\" has to be believed without evidence. There is no way\nin which it can be established. It is beyond the reach and realm of\nreason. It defies observation and is independent of experience.\n\nIt is claimed not only that Christ was the Son of God, but that he was,\nand is, God.\n\nWas he God before he was born? Was the body of Mary the dwelling place\nof God?\n\nWhat evidence have we that Christ was God?\n\nSomebody has said that Christ claimed that God was his father and that\nhe and his father were one. We do not know who this somebody was and do\nnot know from whom he received his information.\n\nSomebody who was \"inspired\" has said that Christ was of the blood of\nDavid through his father Joseph.\n\nThis is all the evidence we have.\n\nCan we believe that God, the creator of the Universe, learned the trade\nof a carpenter in Palestine, that he gathered a few disciples about\nhim, and after teaching for about three years, suffered himself to be\ncrucified by a few ignorant and pious Jews?\n\nChrist, according to the faith, is the second person in the Trinity, the\nFather being the first and the Holy Ghost the third. Each of these three\npersons is God. Christ is his own father and his own son. The Holy Ghost\nis neither father nor son, but both. The son was begotten by the father,\nbut existed before he was begotten—just the same before as after.\nChrist is just as old as his father, and the father is just as young as\nhis son. The Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father and Son, but was equal\nto the Father and Son before he proceeded, that is to say, before he\nexisted, but he is of the same age of the other two.\n\nSo, it is declared that the Father is God, and the Son God and the Holy\nGhost God, and that these three Gods make one God.\n\nAccording to the celestial multiplication table, once one is three, and\nthree times one is one, and according to heavenly subtraction if we take\ntwo from three, three are left. The addition is equally peculiar, if\nwe add two to one we have but one. Each one is equal to himself and the\nother two. Nothing ever was, nothing ever can be more perfectly idiotic\nand absurd than the dogma of the Trinity.\n\nHow is it possible to prove the existence of the Trinity?\n\nIs it possible for a human being, who has been born but once, to\ncomprehend, or to imagine the existence of three beings, each of whom is\nequal to the three?\n\nThink of one of these beings as the father of one, and think of that one\nas half human and all God, and think of the third as having proceeded\nfrom the other two, and then think of all three as one. Think that after\nthe father begot the son, the father was still alone, and after the\nHoly Ghost proceeded from the father and the son, the father was still\nalone—because there never was and never will be but one God.\n\nAt this point, absurdity having reached its limit, nothing more can be\nsaid except: \"Let us pray.\"\n\nV. The Theological Christ\n\nIN the New Testament we find the teachings and sayings of Christ. If\nwe say that the book is inspired, then we must admit that Christ really\nsaid all the things attributed to him by the various writers. If the\nbook is inspired we must accept it all. We have no right to reject the\ncontradictory and absurd and accept the reasonable and good. We must\ntake it all just as it is.\n\nMy own observation has led me to believe that men are generally\nconsistent in their theories and inconsistent in their lives.\n\nSo, I think that Christ in his utterances was true to his theory, to his\nphilosophy.\n\nIf I find in the Testament sayings of a contradictory character, I\nconclude that some of those sayings were never uttered by him. The\nsayings that are, in my judgment, in accordance with what I believe to\nhave been his philosophy, I accept, and the others I throw away.\n\nThere are some of his sayings which show him to have been a devout Jew,\nothers that he wished to destroy Judaism, others showing that he held\nall people except the Jews in contempt and that he wished to save no\nothers, others showing that he wished to convert the world, still others\nshowing that he was forgiving, self-denying and loving, others that he\nwas revengeful and malicious, others, that he was an ascetic, holding\nall human ties in utter contempt.\n\nThe following passages show that Christ was a devout Jew.\n\n\"Swear not, neither by heaven, for it is God's throne, nor by the earth\nfor it is his footstool, neither by Jerusalem for it is his holy city.