MISTAKES 
 
 or 
 
 AS SHOWN BY 
 
 PROF. SWING, J. MONRO GIBSON, D. D., 
 
 W. H. RYDER, D. D., RABBI WISE, 
 
 BROOKE HERFORD, D. D., 
 
 AND OTHERS. 
 
 INCLUDING INGERSOLL'S LECTURE 
 
 ON THB 
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 J. B. M C CLURE. 
 'I 
 
 CHICAGO: 
 
 RHODES & McCLURE, PUBLISHERS. 
 1880.
 
 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1879, by 
 
 J. B. MCCLURK & R. S. RHODES, 
 In the Office of the Librarian of congress, at Washington, D. 0. 
 
 Stereotyped and 1 Tin ted 
 
 HV 
 
 OTTAWAT & COMPANT, 
 
 DOIIOHUK A llKNNEBKRBT, 
 
 Binders.
 
 A religious faith at present BO generally pervades the 
 civilized world that it seems almost amazing that any one 
 should dare speak as Mr. Ingersoll does in his several lec- 
 tures about the Bible. It is this singularity, no doubt, 
 rather than intrinsic worth, which gives any significance 
 that may attach to his words. That the Bible is in the 
 least endangered is out of the question. It is too late now 
 for that. The words herein compiled from good and able 
 men, who have made the great Book, in its early language, 
 import and history, a careful study for long years, will show 
 how futile are Mr. Ingersoll's efforts in parading what he 
 calls the " Mistakes of Moses," etc. Indeed, it would seem 
 that, possibly Mr. I. is guilty of a mistaken identity, for he 
 is severely accused of false assertions and misrepresentations 
 concerning the real Moses. This reminds us of a " mis- 
 take" which was made on a certain occasion by the celebra- 
 ted Archbishop of Dublin, the gifted author of the work so 
 widely known, entitled " The Study of Words." lie was 
 not in robust health at the time, and for many years had 
 been apprehensive of paralysis. At a dinner in Dublin, 
 given by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, his grace sat on 
 the right of his hostess, the Duchess of Abercorn. In the 
 
 midst of the dinner the company was startled by seeing the 
 
 (3)
 
 4 PREFACE. 
 
 Archbishop rise from his seat, and still more startled to hear 
 him exclaim in a dismal and sepulchral tone, " It has comet 
 it has come!" 
 
 " What has come, your Grace? " eagerly cried half a dozen 
 voices from different parts of the table. 
 
 " What I have been expecting for twenty years," solemnly 
 answered the archbishop " a stroke of paralysis. I have 
 been pinching myself for the last twenty minutes, and find 
 myself entirely without sensation." 
 
 "Pardon me, my dear archbishop," said the duchess, 
 looking up at him with a somewhat quizzical smile " par- 
 don me for contradicting you, but it ialthat yvu have leen 
 pinching!" 
 
 Messrs. Gibson, Swing, Ryder and Herford, of Chicago, 
 and Rabbi Wise, of Cincinnati, whose replies are herein 
 given, are too well known as scholars and divines, to require 
 any introduction to a reading public. Their words are 
 wise and timely, and are put on record in this form to show 
 the weakness of modern infidelity and the stability of Divine 
 Truth. 
 
 J. B. McCLURB. 
 
 CHICAGO, April 22nd, 1879.
 
 PAGB 
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY 7 
 
 The Lawyer vs. The Philosopher Ingersoll's Pro- 
 fessional Proclivities in Making a Part Equal to 
 the Whole .8 
 
 Seven Mistakes of Moses Left Oat! Injustice to 
 Hebrew History 10 
 
 Swing Puts Himself in ingersoll's Place and At- 
 tacks the Seventeenth Century How it Works 13 
 
 Ingersoll's Narrowness Shuts Out God, Heaven and 
 Immortality Infidel Dogmatism ... 15 
 
 In the World's Great Freedom of Choice, Ingersoll 
 is Counted Out 18 
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY 21 
 
 Ingersoll's Unfairness Attributes to Moses State- 
 ments not in the Bible 22 
 
 His Temporary Insanity occasioned by Heavy Rains 
 Intellectually Submerged in the Deluge Dam- 
 aging Blunders Ingersoll up the Wrong Moun- 
 tain 24 
 
 Top-heavy Too Broad a Structure reared on a Too 
 
 Narrow Base 27 
 
 Ingersoll's Inconsistency , . . . 29 
 
 lie lias No Poetry in His Soul; ergo, etc. . . 31 
 Additional Misrepresentations .... 32 
 Dr. Ryder Propounds a Question .... 34 
 
 (5)
 
 6 CONTENTS. 
 
 PAOH 
 
 Ingersoll Admits His Sad Need of Inspiration . 35 
 Ingersoll's "Religion of Humanity" All Right Ex- 
 cept the Religion 37 
 
 Dr. Ryder Tells a Little Story for the sake of Illus- 
 tration 39 
 
 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY 41 
 
 The Ingersoll Paradox 43 
 
 Ingersoll's Exaggerations and False Assertions . 43 
 Dr. Herford's Story of Moses, with an Apt Illustra- 
 tion The Germinal Power of the Pentateuch . 46 
 The Mosaic Religion of Humanity . . .49 
 
 THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY 53 
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY 61 
 
 Ingersoll Betrays His Ignorance .... 62 
 Harmony of Science and Genesis . . . .63 
 The Harmony of Genesis and Science Not the 
 
 Result of Guess-work, but of Inspiration . 67 
 
 God 69 
 
 Nature TO 
 
 Man 73 
 
 Woman 73 
 
 Mistakes Respecting Labor and Death Corrected . 75 
 The Deluge and its Difficulties Not Universal 
 Ararat originally a District (alas! Ingersoll calls 
 it a High Mountain) Other Deluges . . 70 
 Faith in Jesus Christ the Essential Factor . . 80 
 Candor vs. Injustice Dr. Gibson's Pointed Sum- 
 mary 81 
 
 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAY OF TOE BIBLB . 85-96 
 
 IHOERSOLL'S LECTURE, 
 
 Entitled "TiiE MISTAKES OF MOSES," . . 97
 
 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL 
 
 A3 SHOWN BY 
 
 PROF. SWING, 
 
 W. II. RYDER, D. D., 
 
 BROOKE HERFORD, D. D., 
 
 J. MONRO GIBSON, D. D., 
 RABBI WISE, 
 AND OTHERS. 
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 
 
 Tins discourse is not spoken regard ing the man, Robert 
 G. Ingersoll, but regarding the addresses which he is deliv- 
 ering and is otherwise publishing. The man Ingersoll is 
 said to be, in his private life, kind, neighborly, humane, 
 and in many ways an example which might be imitated 
 with great profit by thousands who represent themselves as 
 holding the Pagan or the Christian religion. But, were 
 this author and lecturer a mean, wicked man, I should still 
 be bound to consider his thoughts apart from the thinker 
 just as we deal with Bacon's ideas apart from his moral 
 qualities, and the politics of Alexander Hamilton apart 
 from the infirmities of his moral sentiments. The iiitel- 
 
 CO
 
 8 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 lect of such an individual as the one before ns is a thinking 
 machine. It makes a survey of the religions landscape. 
 Objects strike it that escape yon and me. His eyes are not 
 those of a preacher, not those of a bishop, nor those of an 
 evangelist like Mr. Moody; not those of a moralist like 
 Dyniond or William Penn, nor those of Theodore Parker 
 or Emerson, but they are a vision purely his o\vn, and our 
 task is limited to the inquiry what this peculiar sense dis- 
 covers in our wide and varied world. 
 
 The Lawyer vs. The Philosopher Ingersoll's Professional 
 Proclivities in Making a Part equal to the "Whole ! 
 
 We perceive at once that these addresses do not offer us 
 any system of philosophy for woman, or child, or State, and 
 therefore they cannot aspire to be any valuable Mentor to 
 tell each young Telemachus how to live. They are the 
 speeches of a lawyer retained by one client of a large case. 
 Men trained in a profession come by degrees into the pro- 
 fession's channel, and flow only in the one direction, and al- 
 ways between the same banks. The master of a learned 
 profession at last becomes its slave. lie who follows faith- 
 fully any calling wears at last a soul of that calling's shape. 
 You remember the death scene of the poor old schoolmas- 
 ter, lie had assembled the boys and girls in the winter 
 mornings and hud dismissed them winter evenings after 
 sundown, and had done this for fifty long years. One win- 
 ter Monday lie did not appear. Death had struck his old 
 and feeble pulse; but, dying, his mind followed its beauti- 
 ful but narrow river-bed, and his last words were: "It is 
 growing d:irk the school is dismissed let the girls pass 
 out first." Very rarely docs the man in the pulpit, or at 
 the bur, or in statesmanship, escape this molding hand of 
 Lis pursuit. Wo are all clay iu the hands of that potter
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY. & 
 
 which is called a pursuit. A pursuit is seldom an ocean of 
 water; it is more commonly a canal. But if there be a 
 class of men more modified than others in language and 
 forms of speech, the lawyers compose such a class, for it ia 
 never their business to present both sides. It is their espe- 
 cial duty BO to arrange a part of the facts as that they shall 
 seem to be the whole facts, and next to their power of pre- 
 senting a cause mast come their power to conceal all aspects 
 unfavorable to their purpose. A philosopher must see and 
 set forth at once both sides of all questions, but a lawyer 
 must learn to see the one side of a case, for there is another 
 man expressly employed to see the reverse of the shield. 
 But few of us are philosophers. "When we wish to exhibit 
 something, we instantly cut off all light except that which 
 will fall upon our goods. If we are to display only a yard 
 of silk, we will veil the sun and move about to find the 
 right position, and then light a little more gas, that the 
 fields, and hills, and heavens may all withdraw, and permit 
 us to see the fold of a bride's dress. Thus all the profes- 
 sions, honored by being called learned, do more or less cut 
 off the light from all things except the fabric that is being- 
 unfolded by their skillful fingers. 
 
 Men of intense emotional power like Mr. Ingersoll, and 
 men who, like him, have hearts as full of colors as a paint- 
 er's shop, are wont, beyond common, to pour their passion- 
 upon one object rather than diffuse it all over the world. 
 These can awaken, and entertain, and shake, and unsettle, 
 but then, after all is over, we all must seek for final guides 
 men who are calmer and \yho spread gentler tints with their 
 brush. I am, therefore, of the opinion that none of us \ 
 should follow anyone man, but rather all men; should seek 
 that general impression, that wide-reaching common-sense, 
 which knows little of ecstacy and little of despairj These
 
 10 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 ^"Addresses" under notice are wonderful concentrations of 
 wit, and fun, and tears, and logic, but concentrations upon 
 minor points. They are severe upon a little group of men, 
 ttpon literalists and old Popes, and old monks, but they do 
 not weigh and mo;isure fully the religion of such a being as 
 Jesus Christ, nor touch the ideas and actions of the human 
 race away from these fading forms of human nature. 
 
 huii 
 W 
 
 Seven Mistakes of Moses Left out! Injustice to Hebrew 
 
 History. 
 
 These addresses do injustice to the Hebrew history. A 
 lawyer has a right to be one-sided and narrow when he is 
 presenting the cause of his client, but when he is addressing 
 a public upon a religious, or political, or social question, 
 narrowness in his discourse must be considered an infirmity, 
 or else an act of injustice. These speeches betray either 
 unconscious narrowness or willful injustice. But Mr. Inger- 
 Boll is the embodiment of sincerity, according to those who 
 enjoy his acquaintance, and therefore we must conclude 
 that the cast of his mind is such that it is led hither and 
 thither by that narrowness which belongs no more to a high 
 Calvinist than to a high infidel. If tho lecture upon 
 "Moses" had been more thoughtful, it would have con- 
 fessed that there were several forms of the man " Moses," 
 the historic" Moses," the Hebrew " Moses," and the Calvin- 
 istic " Moses; " and then, after this concession, he might have 
 (assailed the " Calvinistic Moses." .... 
 But if the addresses had been broad, and spoken for that 
 larger audience called humanity, they would have asked us 
 to mark the mistakes of the Moses of Hebrew times and of 
 common history. But they did not dream of this. Stand- 
 ing in the presence of one of the grandest figures of
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 11 
 
 tian and Hebrew antiquity, Mr. Ingersoll failed to see this I 
 personage, arid permitted nothing to come upon his field of 
 vision except those sixteenth century theologians who dis- i 
 torted alike the mission of Moses and of Christ, and even 
 of the Almighty. To set forth the mistakes of the historic j 
 " Moses " would not be any easy task. I One doing this 
 would be compelled to ask us to mark the blunders of a 
 leader who planned freedom for slaves; who bore complain- 
 ings from an ignorant people until he won the fame of unu- 
 sual meekness, one who did in reality what infidels only 
 have dreamed of doing living and dying for the people; 
 the mistakes of one whose ten laws are still the fundamental 
 ideas of a State, of one who organized a nation which lived 
 and flourished for 1,500 years; the mistakes of one who 
 divested the idea of God of bestiality and began to clothe it 
 with the notions of wisdom and justice, and even tenderness; 
 the follies of one who established industry and education, 
 and a higher form of religion, and gave the nation holding 
 these virtues such an impulse that in the hour of dissolving 
 it produced a Jesus Christ and the twelve Apostles; and 
 thus did more in its death than Atheism could achieve in all 
 the eons of geology. Seven mistakes of Moses left out!-*"* 
 
 There is, it is true, a time and a place for irony, but after 
 it has done its work amid the accidental of a time or a place, 
 there remains yet much to be studied by the sober intellect 
 and loved by the heart which really cares for the useful and 
 the true. It is essentially a small matter that some poetic 
 mind, some Froissart or some Herodotus, came along per- 
 haps after the reigns of David and Solomon, and gathered up 
 all the truths of old Hebrew tradition, and all the legends, 
 too, and wove them together, for out of such entanglements 
 the essential ideas generally rise up just as noble pine trees 
 at last rise up above the brambles and thickets at their base,
 
 12 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 and evermore stand in the full presence of rain, and air, and 
 eun. Above the brambles and thorn of legend, at which 
 the narrow eye may laugh, there rises up from the Mosaic 
 soil a growth of moral truth that catches at last full sun- 
 shine and full breeze; a growth that will long make a good 
 shadow for the graves of Christian and intidel beneath. 
 The errors of legend are so unimportant that even a Divine 
 Book may carry them. 
 
 It will thus appear that the method of the addresses is 
 very defective. It is not a wide survey of a two-thousand- 
 year period in human civilization, a period when the He- 
 brews were making imperishable the good of the Egyptians 
 who were dying from vices and despotism, but is only the 
 ramble of a satirist having a sharp eye for defects and a most 
 ready tongue. All the by-gone periods may be passed over 
 in two manners. We may go forth for our laughter or foi 
 our pensiveness and wisdom. Juvenal saw old Rome fuU 
 of dissolute men and women. Virgil saw it full of litera- 
 ture. Tacitus found it not destitute of patriots and heroes; 
 and when Juvenal found the husbands all debauchees, and 
 the wives all hypocrites, there the most calm and elegant 
 historians found the most excellent Agricola, and found a 
 wife of spotless fame in the daughter Domitia. Thus in 
 the very generations in which the lampoons of Juvenal 
 found only vice, behold we see beauty and virtue in full 
 bloom around the homes of Tacitus, and Agricola, and 
 Pliny. Thus all the fields of human thought lie open to 
 the invasion of those who wish to mock, and of those who 
 wish to admire. And beyond doubt when Mr. Ingersoll 
 shall have uttered his last thought over the Mistakes of 
 Moses, some other form of intellect could glean in the same 
 field, and leave covered with the truths of Moses, a nobler 
 and larger tablet
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 18 
 
 Swing Puts Himself in Ingersoll's Place and Attacks the 
 Seventeenth Century. How it "Works ! 
 
 /^Permit me now, in imitation of the style of these addresses, 
 to ask you to look at the seventeenth century: Why, it all 
 drips in blood! Horror upon horrors! The King of Persia 
 put to death some of the Royal family and put out the eyes 
 of all the rest even the eyes of infants. Russia begins her 
 cruel oppression of Poland. Prussia, the hope of Europe,, 
 is desolated by war, which never lifted its black cloud for 
 thirty years. In this wretched century came the massacre 
 of Prague and the forcible banishment of 30,000 Protestant 
 families. Allowing five persons to a family, it will thus ap- 
 pear that 150,000 were driven from their homes and country. 
 Further south, in France, a few years before, 700,000 Pro- 
 testants had been murdered in twenty-four hours. After- 
 ward came the licentious court of Louis XIY.; while over 
 in England noble men and women were being beheaded or 
 otherwise slain in dreadful numbers. The beautiful Queen 
 Mary is beheaded just as the century begins, and Essex is 
 beheaded in its full opening. And in its close France re- 
 enters the scene, revokes the edict of Nantes, and sends into 
 exile 800,000 of her best citizens. 
 