\"\n\n\"Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets, I am\nnot come to destroy, but to fulfill.\" \"For after all these things,\n(clothing, food and drink) do the Gentiles seek.\"\n\nSo, when he cured a leper, he said: \"Go thy way, show thyself unto the\npriest and offer the gift that Moses commanded.\"\n\nJesus sent his disciples forth saying: \"Go not into the way of the\nGentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not, but go\nrather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.\"\n\nA woman came out of Canaan and cried to Jesus: \"Have mercy on me, my\ndaughter is sorely vexed with a devil\"—but he would not answer. Then\nthe disciples asked him to send her away, and he said: \"I am not sent\nbut unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.\"\n\nThen the woman worshiped him and said: \"Lord help me.\" But he answered\nand said: \"It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it unto\ndogs.\" Yet for her faith he cured her child.\n\nSo, when the young man asked him what he must do to be saved, he said:\n\"Keep the commandments.\"\n\nChrist said: \"The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat, all\ntherefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do.\"\n\n\"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the\nlaw to fail.\"\n\nChrist went into the temple and cast out them that sold and bought\nthere, and said: \"It is written, my house is the house of prayer: but ye\nhave made it a den of thieves.\"\n\n\"We know what we worship for salvation is of the Jews.\"\n\nCertainly all these passages were written by persons who regarded Christ\nas the Messiah.\n\nMany of the sayings attributed to Christ show that he was an ascetic,\nthat he cared nothing for kindred, nothing for father and mother,\nnothing for brothers or sisters, and nothing for the pleasures of life.\n\nChrist said to a man: \"Follow me.\" The man said: \"Suffer me first to go\nand bury my father.\" Christ answered: \"Let the dead bury their dead.\"\nAnother said: \"I will follow thee, but first let me go bid them farewell\nwhich are at home.\"\n\nJesus said: \"No man having put his hand to the plough, and looking back\nis fit for the kingdom of God. If thine right eye offend thee pluck it\nout. If thy right hand offend thee cut it off.\"\n\nOne said unto him: \"Behold thy mother and thy brethren stand without,\ndesiring to speak with thee.\" And he answered: \"Who is my mother,\nand who are my brethren?\" Then he stretched forth his hand toward his\ndisciples and said: \"Behold my mother and my brethren.\"\n\n\"And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren or sisters, or\nfather or mother, or wife or children, or lands for my name's sake shall\nreceive an hundred fold and shall inherit everlasting life.\"\n\n\"He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and\nhe that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.\"\n\nChrist it seems had a philosophy.\n\nHe believed that God was a loving father, that he would take care of his\nchildren, that they need do nothing except to rely implicitly on God.\n\n\"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.\"\n\n\"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate\nyou and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.\"\n\n\"Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat or what ye shall\ndrink, nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on.... For your heavenly\nFather knoweth that ye have need of all these things.\"\n\n\"Ask and it shall be given you. Whatsoever ye would that men should do\nto you, do ye even so to them. If ye forgive men their trespasses your\nheavenly Father will also forgive you. The very hairs of your head are\nall numbered.\"\n\nChrist seemed to rely absolutely on the protection of God until the\ndarkness of death gathered about him, and then he cried: \"My God! my\nGod! why hast thou forsaken me?\"\n\nWhile there are many passages in the New Testament showing Christ to\nhave been forgiving and tender, there are many others, showing that he\nwas exactly the opposite.\n\nWhat must have been the spirit of one who said: \"I am come to send fire\non the earth? Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell\nyou, nay, but rather division. For from henceforth there shall be five\nin one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The\nfather shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father,\nthe mother against the daughter and the daughter against the mother,\nthe mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law\nagainst her mother-in-law.\"\n\n\"If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife, and\nchildren and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot\nbe my disciple.\"\n\n\"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them,\nbring hither and slay them before me.\"\n\nThis passage built dungeons and lighted fagots.\n\n\"Depart ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his\nangels.\"\n\n\"I came not to bring peace but a sword.\"\n\nAll these sayings could not have been uttered by the same person. They\nare inconsistent with each other. Love does not speak the words of\nhatred. The real philanthropist does not despise all nations but his\nown. The teacher of universal forgiveness cannot believe in eternal\ntorture.\n\nFrom the interpolations, legends, accretions, mistakes and falsehoods\nin the New Testament is it possible to free the actual man? Clad in mist\nand myth, hidden by the draperies of gods, deformed, indistinct as\nfaces in clouds, is it possible to find and recognize the features, the\nnatural face of the actual Christ?\n\nFor many centuries our fathers closed their eyes to the contradictions\nand inconsistencies of the Testament and in spite of their reason\nharmonized the interpolations and mistakes.\n\nThis is no longer possible. The contradictions are too many, too\nglaring. There are contradictions of fact not only, but of philosophy,\nof theory.\n\nThe accounts of the trial, the crucifixion, and ascension of Christ do\nnot agree. They are full of mistakes and contradictions.\n\nAccording to one account Christ ascended the day of, or the day after\nhis resurrection. According to another he remained forty days after\nrising from the dead. According to one account, he was seen after his\nresurrection only by a few women and his disciples. According to another\nhe was seen by the women, by his disciples on several occasions and by\nhundreds of others.\n\nAccording to Matthew, Luke and Mark, Christ remained for the most part\nin the country, seldom going to Jerusalem. According to John he remained\nmostly in Jerusalem, going occasionally into the country, and then\ngenerally to avoid his enemies.\n\nAccording to Matthew, Mark and Luke, Christ taught that if you would\nforgive others God would forgive you. According to John, Christ said\nthat the only way to get to heaven was to believe on him and be born\nagain.\n\nThese contradictions are gross and palpable and demonstrate that the\nNew Testament is not inspired, and that many of its statements must be\nfalse.\n\nIf we wish to save the character of Christ, many of the passages must be\nthrown away.\n\nWe must discard the miracles or admit that he was insane or an impostor.\nWe must discard the passages that breathe the spirit of hatred and\nrevenge, or admit that he was malevolent.\n\nIf Matthew was mistaken about the genealogy of Christ, about the wise\nmen, the star, the flight into Egypt and the massacre of the babes by\nHerod,—then he may have been mistaken in many passages that he put in\nthe mouth of Christ.\n\nThe same may be said in regard to Mark, Luke and John.\n\nThe church must admit that the writers of the New Testament were\nuninspired men—that they made many mistakes, that they accepted\nimpossible legends as historical facts, that they were ignorant and\nsuperstitious, that they put malevolent, stupid, insane and unworthy\nwords in the mouth of Christ, described him as the worker of impossible\nmiracles and in many ways stained and belittled his character.\n\nThe best that can be said about Christ is that nearly nineteen centuries\nago he was born in the land of Palestine in a country without wealth,\nwithout commerce, in the midst of a people who knew nothing of the\ngreater world—a people enslaved, crushed by the mighty power of Rome.\nThat this babe, this child of poverty and want grew to manhood without\neducation, knowing nothing of art, or science, and at about the age of\nthirty began wandering about the hills and hamlets of his native land,\ndiscussing with priests, talking with the poor and sorrowful, writing\nnothing, but leaving his words in the memory or forgetfulness of those\nto whom he spoke.\n\nThat he attacked the religion of his time because it was cruel. That\nthis excited the hatred of those in power, and that Christ was arrested,\ntried and crucified.\n\nFor many centuries this great Peasant of Palestine has been worshiped as\nGod.