 Thus dragged along the seventeenth century, as it would 
 seem, bleeding, and weeping, and gasping in perpetual 
 dying. What a picture! Amazing indeed, but narrow and 
 false! I have been thinking only of the "mistakes" of a 
 time. Just look at that century again with a wider survey 
 and a happier heart, and lo! we see in it a matchless line 
 of immortal worthies. There flourished Gustavus, laying 
 the foundations of our liberty; there lived Grotius, writing 
 down the holiest principles of duty ; there we see Galileo 
 inventing the telescope, and beholding the starry sky; there
 
 14 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 sits Kepler finding the highest laws of astronomy; near 
 these are the French preachers, Bossuet, Fenelon, and Mas- 
 silon, whose fame has not been equaled ; there, too, Pascal 
 and Corneille. But this is not all. It is not one-third the 
 splendor of that one epoch, for, cross the Channel, and 
 behold you meet Shakspeare, and Lord Bacon, and Milton, 
 and Locke, and while these divine minds are composing 
 their books, Cromwell is overthrowing despots, and a 
 Republic springs up as by enchantment. Thus the seven- 
 teenth century, which awhile ago seemed only a period that 
 a kind heart might wish stricken from history, now comes 
 back to us as the sublime dawn of poetry, and science, and 
 eloquence, and liberty. ^ 
 
 The truth is we must move through the present and the 
 past with both eyes wide open, and with a mind willing to 
 know all and to draw a conclusion from the whole combined 
 cloud of witnesses. The author of the addresses does not 
 do this. He does not make a wide survey nor draw conclu- 
 sions from widely scattered facts; and hence, after he has 
 spoken about the horrors of the Mosaic age, or of the church 
 there remains that age or that church emptying rich treas- 
 ures into the general civilization, purifying the barbarous 
 ages, awaking the intellect, stimulating the arts, inspiring 
 good works, elevating the life of the living, by setting before 
 man a God and a future existence. Our Christianity has a 
 Hebrew origin. The sermon on the Mount was begun by 
 Moses. 
 
 The eloquence of Mr. Ingersoll is much like the art of 
 Hogarth or John Leech, an acute, and witty, and interest- 
 ing art, but very limited in its range. Hogarth was with- 
 out a rival in his ability to picture the " mistakes" of mar- 
 riage, and of a " Rake's Progress," the peculiarity of " Beer 
 Lane" and " Gin Lane"; and his art was legitimate in its
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 15 
 
 field, but its field was narrow, and took no notice of the 
 eternal beauty of things as painted by Rubens or Raphael. 
 /After Hogarth had said all he could see and believe about 
 marriage, there stood the holy relation in its historic great- 
 ness, tilling millions of homes with its peace and friend- 
 ship, notwithstanding the mirth-provoking pencil. Thus 
 the ideas of "Moses," and " Church," and "Heaven," and 
 
 God" lie before Mr. Ingersoll to be pictured by his skill- 
 ful derision, but after the artist has drawn his little Puritanic 
 Hebrew and his absurd Heaven, and has painted his little 
 gods, and has limned his own Papal Heaven and Hell, 
 another scene opens and there untarnished are the deep 
 things of right and wrong,' the immortal hopes of man, and 
 [a Heavenly Father which cannot be placed upon a jester's 
 janvas. 
 
 John Leech found the weak points in all English high 
 and low life. The fashions, and sports, and entertainments, 
 and the current politics, underwent for a generation the tor- 
 ture of his pictures, his sketches, his cartoons, but the 
 moment the laugh had ended, the homes of England, the 
 happy social life of rich and poor, the learning and wisdom 
 of her statesmen were back in their place just as the sun is 
 in his place after a noisy thunderstorm has passed by. 
 
 Ingersoll's Narrowness Shuts out God, Heaven and Immor- 
 tality Infidel Dogmatism. 
 
 This narrowness of survey which marks Mr. Ingersoll's 
 estimate of the Hebrew period and of the human Church, 
 follows him in his thoughts about another life and the exist- 
 
 o 
 
 ence of God. He denies that any regard whatever should 
 be paid to a second life. Heaven deserves no consider- 
 ation at our hands. He says in his lecture on the Gods: 
 " Reason, observation and experience have taught us 
 
 2
 
 16 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 that happiness is the only good ; that the time to be happy 
 is now, and the way to be happy is to make others so. This 
 is enough for us. In this belief we are content to live and 
 die." Such assertions as these no broadly-reaching mind 
 could make, for the broad mind, not knowing but that there 
 may be a second life, having no positive information on that 
 point, is bound to admit all that uncertainty, and that hope 
 is a most lawful element in that strange mingling which 
 makes up the soul. As Mr. Ingersoll does not know whence 
 / man came, so he knows not whither he goes, and therefore 
 | he must himself stand and permit others to stand in the 
 presence of death as in the presence of a great mystery that, 
 at least, should silence all dogmatism of priest or infidel. 
 The logic of the addresses may be fitted for the common 
 jury, but they are too rude for man who is weeping his 
 way along between birth and death. 
 
 In some better hour the lawyer forgets his petit jury and 
 addresses the human soul. On the title page of a recent 
 volume he says in substance that: " The dream of immor- 
 tal life has always existed in the heart of man, and will 
 remain there in all its matchless charms, born not of any 
 book or creed, but out of human affection;" and being not 
 born of reason and sense, he can but reject its hope; he is 
 personally above being molded in thought, or action, by 
 such a fable of the heart. In calling such a dream a fable, 
 he is guilty of that very dogmatism which he so hates in 
 Calvin and Edwards, for if Calvin was too certain that he 
 knew God's will, Mr. Ingersoll is too certain that he knows 
 God not to exist. It often happens that the dogmatism 
 (of the bigot must await its exact parallel in the dogmatism 
 /of the atheist. The ideas of a future life and a God are 
 thus in these addresses rudely set aside as though this 
 author had shown the real origin and destiny of the Uni- 
 verse, and had found out the secret of the grave.
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 11 
 
 He would pay no attention to the idea of God. He would 
 not be guilty of any worship in this life. He says: "If 
 by any possibility the existence of a power superior to and 
 independent of nature shall be demonstrated, there will be 
 time enough to kneel. Until then let us stand erect." 
 
 In such language we find only a perfect overthrow of the\ 
 method of the human soul; for the soul has never dared | 
 wait for any such certainty in any of the paths before it. It 
 has always been compelled to build up before itself the 
 largest possible motives and hopes, and then live for them 
 and abide the consequences. It is wonderful that a man 
 who will pluck a violet and draw delight from its tender 
 color and still more delicate perfume, will sternly command 
 the human race not to hold in its hands any flower of im- 
 mortality, lest by chance its leaves may at last wither. If 
 this idea of a future life should at last fail, which seems im- 
 possible, the human heart will be all the purer and happier \ 
 from having held all through these years a lily so sweet and/ 
 eo white. 
 
 Loo-ic cannot make such short work of the religious sen- 
 
 o o 
 
 timents. Mr. Ingersoll says: "If you can ever find a God, 
 just let me know, and I shall kneel. Until then I shall 
 stand erect." What injustice to that delicate form of rea- 
 son, which has moved the world for perhaps 10,000 years I 
 We do not propose to find God or a future life. What the/ 
 world has found long since is the deep hope in a God, and 
 the measureless hope that the dying loved ones of this world' 
 will meet in a land that is better. Nobody has come to the 
 human race to let it know that a God has been found, but 
 many have come to it saying: "My dear children, let us 
 trust that all this matchless universe came from a Creator, 
 and that from him we also came." So many and so holy 
 were these voices, and so responsive was the heart, that upon
 
 
 18 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 this trust the living and the dying have knelt and have told 
 their longings to the Invisible. The human race has not 
 been haughty. It has been willing to kneel. Its heart has 
 never been stone, nor its knees brass. It lias stood erect in 
 battle where liberty was to be won ; it has been as erect as an 
 infidel when a bosom was to be bared for arrows or bullets, 
 or when the neck was to be unclothed for the fatal ax, but 
 in moments of hope and longing it has bent willingly in 
 hope and prayer. The advice of the Addresses not to kneel 
 until you have reached and handled the Creator, is advice 
 that civilization has always spurned, for it lias woven all its 
 gorgeous fabrics out of delicate probabilities, gossamer 
 threads spun by the heart. Fame, and learning, and art, 
 and happiness are all simple possibilities before each youth. 
 He does not dare say, Make me sure of results, and I will 
 gird myself for the present. He casts himself upon the bet- 
 ter of two possibilities, and is borne along toward an un- 
 known end. Thus has the human race dealt with the inti- 
 mations of religion. It has cast itself upon the better hope, 
 and, being at perfect liberty to espouse Atheism, has always 
 repudiated it as being a paralysis of the soul, and a perfect 
 reversal of the common logic of society. 
 
 In the World's Great Freedom of Choice, Ingersoll is Coun- 
 ted out ! 
 