\n\nMillions and millions have given their lives to his service. The wealth\nof the world was lavished on his shrines. His name carried consolation\nto the diseased and dying. His name dispelled the darkness of death, and\nfilled the dungeon with light. His name gave courage to the martyr,\nand in the midst of fire, with shriveling lips the sufferer uttered\nit again, and again. The outcasts, the deserted, the fallen, felt that\nChrist was their friend, felt that he knew their sorrows and pitied\ntheir sufferings.\n\nThe poor mother, holding her dead babe in her arms, lovingly whispered\nhis name. His gospel has been carried by millions to all parts of the\nglobe, and his story has been told by the self-denying and faithful to\ncountless thousands of the sons of men. In his name have been preached\ncharity,—forgiveness and love.\n\nHe it was, who according to the faith, brought immortality to light, and\nmany millions have entered the valley of the shadow with their hands in\nhis.\n\nAll this is true, and if it were all, how beautiful, how touching, how\nglorious it would be. But it is not all. There is another side.\n\nIn his name millions and millions of men and women have been imprisoned,\ntortured and killed. In his name millions and millions have been\nenslaved. In his name the thinkers, the investigators, have been branded\nas criminals, and his followers have shed the blood of the wisest and\nbest. In his name the progress of many nations was stayed for a thousand\nyears. In his gospel was found the dogma of eternal pain, and his words\nadded an infinite horror to death. His gospel filled the world with\nhatred and revenge; made intellectual honesty a crime; made happiness\nhere the road to hell, denounced love as base and bestial, canonized\ncredulity, crowned bigotry and destroyed the liberty of man.\n\nIt would have been far better had the New Testament never been\nwritten—far better had the theological Christ never lived. Had the\nwriters of the Testament been regarded as uninspired, had Christ been\nthought of only as a man, had the good been accepted and the absurd, the\nimpossible, and the revengeful thrown away, mankind would have escaped\nthe wars, the tortures, the scaffolds, the dungeons, the agony and\ntears, the crimes and sorrows of a thousand years.\n\nVI. The \"scheme\"\n\nWE have also the scheme of redemption.\n\nAccording to this \"scheme,\" by the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden\nof Eden, human nature became evil, corrupt and depraved. It became\nimpossible for human beings to keep, in all things, the law of God.\nIn spite of this, God allowed the people to live and multiply for some\nfifteen hundred years, and then on account of their wickedness drowned\nthem all with the exception of eight persons.\n\nThe nature of these eight persons was evil, corrupt and depraved, and\nin the nature of things their children would be cursed with the same\nnature. Yet God gave them another trial, knowing exactly what the result\nwould be. A few of these wretches he selected and made them objects of\nhis love and care, the rest of the world he gave to indifference and\nneglect. To civilize the people he had chosen, he assisted them in\nconquering and killing their neighbors, and gave them the assistance of\npriests and inspired prophets. For their preservation and punishment\nhe wrought countless miracles, gave them many laws and a great deal of\nadvice. He taught them to sacrifice oxen, sheep, and doves, to the end\nthat their sins might be forgiven. The idea was inculcated that there\nwas a certain relation between the sin and the sacrifice,—the greater\nthe sin, the greater the sacrifice. He also taught the savagery that\nwithout the shedding of blood there was no remission of sin.\n\nIn spite of all his efforts, the people grew gradually worse. They would\nnot, they could not keep his laws.\n\nA sacrifice had to be made for the sins of the people. The sins were\ntoo great to be washed out by the blood of animals or men. It became\nnecessary for. God himself to be sacrificed. All mankind were under the\ncurse of the law. Either all the world must be lost or God must die.\n\nIn only one way could the guilty be justified, and that was by the\ndeath, the sacrifice of the innocent. And the innocent being sacrificed\nmust be great enough to atone for the world; There was but one such\nbeing—God.\n\nThereupon God took upon himself flesh, was born into the world—was\nknown as Christ—was murdered, sacrificed by the Jews, and became an\natonement for the sins of the human race.\n\nThis is the scheme of Redemption,—the atonement.\n\nIt is impossible to conceive of anything more utterly absurd.\n\nA man steals, and then sacrifices a dove, or gives a lamb to a priest.\nHis crime remains the same. He need not kill something. Let him give\nback the thing stolen, and in future live an honest life.\n\nA man slanders his neighbor and then kills an ox. What has that to do\nwith the slander. Let him take back his slander, make all the reparation\nthat he can, and let the ox alone.\n\nThere is no sense in sacrifice, never was and never will be.\n\nMake restitution, reparation, undo the wrong and you need shed no blood.\n\nA good law, one springing from the nature of things, cannot demand, and\ncannot accept, and cannot be satisfied with the punishment, or the\nagony of the innocent. A god could not accept his own sufferings in\njustification of the guilty.—This is a complete subversion of all ideas\nof justice and morality. A god could not make a law for man, then suffer\nin the place of the man who had violated it, and say that the law had\nbeen carried out, and the penalty duly enforced. A man has committed\nmurder, has been tried, convicted and condemned to death. Another man\ngoes to the governor and says that he is willing to die in place of the\nmurderer. The governor says: \"All right, I accept your offer, a murder\nhas been committed, somebody must be hung and your death will satisfy\nthe law.\"\n\nBut that is not the law. The law says, not that somebody shall be\nhanged, but that the murderer shall suffer death.\n\nEven if the governor should die in the place of the criminal, it would\nbe no better. There would be two murders instead of one, two innocent\nmen killed, one by the first murderer and one by the State, and the real\nmurderer free.\n\nThis, Christians call, \"satisfying the law.\"\n\nVII. Belief.\n\nWE are told that all who believe in this scheme of redemption and have\nfaith in the redeemer will be rewarded with eternal joy. Some think that\nmen can be saved by faith without works, and some think that faith and\nworks are both essential, but all agree that without faith there is no\nsalvation. If you repent and believe on Jesus Christ, then his goodness\nwill be imputed to you and the penalty of the law, so far as you are\nconcerned, will be satisfied by the sufferings of Christ.\n\nYou may repent and reform, you may make restitution, you may practice\nall the virtues, but without this belief in Christ, the gates of heaven\nwill be shut against you forever.\n\nWhere is this heaven? The Christians do not know.\n\nDoes the Christian go there at death, or must he wait for the general\nresurrection?\n\nThey do not know.\n\nThe Testament teaches that the bodies of the dead are to be raised?\nWhere are their souls in the meantime? They do not know.\n\nCan the dead be raised? The atoms composing their bodies enter into new\ncombinations, into new forms, into wheat and corn, into the flesh of\nanimals and into the bodies of other men. Where one man dies, and some\nof his atoms pass into the body of another man and he dies, to whom will\nthese atoms belong in the day of resurrection?\n\nIf Christianity were only stupid and unscientific, if its God was\nignorant and kind, if it promised eternal joy to believers and if the\nbelievers practiced the forgiveness they teach, for one I should let the\nfaith alone.\n\nBut there is another side to Christianity. It is not only stupid, but\nmalicious. It is not only unscientific, but it is heartless. Its god\nis not only ignorant, but infinitely cruel. It not only promises the\nfaithful an eternal reward, but declares that nearly all of the children\nof men, imprisoned in the dungeons of God will suffer eternal pain. This\nis the savagery of Christianity. This is why I hate its unthinkable God,\nits impossible Christ, its inspired lies, and its selfish, heartless\nheaven.\n\nChristians believe in infinite torture, in eternal pain.\n\nEternal Pain!\n\nAll the meanness of which the heart of man is capable is in that one\nword—Hell.\n\nThat word is a den, a cave, in which crawl the slimy reptiles of\nrevenge.\n\nThat word certifies to the savagery of primitive man.\n\nThat word is the depth, the dungeon, the abyss, from which civilized man\nhas emerged.\n\nThat word is the disgrace, the shame, the infamy, of our revealed\nreligion.\n\nThat word fills all the future with the shrieks of the damned.\n\nThat word brutalizes the New Testament, changes the Sermon on the\nMount to hypocrisy and cant, and pollutes and hardens the very heart of\nChrist.