 The world has always been perfectly free to use the form 
 of reasoning which Mr. Ingersoll suggests. No "Westmin- 
 ster Assembly, no Calvin compelled the, human family 
 from Old Egypt to Greece to think the universe had a 
 Creator. The world has always been free to suppose that 
 such seasons as day and night and spring and summer, such 
 creatures as the nightingale and man, such a star as the sun, 
 all came from mud and water and fire, mingling of their
 
 PROF. SWING'S REPLY. 19 
 
 own accord ; but the world lias had no wide use for such 
 conclusions. Of its own free choice, it has avoided Atheism, 
 and has never made up anywhere a civilization without dis- 
 carding the idea of waiting for a demonstration, and with- 
 out espousing the idea that all noble society reposes upon 
 lofty hopes. Out of beautiful possibilities the soul's gar- 
 ments are woven. 
 
 It thus appears that the Addresses are defective as guides 
 for any man's life or death. They constitute a bill of ex- 
 ceptions against certain hard rulings in some local and igno- 
 rant courts, but as pleadings in the great tribunal where the 
 whole human family stands assembled, to get the wisest 
 decisions about duty and happiness, and the possibility of 
 there being a God and a second life, the possible value of a 
 hope for the dying they each and all fall far short. They 
 see only the religion of some fanatic, and think it the religion 
 of Jesus or of mankind. They see a God damning honest 
 men, and conclude that is what is meant by Jehovah. They 
 see a Heaven with some little sect in the midst of it, and 
 speak as though they were what is meant by the immortality 
 of man. They note the follies of the Puritans and Papists, 
 and infer that if there were no religion in the world, there v \ 
 would be no bad judgment or bad passions. They fail, too, 
 to mark the delicacy of man's practical logic, which is not 
 iron-like, waiting for the absolute end of all doubt, but which 
 is bending and hopeful, and stands ready forever to found 
 immense motives, and society, and church, and homes upon 
 the greater and better of two probabilities that lie within this 
 world of cloud. They assert the adequacy of earthly happi- 
 ness as an end of being, and fail to mark that earthly hap- 
 piness has always depended upon high morals, and father, 
 and mother, and child, and social life, and all mental de- 
 velopment have found their full meaning, until a warm and
 
 20 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 broad religion has shed its cheering light. The human race 
 cannot find its supreme good in having a few acres of ground, 
 and in seeing the grass grow, and in hearing the birds sing. 
 These make some days delightful indeed, but man, with his 
 retinue of art, and statesmanship, and morals, and tempta- 
 tions, and virtues, and joys, and sorrows, and partings, and 
 death, demands the assumption of a God, and the expecta- 
 tions of a resurrection from the dust. Under such a temple 
 as society, the foundation must be deep. 
 
 To those who read or hear these addresses of Mr. Inger- 
 soll, let me say : Hear them, read them if you wish, for they 
 will show you what a sad caricature of Christianity was that 
 which came down to us from the Dark Ages; but, having 
 thus been taught by an enemy, then dismiss the laughter, 
 and look at religion in the widest forms of its doctrine and 
 experience. We are now warned daily not to follow parti- 
 sans in politics, because they will eclipse a country by a 
 little chair in office they will make a village outweigh a 
 continent. These addresses of a talented lawyer warn us 
 equally against trusting the partisans in religion the dim- 
 eyed zeal which makes a Deity as small as their own hearts, 
 a Bible as cold and as hard as adamant; but now, having 
 been taught to shun partisans in politics and in Christi- 
 anity, let us learn to resist one more form of partisan the 
 'partisan of an atheism and a hopeless grave. Let us at 
 times laugh with him, let us admire his acuteness, let us 
 confess the honesty of his life, but for our guides or ideas 
 in the world spiritual let us seek some mountain of thought 
 where the survey is broader, and tenderer, and more just, 
 from which height no good lies concealed; but looking from 
 which we can see the great landscape of the soul, some of 
 it bathed in light, some of it lying in shadow, but all of it 
 instructive and full of impressiveness.
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 
 
 DR BTDEE'S EEPLT. 
 
 IN the commencement of this review of Mr. Ingersoll's 
 lecture upon " The Mistakes of Moses," I wish two things 
 distinctly understood: First, that my controversy is not 
 with the man, but with his address; and, second, that he 
 has the same right to advocate his views as I have to advo- 
 cate mine. On the question of religious liberty we are as 
 one. 
 
 Furthermore, I do not wonder that certain minds, having 
 passed through peculiar experiences, become thoroughly 
 disgusted with particular forms of theological thought. My 
 only surprise is that more are not. Such material ideas of 
 the Deity as are sometimes put forth in the name of Chris- 
 tianity; such offensive liberalizing as is sometimes applied 
 to the future life, and such thoroughly untenable positions 
 as are sometimes taken as to what the Scriptures actually 
 are, has long been a fruitful cause of infidelity, and will 
 continue to be so as long as they receive the indorsement of 
 any branch of the Christian Church. 
 
 But intensity of conviction may degenerate into preju- 
 dice, and this prejudice practically unfits one to discuss the 
 subject to which it relates. From what the distinguished 
 lecturer says of himself, of his determination in every ad- 
 dress he makes, no matter what the topic, to denounce cer- 
 tain views, and from the specimen of his work now brought
 
 22 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 under review, I conclude that Col. Ingersoll occupies just 
 this position. 
 
 While, t'ien, the right to speak one's honest thought is 
 thus frankly conceded, and the provocation to employ strong 
 language in reference to certain theological opinions is also 
 conceded, it will be admitted by all candid minds that cer- 
 tain subjects from their very nature, and from interest which 
 they involve, are to be treated with seriousness and tkirness. 
 If not so treated, the influence of the discussion is almost 
 certain to be harmful. The lecture under notice, though 
 nominally on the errors of a particular character in the Old 
 Testament, is virtually an assault upon all revealed religion, 
 and especially that contained in the Bible. 
 
 Ingersoll's Unfairness Attributes to Moses Statements 
 not in the Bible. 
 
 Now, my first position is this: "Whoever publicly attacks 
 the sacred books of the Christian world, and attempts to 
 destroy faith in them, should treat the subject fairly. I re- 
 gret to say that the lecture does not seem to me so to treat 
 its great theme, but is, on the contrary, a conspicuous illus- 
 tration of prejudice and unfairness. No small portion of 
 the lecture is unworthy a reply. There is nothing to reply 
 to. Of fair argument there is a lamentable lack, no incon- 
 siderable portion of the time seems to have been spent in 
 knocking over a man of straw of his own manufacture. If 
 his lecture be regarded simply as an entertainment, it is a 
 success, for the Colonel knows how to amuse an audience as 
 well as the best; but if it were intended to be a fair and 
 able discussion of an important subject, it is not simply a 
 failure, but a failure so obvious as to leave no room for any 
 other opinion. In proof of my statement that the lecture 
 does not treat the topic which it professes to discuss fairly, 
 I offer these specimens as evidence:
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 23 
 
 The first specimen is: Attributing to Moses language 
 and statements not to be found in any of his writings. 
 Speaking of Moses, he says : " The gentleman who wrote it 
 (Genesis) begins by telling us that God made it (the world) 
 out of nothing." And then he proceeds to ridicule the idea. 
 But Moses says neither that nor anything like it. The 
 lecturer thus misrepresents the very first sentence in the 
 Pentateuch. What Moses says is, that "In the beginning 
 God created the heavens and the earth." What he created 
 them out of, or when " in the beginning " was, he does not 
 say. The simple thought is that the heavens and the earth 
 were not self-evolved, but were created by the Omnipotent 
 Jehovah. 
 
 " You recollect," he says, " that the gods came down and 
 made love to the daughters of men," etc. Where does Moses 
 say that? Plenty of that kind of talk is Grecian and Roman 
 mythology, but what has that to do with " The Mistakes of 
 Moses? " " They built a tower (Babel) to reach the heavens 
 and climb into the abodes of the gods." Another of the 
 Colonel's mistakes. The Tower of Babel was not built for 
 any such purpose. From the frequent references of this 
 kind to the gods in connection with the religion of Moses, 
 it looks as if the lecturer was not aware that the Jews were 
 not particularly in favor of idolatry. Again he says: 
 "There is not one word in the Old Testament about woman 
 except words of shame and humiliation. It did not take 
 the pains to record the death of the mother of us all. I have 
 no respect for any book that does not treat woman as the 
 equal of man." 
 
 It is true that Moses does not record the death " of the 
 mother of us all; " but it is also true that the first account 
 of the burial of any person in the book of Genesis is that 
 of a woman, Sarah, the wife of Abraham. Moses simply
 
 i4 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 says of Adam: "The father of us all," "And he died;" 
 and in a similar summary manner are all the other men dis- 
 posed of; bat when it comes to this woman Sarah, a special 
 lot has to be purchased for her, and secured to the family, 
 eo that her remains might not be disturbed; and even now 
 in remembrance of the cave of the field in which she was 
 buried, a certain part of our modern cemeteries is called 
 Machpelah. By the side of this fact how does the declara- 
 tion look that " there is not one word in the Old Testament 
 about women, except words of shame and humiliation?" 
 Suppose I turn the tables npon the lecturer, and say, I have 
 no respect for any book that does not treat man as the equal 
 of woman. My words, if applied to the Bible, would be 
 hardly less libelous than his. 
 
 His Temporary Insanity Occasioned by Heavy Rains 
 Intellectually Submerged in the Deluge Damaging 
 
 Blunders lugersoll up the Wrong Mountain. 
 My second specification is that he not only makes Moses 
 say what he does not say, but he frequently misrepresents 
 what he does say. I name these particulars: First, in speak- 
 ing of the flood, he gives the impression that, according to 
 the Scriptural account, all the water that covered the earth 
 and inundated it came out of the clouds in the form of rain. 
 He says: "And then it began to rain, and it kept on rain- 
 ing until the water went twenty-nine feet over the highest 
 mountains. How deep were these waters? About five and 
 a half miles. How long did it rain? Forty days. How 
 much did it have to rain a day? About 800 feet." Now 
 what are the facts? In the verse which precedes the one 
 which says, "And the rain was upon the earth forty days and 
 forty nights," we have this record, Gen., vii., ii. " In the 
 600th year of Noah's life, in the second month, the 17th day of 

 
 DX. RYDER'S REPLY. 25> 
 
 the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great 
 deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." 
 Why did not the lecturer mention this statement of the 
 " breaking up of the fountains of the great deep," which is 
 generally supposed to refer to the upheaval or subsidance of 
 some large body or bodies of land, perhaps to portions of 
 this western continent, and is considered to have been the 
 principal cause of the deluge? Why omit the supposed 
 principal cause of the deluge, unless it was his purpose to 
 make out a case without regard to the facts? * 
 
 Furthermore, wh.at authority has he for saying that the 
 ark rested on the top of a mountain seventeen thousand feet 
 high, and that the water upon the earth was " five and a 
 half miles deep?" Has he committed the ignorant blunder 
 of confounding Agri-Dagh with the hilly district to which 
 the name was formerly applied? The lofty peak that now 
 bears the name of Ararat has no such designation in Bib- 
 lical history, and it is the name given to it in compara- 
 tively modern times. The Bible record is: "Fifteen cubits 
 upwards did the waters prevail." The Hebrew cubit is 
 about twenty- two inches. If we may trust the conclusions 
 of science, deluges have been no unusual events in the his- 
 tory of this globe. Most of the land, if not all of it, no 
 matter how high at present, has been at some time sub- 
 merged. Whatever one may think about the accuracy of 
 the narrative in reference to the building of the ark and the 
 uses to which it was put, there is certainly no physical 
 improbability in the statement that that part of the earth 
 which was then above water was thoroughly inundated. 
 
 Again, the gentleman makes merry over what he calls the 
 " rib story," and imagines two persons before the bar of 
 God, one believing the " rib story " and the other denying 
 it The believer of it is accepted by the Judge as belonging
 
 26 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 in Heaven, and the denier of it as belonging in Hell. And 
 this he puts before the public as Bible doctrine as if any 
 man of common sense, whether Jew or Gentile, ever defended 
 eo ridiculous a theory. As a further specimen of this unfair- 
 ness, I present you this: " Do you believe the real God 
 if there is one ever killed a man for making hair oil? 
 And yet you find in the Pentateuch that God gave Moses a 
 receipt for making hair oil to grease Aaron's beard ; and 
 said if anybody made the same hair oil he would be killed." 
 There cold hardly be written a more complete misrepre- 
 sentation and perfect caricature of the whole subject than 
 this. The reference in Scripture is to an anointing oil, to be 
 applied, not simply to the persons of the priests, but to the 
 sacred vessels as well; and, thus anointed, they were set 
 apart for what they regarded as holy uses. But if this cus- 
 tom which Mr. Ingersoll seeks to hold up to ridicule, was 
 simply Jewish, there would be some show or plausibility for 
 talking about it as he does; but he lias not even that to jus- 
 tify his attack. For this custom of using anointing oils in 
 connection with religious services, and sacred persons, and 
 utensils, was common among the idolatrous. nations, and 
 even conspicuous among the rites of the Romans. And 
 even now one often meets with the spirit of the same cus- 
 tom. I do not know whether the Colonel is a member of 
 the Masonic fraternity, but he must have seen representa- 
 tives of that ancient Order pour out anointing oil upon the 
 corner-stone of some building which they were engaged in 
 laying. Why not ridicule that, and why not also ridicule 
 the beautiful custom of that Order of dropping upon the 
 uncovered coffin of a deceased member the little sprigs of 
 evergreen that the brethren bear in their hands as they 
 march around his open grave? It is easy to see that with 
 reference to every such custom, however sacred, one who
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 27 
 
 takes the naked fact apart from its associations, may find 
 abundant material for ridicule. But whether a fair-minded 
 man will allow himself to treat any serious subject in that 
 manner, is a question upon which there is no occasion that 
 I should pronounce judgment. Mr. Ingersoll makes a sim- 
 ilar blunder in what he says about the custom of sacrificing 
 doves for the use of priests, since the practice did not exist 
 among the Hebrews until hundreds of years after the event 
 which he seeks to ridicule. 
 
 Top-Heavy Too Broad a Structure Reared on a Too Nar- 
 row Base. 
 
 My third specification is, that he treats a particular inter- 
 pretation of the Bible as the undisputed word of God. He 
 assumes that this or that is Bible doctrine because some- 
 body may at some time have taught it, and then denounces 
 the whole Bible as unworthy the respect of mankind. 
 This feature of the address runs through the whole of it. 
 But, in this respect, candor compels me to say his method 
 is that of Thomas Paine in his "Age of Reason," and of a 
 certain class, but not the better class, of so-called infidel 
 writers. Mr. Paine reproved the world for believing what 
 he showed to be unreasonable doctrines, and called upon 
 the people to throw away their Bibles for teaching such 
 sentiments; but it was Mr. Paine, and not the Bible that was 
 in fault, for the doctrines which he shed so much ink to 
 condemn are not taught in the Bible. Mr. Ingersoll's 
 method is precisely the same. If he wishes to hold up to 
 the contempt of mankind certain doctrines that some sect 
 may have believed, or even does believe, let him announce 
 his subject, keep to his text, and go ahead; but to go from 
 pluce to place, exhorting the people everywhere to throw 
 away their Bibles, under the pretense that these represents-
 
 28 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 ticms of his are the undisputed word of God, is simply an 
 outrage upon the Christian piiblic, and unworthy any man 
 who claims to be fair-minded. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll's references to the clergy disappoint me. 
 He speaks of them as if they were a set of fools, and does 
 not add that they are all graduates of prisons, and a pack of 
 scoundrels generally. To which gentlemanly references we 
 need only say, that in this slanderous speech he is guilty 
 of the same offense against fairness and good breeding that 
 is committed by any nominal Christian who, either through 
 Windless or perversity, can see nothing good in the services 
 of the distinguished infidels of history, and who, to preju- 
 dice the public against them, resort to the mean subterfuge 
 of misrepresenting their positions, and telling falsehoods 
 about them. If any man, in an address before this com- 
 munity, should treat the writings of Yoltaire as shabbily as 
 Mr. Ingersoll has treated the writings of Moses, and as to 
 that, the entire Bible, the Colonel would have to go out- 
 side the Psalms of David to find imprecations to express 
 his contempt. His references to Andover have, of course, 
 nothing to do with " The Mistakes of Moses," but they 
 relate to an important subject, and are a pertinent illustra- 
 tion of the eminent unfairness of the general address. This 
 is what he says: "They have in Massachusetts, at a place 
 called Andover, ?i kind of minister factory; and every Pro- 
 fessor in that factory takes an oath in every five years that, 
 so help him God, he will not during the next five years 
 intellectually advance; and probably there is no oath he 
 could easier keep. They believe the same creed they first 
 taught when the foundation stone was laid, and now, when 
 they send out a minister they brand him, as hardware from 
 Birmingham and Sheffield. And every man who knows 
 where he was educated knows his creed, knows every argu- 
 ment of his creed, every book that he has read, and just
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 29 
 
 what lie amounts to intellectually, and knows that he will 
 shrink and shrivel and become more and more stupid day 
 after day until he meets with death." 
 