\n\nThat word adds an infinite horror to death, and makes the cradle as\nterrible as the coffin.\n\nThat word is the assassin of joy, the mocking murderer of hope. That\nword extinguishes the light of life and wraps the world in gloom. That\nword drives reason from his throne, and gives the crown to madness.\n\nThat word drove pity from the hearts of men, stained countless swords\nwith blood, lighted fagots, forged chains, built dungeons, erected\nscaffolds, and filled the world with poverty and pain.\n\nThat word is a coiled serpent in the mother's breast, that lifts its\nfanged head and hisses in her ear:—\"Your child will be the fuel of\neternal fire.\"\n\nThat word blots from the firmament the star of hope and leaves the\nheavens black.\n\nThat word makes the Christian's God an eternal torturer, an everlasting\ninquisitor—an infinite wild beast.\n\nThis is the Christian prophecy of the eternal future:\n\nNo hope in hell.\n\nNo pity in heaven.\n\nNo mercy in the heart of God.\n\nVIII. Conclusion\n\nTHE Old Testament is absurd, ignorant and cruel,—the New Testament is\na mingling of the false and true—it is good and bad.\n\nThe Jehovah of the Jews is an impossible monster. The Trinity absurd and\nidiotic, Christ is a myth or a man.\n\nThe fall of man is contradicted by every fact concerning human history\nthat we know. The scheme of redemption—through the atonement—is\nimmoral and senseless. Hell was imagined by revenge, and the orthodox\nheaven is the selfish dream of heartless serfs and slaves. The\nfoundations of the faith have crumbled and faded away. They were\nmiracles, mistakes, and myths, ignorant and untrue, absurd, impossible,\nimmoral, unnatural, cruel, childish, savage. Beneath the gaze of the\nscientist they vanished, confronted by facts they disappeared. The\northodox religion of our day has no foundation in truth. Beneath the\nsuperstructure can be found no fact.\n\nSome may ask, \"Are you trying to take our religion away?\"\n\nI answer, No—superstition is not religion. Belief without evidence is\nnot religion. Faith without facts is not religion.\n\nTo love justice, to long for the right, to love mercy, to pity\nthe suffering, to assist the weak, to forget wrongs and remember\nbenefits—to love the truth, to be sincere, to utter honest words, to\nlove liberty, to wage relentless war against slavery in all its forms,\nto love wife and child and friend, to make a happy home, to love the\nbeautiful in art, in nature, to cultivate the mind, to be familiar with\nthe mighty thoughts that genius has expressed, the noble deeds of all\nthe world, to cultivate courage and cheerfulness, to make others happy,\nto fill life with the splendor of generous acts, the warmth of loving\nwords, to discard error, to destroy prejudice, to receive new truths\nwith gladness, to cultivate hope, to see the calm beyond the storm, the\ndawn beyond the night, to do the best that can be done and then to be\nresigned this is the religion of reason, the creed of science. This\nsatisfies the brain and heart.\n\nBut, says the prejudiced priest, the malicious minister, \"You take away\na future life.\"\n\nI am not trying to destroy another world, but I am endeavoring to\nprevent the theologians from destroying this.\n\nIf we are immortal it is a fact in nature, and that fact does not depend\non bibles, or Christs, or priests or creeds.\n\nThe hope of another life was in the heart, long before the \"sacred\nbooks\" were written, and will remain there long after all the \"sacred\nbooks\" are known to be the work of savage and superstitious men. Hope is\nthe consolation of the world.\n\nThe wanderers hope for home.—Hope builds the house and plants the\nflowers and fills the air with song.\n\nThe sick and suffering hope for health.—Hope gives them health and\npaints the roses in their cheeks.\n\nThe lonely, the forsaken, hope for love.—Hope brings the lover to their\narms. They feel the kisses on their eager lips.\n\nThe poor in tenements and huts, in spite of rags and hunger hope for\nwealth.—Hope fills their thin and trembling hands with gold.\n\nThe dying hopes that death is but another birth, and Love leans above\nthe pallid face and whispers, \"We shall meet again.\"\n\nHope is the consolation of the world.\n\nLet us hope, if there be a God that he is wise and good.\n\nLet us hope that if there be another life it will bring peace and joy to\nall the children of men.\n\nAnd let us hope that this poor earth on which we live, may be a perfect\nworld—a world without a crime—without a tear.\n"
}