 My personal sympathy with the And over Theological 
 School is not, as you may suppose, very deep and ardent. 
 I respect the generosity and self-sacrifice of the five noble 
 minds one of whom was a woman that founded the insti- 
 tution in 1807, and the aid which it has given to liberal and 
 exact scholarship. On the whole, I do not like the rule to which 
 Mr. Ingersoll refers. Probably many of those in charge of 
 the institution do not. I understand it to be a custom con- 
 tingent upon certain endowments made long ago, and which 
 is observed as a matter of form. But the rule is not fairly 
 open to the objection that Mr. Ingersoll makes against it. 
 First, it simply relates to the theological professors, and 
 does not concern the students. Second, it compels no man 
 to take it who does not wish to. The University says, in 
 effect, we believe in certain doctrines; we desire the instruc- 
 tion of this institution to be in accordance with these ideas. 
 Can you conscientiously teach them? If so, we wish you; 
 if not, we do not wish you. But if you come to us, yon 
 are not compelled to remain, but can go where you will, and 
 when you will, and teach what you please; but so long as 
 'you remain in the service of this institution we expect you 
 to carry out the purposes of its founders. "What is there in 
 this that is particularly narrow and dementing? But the 
 Colonel repudiates his own positions. He says: " The com- 
 mon school is the bread of life, but there should be nothing 
 taught in the school except what somebody knows; any- 
 thing else should not be maintained by a system of general 
 taxation." 
 
 Ingersoll's Inconsistency! 
 
 But, let us inquire, who is to decide "what somebody 
 knows?" Practically, the answer is, the people, or their
 
 80 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 representatives, in school boards, committees, etc. They 
 select the text-books, and they expect instructors whom they 
 engage to follow them, for the text-books are assumed to 
 embody what is true on the subjects to which they relate. 
 "What would the lecturer say of a teacher in one of our public 
 schools who should to-day teach the rejected doctrine that 
 the sun revolves about the earth? "What, but this: turn 
 him out and put some one in his place who teaches the 
 truth which, being interpreted, means, teaches according 
 to the authorized text-books. Why, on the very occasion of 
 the lecture itself, after the Colonel had denounced Andover 
 for pledging loyalty to certain doctrines, and which act he 
 characterizes as so harmful to freedom of thought, he him- 
 self demands of the people whom he is addressing that they 
 will never support a certain form of doctrine, nor give money 
 to aid in building any church in which they are taught. 
 His language is: "I would have every one who hears me 
 swear that he will never contribute another dollar to build 
 another church in which is taught such infamous lies." 
 Mark you, not simply a pledge for five years, but they are 
 never to change their views. My friends, is there no such 
 thing as consistency in belief ? Is one a bigot because he 
 says, This is what I believe, and this, therefore, I defend? 
 Are these men to be ridiculed and assailed, and only those 
 who shirk such responsibility to be held up as patterns and 
 guides? Brethren, I am not speaking of some sophoinoric 
 oration, but about the deliberate thought of a man who has 
 made himself famous in this line of labor, and of whom our 
 townsman who gracefully introduced him said, " a man who 
 does his own thinking, and who thinks before he says." 
 Now, of every such man it is safe to say, he knows that 
 organization is essential to the welfare of society, and is 
 perfectly consistent with liberty of thought. The free- 
 thinkers of this country are organized as well as others;
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 31 
 
 and it is their right to be if they have anything to teach or 
 defend. A Christian combination, against which some peo- 
 ple hurl their anathemas, is simply the grouping together 
 of those who have a similar mind and purpose, the better to 
 do this work which they have in common. Of course there 
 has been in connection with some of these denominations a 
 fearful amount of bigotry. When we come to that topic we 
 are quite at home. Bigotry is no friend of ours: we owe 
 him no service. The denomination which this church rep- 
 resents has received from the dominant sects about us a 
 pretty large share of persecution and abuse. But, for all 
 that, we do not propose to follow the lecturer's example and 
 call our brethren hard names, simply because they apply 
 such epithets to us. 
 
 He Has no Poetry in His Soul ; Ergo, etc. 
 
 My fourth specification is, that he misrepresents the wri- 
 tings of Moses, and, as to that, the entire Bible, by treating 
 its metaphoric language as literal statements. 
 
 Think of a man, in this age of light, speaking of the pic- 
 tured representation of the Old Testament in this way: 
 " Thev believed that an an^el could take a lever, raise a 
 
 / o ' 
 
 window, and let out the desired quantity of moisture. I 
 find out in the Psalms that he bowed the heavens and came 
 down." I wonder if the gentleman can see anything but 
 mere literalism in this passage? "As the mountains round 
 about Jerusalem, so the Lord is round about His people from 
 henceforth, even forever." Like other nations, the Hebrews 
 have their patriotic, descriptive, didactic, and lyrical poems 
 in the same varieties as other nations; but with them, unlike 
 other nations, whatever may be the form of their poetry, it 
 always possesses the characteristic of religion. Even their 
 patriotic songs are a part of their religion. The Jews have 
 taught the world its devotional poetry. If there is to bo 
 
 3
 
 82 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 found anywhere conceptions of the Deity and of the universe 
 more remarkable for their sublimity and grandeur than are 
 met with in the sacred books of the Jews, I know not where 
 to look for them. Certainly when they are compared with 
 the religious poems of other countries, most nearly contem- 
 poraneous, as those of Homer and Ilesiod, they are so vastly 
 superior as to lead to the belief that, if the poets of idola- 
 trous Greece drew their inspiration from human genius and 
 learning, those of Judea had a higher illumination. 
 
 Additional Misrepresentations. 
 
 My fifth specification is, that the representation given in 
 the lecture of the Hebrews as a people, is almost wholly in- 
 correct, both as to the work undertaken by them and the 
 effect of that work upon mankind. 
 
 We have no disposition to shut our eyes to the ignorance, 
 cruelty and superstition of the Hebrew race in the early 
 periods of their history. There was but little in them that 
 gave the promise of a great nation when Moses led them 
 out of Egypt. They were low in the scale of civilization. 
 Many of the things done by them we cannot justify, and 
 we are not required to do so. But what arrests our atten- 
 tion is, that almost from the first they show a gradual im- 
 provement in their condition, and finally reach that proud 
 pre-eminence when Jerusalem became the Athens of its 
 day. There are two points of view from which to judge of 
 the early history of any people: one is, to compare it with 
 that of contemporary nations, and the other is, to compare 
 it with our own time. It is manifest that the former is the 
 proper basis of judgment. Consider, then, as already inti- 
 mated, who the people were that Moses thus led out of 
 Egypt. Reflect that they were but children in intelligence, 
 and that the higher forms of thought had but little influence 
 over them; and that if they were held to the law of duty,
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 83 
 
 and organized into a nation, it must be by such material 
 forms and simple customs as they could comprehend. Re- 
 flect, furthermore, that these people had been brought up in 
 the midst of idolatry, and that in leaving Egypt they did 
 not get away from its influences, but that, wherever they 
 went, they were assailed by it; that idolatry was almost the 
 universal form of worship, and that it was a mighty task to 
 educate these people in the doctrine of the one only living 
 and true God, and hold them to it. Reflect, furthermore, 
 that to secure this end much might then be done which, 
 under the circumstances, would be at least excusable, that 
 should not be done now. Fairness requires that we con- 
 sider whether the custom originated with the Jews them- 
 selves, and what was its spirit and purpose. 
 
 Prominent mention is made in the lecture of polygamy 
 in connection with the Jews, and one would infer from 
 what he says that the custom of plurality of wives originated 
 with them, and that it was a custom peculiar to them. 
 This is his language: "Is there a woman here who believes 
 in the institution of polygamy? Is there a man here who 
 believes in that infamy? You say 'no, we do not.' Then 
 you are better than your God was 4,000 years ago. Four 
 thousand years ago he believed in it, taught it, and upheld 
 it." The facts appear to be these: Polygamy has existed 
 from time immemorial. Even in the Homeric age of the 
 Greeks it prevailed to some extent, and, though not known 
 in republican Rome, it practically prevailed under the 
 Empire, owing to the prevalence of divorce; but in what 
 we call the Eastern nations the custom has been almost 
 universal, being sanctioned by all religions, including that 
 of Mohammedanism. In this regard the Hebrews, to a cer- 
 tain extent, followed the prevalent custom viz: the law of 
 Moses did not forbid it, but did contain many provisions 
 against its worst abuses, and such as were intended to
 
 84 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 restrict it within narrow limits; and, as the spirit of the 
 Hebrew religion advanced the civilization of the nation, 
 the practice more and more fell into disuse, until it finally 
 died out; and in the glimpses of Jewish life which the New 
 Testament gives us, there are no traces of it discernible. 
 Since the Hebrew race the world over, for some 2,000 years, 
 has as much as any other people discountenanced such 
 practices, though still firmly believing in Moses as the 
 prophet of God, it is clear that they do not consider polyg- 
 amy any part of the Jewish system, but a custom permit- 
 ted for a season because so universally practiced by the 
 surrounding nations. 
 
 Doctor Ryder Propounds a Question. 
 
 / But just here comes in a question of high importance. 
 If there is nothing in Judaism to exalt woman and every 
 reference to her in their sacred books is one of " humiliation 
 and shame" how happens it that the Jews discarded the 
 custom of polygamy some two thousand years ago, while 
 the practice still prevails among the nations of the East, 
 and notably in Mohammedanism, which, in so many respects, 
 takes the external form of Judaism? The truth is, that great 
 injustice has been done to the real religion of the Hebrews, 
 by both Christians and unbelievers. "We have judged it too 
 exclusively by the Mosaic law, and the mere letter of it at 
 that. Real Judaism is not the Old Testament, but that 
 which has come out of it the result of its growth, and the 
 expansion of its inherent forces. Long before the advent 
 of our Lord the Mosaic law had virtually given way to the 
 Jewish religion, and it is that religion, the spirit of which 
 in the beginning so largely came from the great law-giver 
 himself that has had three thousand years of existence to 
 certify its right to live, and which to-day assigns it a most 
 honorable place among the religions of humanity. And in
 
 DR. RYDER'S PEPLT. 85 
 
 dismissing this branch of our subject, it seems pertinent to 
 inquire, where did Moses obtain his religious ideas? The 
 Egyptians had reached high advancement in the arts and 
 sciences in the time of Moses, but their degradation in refer- 
 ence to religion is unmistakable. It is said of Moses that 
 he " was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and 
 was mighty in words and deeds; " and he was no doubt 
 greatly aided by what he had learned from them, but it 
 seems too evident to admit of discussion that he did not get 
 his religious ideas from that source. Whence came they? 
 But, whatever may be our answer to this question, there 
 can be, it seems to me, but one opinion as to the respect 
 due to the illustrious religious leader who has made upon 
 the race so profound an impression for good. 
 
 The five specifications now before you cover the evidence 
 we offer of the correctness of our general proposition, viz.: 
 that the address upon " The Mistakes of Moses," is a con- 
 spicuous illustration of prejudice and unfairness. 
 
 Ingersoll Admits His Sad Need of Inspiration. 
 
 . Col. Ingersoll uses this language: " Nothing needs inspir- 
 ation but a falsehood or a mistake. A fact never went into 
 partnership with a miracle." " A fact will fit every other 
 fact in the universe, and that is how you can tell whether 
 or not it is a fact." Suppose we test this rule. How about 
 good and evil, truth and error, the mysterious and the evi- 
 dent, divine sovereignty and human freedom, heat and cold, 
 art and asceticism, economy and benevolence, government 
 and freedom, each of which is an undisputed fact, but each 
 two facts that we thus group together no more fit each other 
 than the centripetal and centrifugal forces, which, acting in 
 opposite directions, hold the universe together? My friends, 
 there is a recognizable distinction between the knowable 
 and unknowable. But the line that separates the two is
 
 
 86 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 not sharply defined. The border land between'them seems 
 sometimes near and at other times very far away. The 
 realm beyond the knowable is the realm of mystery, and 
 out of it come some of the most potential forces that sway 
 our lives. What we call the knowable is those tilings that 
 can be demonstrated can be proved to be true by a prac- 
 tical method. But consider how small a portion of our real 
 life is covered by any such form of real evidence. For 
 neither our affections, nor our tastes, nor our judgments, 
 nor our beliefs, nor our ambitions, nor the higher expres- 
 sions of our moral natures, can be thus demonstrated. 
 They do not in any way depend upon the classification of 
 facts in nature, but are cognizable by our consciousness, 
 and are so widely operative in our daily life, that it almost 
 seems as if what we call the knowable never touches us at all. 
 /" Science has nothing to say about, or to do with, either 
 /morals, religion, benevolence, duty, or inspiration. The 
 Vflources of life, the cause of thought, of affection, passion, 
 hope, and love, are all incomprehensible to science, and Avill 
 remain so till the end of time. "There is no science of the 
 soul, any more than there is a prayer in mathematics.' 1 How 
 utterly, then, does one misapprehend and misstate the real 
 facts of human experience, who teaches that " nothing needs 
 inspiration but a falsehood, or a mistake," and that one is to 
 accept nothing as true which cannot be demonstrated. How 
 much wiser and how much better are the words of St. Au- 
 gustine, when he says: "God exists more truly than he can 
 be thought of; He can be thought of more truly than he 
 can be spoken of." For myself, I reverently believe that 
 the Bible contains a revelation from God. 1 say contains 
 a revelation from God, not that it is in itself such a revela- 
 tion, for the Bible, as such, was not revealed. The inspira- 
 tion that breathes through its pages is of some of the things 
 written, but not of all; the inspiration is rather of the
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 87 . 
 
 thought, purpose, the leadings of God, than of the letter in 
 which they are expressed. There is, to my mind, no appeal 
 from the words of Christ once satisfied that he uttered the 
 sayings which are attributed to Him in the Gospels, and 
 they are, to me at least, infallibly true, and literally "the 
 words of eternal life." 
 
 Ingersoll's " Religion of Humanity " All Right Except 
 
 the Religion. \ 
 
 The influence of such an address is to completely destroy ' 
 the religious faith which the people now have, and give 
 them nothing in return. It is true Mr. Ingersoll commends 
 to his hearers " the religion of humanity." But what does 
 he mean by it? The answer is, he means simply Atheism, 
 which is virtually the rejection of all religion, since it is 
 the denial of the beinor O f God himself. Now with God 
 
 o 
 
 dethroned, the name religion has no further use. What, 
 then, is the religion of humanity to those who deny the 
 existence of God, and leave everything either to chance or in- 
 exorable law? One might infer from the assumption of these 
 Atheistic teachers that free-thinkers are the only people who 
 have any religion of humanity, or who practice it. The 
 general impression made by the Colonel's lecture is that 
 Christians are a bad lot mean, hypocritical, demented kind 
 of folks; and that bright and progressive people, such as 
 " have brains " (though it does not require a large supply 
 of that article to qualify one to ridicule another person's 
 religion) and " do their own thinking," reject all such 
 absurdities as revealed religion, and are governed by some 
 sort of a higher law. 
 
 Now that this view of human nature, so complimentary 
 and congenial, withal, is "quite taking" is very likely true. 
 One likes to be patted on the back in this way, and be 
 called " progressive," and not hide-bound like those old
 
 38 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 fogies, and stupid theological graduates, and owlish minis- 
 ters, and such sort of folks. But somehow it does not seem 
 to stay upon the public stomach after it is taken. For this 
 is just the kind of talk in which noisy infidels have indulged 
 for the past 300 years. " Christianity is virtually extinct," 
 they say, "and now we are to have a new order of things." 
 But, for some reason, Christianity does not die, ,and the 
 world moves forward in much the old way." 
 
 truth is, some things seem very well as declamation 
 that utterly elude you when you attempt to embody them 
 in vital forms. As theories they look well, but in practice 
 they are worthless. They are as beautiful as foam and just 
 as substantial. Where are the monuments of free religion? 
 In the struggle for religious liberty in France I recognize 
 the powerful influence of Voltaire; and an advocacy of a 
 true democracy in this country, very few, if any, did more 
 by their pen than Thomas P<iine; but, aside from these 
 general benefits to society, where are the testimonies of the 
 work they wrought? What did they do for the more per- 
 fect organization of society, and for the elevation and 
 purity of the public morals? I repeat, where are the mon- 
 uments of this free religion? Has it nothing to show in its 
 own behalf but slanderous assertions? And has its most 
 distinguished advocate in this country degenerated into a 
 jesting scoffer? Who built the institutions of learning 
 throughout the Christian world, and who supports them? 
 Who organized the institutions of charity, and who sustains 
 them? I repeat, this "religion of humanity," whatever 
 that may be, does well enough to talk about, but, somehow, 
 when there is solid work to be done nobody wants it, and 
 somehow, nobody seems to do or pay much towards sup- 
 porting it. The leading universities in Germany that did 
 so much forty years ago in disseminating Rationalism are 
 now comparatively empty, while those of the religious
 
 DR. RYDER'S REPLY. 39 
 
 schools are patronized. To-day every prominent university 
 in Germany except that in Heidelberg is controlled in the 
 interests of revealed religion, and Heidelberg has but very 
 few theological students left. And, if one may judge of 
 the effects of teaching by the deportment of those taught, 
 it will be, I think, nearly the unanimous opinion of travelers 
 that they are very badly instructed, for a prominent part of 
 the business of the students of that institution seems to be 
 to get up quarrels with each other and with the public, and 
 fight duels. The truth is, that the sober second thought of 
 the thinking world has shut its " colossal shears" upon the 
 theories of Bauer, Strauss, and Renan, and no wisdom of 
 man will ever reunite the dissevered fragments. 
 
 Dr. Ryder tells a Little Story for the Sake of Illustration. 
 
 How strange it is that nearly all the world should be such 
 simpletons, and that human nature persists in exploding all 
 these fine theories that have no real religion in them. But 
 then, you know, some people are wise in their own conceits. 
 Let me relate an incident: " An eminent lawyer had in 
 court a very clear case. After presenting an array of testi- 
 mony, law, and precedents that he thought was unanswer- 
 able, he submitted his case. To his utter astonishment, the 
 Judge, who was bigotedly and dogmatically on the opposite 
 side in prejudice, decided every point of the case against 
 him. After he had recovered from his amazement, he arose 
 and proceeded to read Blackstone and leading jurists, the 
 statute law, and judicial decisions, flatly contradicting the 
 decision of the Court. The Judge pompously interrupted 
 him with: ' That will do you no good; the mind of the 
 court is made up; cannot change it.' The lawyer replied: 
 1 1 have no expectation of changing the opinion of the 
 court. I do not question the infallibility and the infallible 
 accuracy of its decision. I only want to show what consum-
 
 40 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 mate fools Blackstone, Kent, and all jurists, our legislators, 
 and all the judges, except the judge of this court, must have 
 been.'" 
 
 Friends of humanity, lovers of the truth as it is in Jesus, 
 can we afford to trifle with such a momentous issue as this? 
 Is there nothing sacred, nothing but the mere husk of things 
 in which it is safe for us to place our faith? Is there no per- 
 manent joy this side the grave, and only the blackness of 
 darkness beyond? Is the.religion in which so many millions 
 trust simply a delusion, and the God whom we adore merely 
 -a myth? If so, why are we in this world, and what is this 
 world? What is anything for but to lure us into disap- 
 pointment? 
 
 Nay, we believe in God, the Father everlasting, and in 
 Jesus Christ, Ilis Son. In the love which They awaken, we 
 desire to live; and in the trust which They inspire, we hope 
 to die.
 
 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. 41 
 
 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. 
 
 ALL through my life I have felt a very deep sympathy 
 for those who have become alienated from Christianity by 
 the irrational and unworthy things often taught in its name. 
 It seems such a miserable, gratuitous loss, as if there waa 
 not enough to make even the purest faith often dim and 
 doubtful without it being made more so by the follies of 
 those who should strengthen men in it ! But so it is. And 
 of course one cannot expect men in that strong reaction to 
 be very discriminating in what they attack. But there are 
 limits! A man is not absolved from the duty of thinking 
 and speaking fairly by having come to reject the popular 
 opinions of society. Now it seems to me that this recent 
 lecture of Col. Ingersoll's overpasses all just limits. I 
 frankly own its brilliant eloquence, its irresistible humor, 
 and the passionate impulses of tender human sympathy 
 which flash out in it. I can quite understand many being 
 carried along by these. But afterward has to come the sober 
 thinking and the honest questioning. What does it amount 
 to? Are its positions true? Are its arguments fair? It 
 seems to me that they are glaringly the opposite. The 
 whole test that he applies to his subject is a mistake; the 
 way in which he applies it is not even moderately just; ita 
 representations are one-sided; its illustrations are carica- 
 ture. And the worst of all is that there is no sign even of 
 any desire or attempt to be fairl
 
 42 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 The Ingersoll Paradox. 
 
 The first of Col. Ingersoll's mistakes, is in the whole point 
 of view in which he places the Bible in order to make it the 
 easier target for his wit. He starts by repudiating any idea 
 of its having been written by God's inspiration; and yet 
 all through talks as if God were responsible for it as if 
 God had said this and threatened that and becomes quite 
 heroic in his declaration that God may damn him, but he 
 won't believe such things! When once inspiration is put 
 aside, such declarations are mere clap-trap! When you look 
 through all this, you find that in reality he simply regards 
 the Bible as the work, the ideas of men. Very well; then 
 take it so, and judge it fairly in that light! If the book of 
 Genesis is, as Col. Ingersoll believes, the writings and the 
 ideas of ancient men, then do not attack it because the ideas 
 are not those of men to-day. But that is what he is con- 
 stantly doing. He is very fond of saying, "The question is 
 not, is it inspired, but is it true?" That sounds very plaus- 
 ible, but you know, as applied to any ancient book, it is 
 simply nonsense. It is a test which you don't apply to any 
 other ancient book in the world. You do not try Homer's 
 " Iliad " by the test of whether it is true. When a clay 
 tablet is dug up at Nineveh, or a papyrus is found in some 
 mummy-wrappings, you don't ask, Is it true? and if not, 
 throw it away. The question about all such things is not, 
 "Are they true?" but "Are they genuine relics and repre- 
 sentations of the thought of the ancient world?" By-and- 
 by indeed will come the question, how far any records or 
 statements in such ancient writings can be taken to throw 
 light on actual history how far their statements are alle- 
 gorical or poetical, or mere ancient tradition? Well and 
 good. And by all means let those questions be applied to 
 Genesis; apply them just as you would to any other ancient
 
 DR. IIERFORD'S REPLY. 48 
 
 writings; but in tlie name of common fairness don't pick it 
 to pieces by a minute verbal criticism, and a strained liber- \ 
 ality which would only be justifiable on the ground of its 
 being verbally inspired. That is a mistake which may be 
 merely a mental confusion, but a graver one lies beyond. 
 
 Ingersoll's Exaggerations and False Assertions. 
 
 II r. Ingprsoll not only applies a kind of test to the book 
 of Genesis which he would not think of applying to any 
 other book, but he does not even apply his own test fairly. 
 lie stands upon the very letter, but he constantly misrep- 
 resents and twists the letter. lie exaggerates, makes things 
 worse than they are; if he can make a bad meaning anyhow 
 he does so. lie says: "The gentleman that wrote Genesis 
 begins by telling us that God made the universe out of 
 nothing." It does not say so. It simply says: "In the 
 beginning God created the heaven and the earth." A little 
 further on he makes great fun of the grass being created on 
 the second day, while the sun was not created till the third 
 day, so that the grass was growing without having " ever 
 been touched by a gleam of light." Yet right before him 
 were these words, at the beginning of all: " And God said, 
 let there be light, and there was light." Of course, the 
 whole idea is that of the world's childhood, but why strain 
 a point to make it ridiculous? It is a far worse perversion 
 where he says: "You will find by jeading the second chap- 
 ter that God tried to palm off on Adam a beast as his help- 
 meet." Now there is absolutely no justification for such a 
 representation. The whole thing is a gratuitious invention 
 of his own. These are small verbal matters, but they show 
 the utter unscrupulonsness with which those ancient tradi- 
 tions are exaggerated and distorted to make better point for 
 his ridicule. 
 
 And then, even in larger things, he cannot be decently
 
 44 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 fair, though the explaining truth may lie on the very sur- 
 face. He quotes the first part of the command against mak- 
 ing any graven image, and then goes off into one of its 
 tirades about that being a law which was " the death of all 
 art " among the Jews. Not a word about the closing part 
 of the command really the essence of it: " Thou shalt not 
 bow down to them, nor worship them! " Why, even if it 
 were as he implies, that Moses utterly prohibited all the art 
 of sculpture, the making of idols being merely one part, still, 
 which was of most importance to the world that the Jews 
 should have cultivated art a little more, or that they should, 
 even at the cost of art altogether, be kept from idolatry? 
 But then Mr. Ingersoll is not even true in his fact. The 
 command was only understood as a command against idol- 
 making, not against other forms of sculpture, and the best 
 proof of this is that they did have other forms of sculpture 
 even in Moses' time, and later had art of no ignoble kind. 
 Even there in the wilderness we read how the sacred ark was 
 by Moses' command shadowed over by the images of two 
 cherubim, with outstretched wings made of pure gold, and 
 the candlestick was made with branches which were shaped 
 like almonds, alternately a bud and a flower. And later, 
 when Solomon built the temple, we not only read of two 
 similar cherubim, but of colossal size, extending their wings 
 over the shrine, but also that " he carved all the walls of the 
 house round about with carved figures of cherubim and palm- 
 trees and open flowers; " while in his own palace we read of 
 sculptured pillars, with pomegranate capitals, and images 
 of oxen and lions, round the great brazen "laver." 
 
 Or, take his representation of Christians thinking of 
 Heaven as a place where their happiness will be enhanced 
 by seeing the tortures of the damned. Here he rises to the 
 height of his most fiery indignation. And it is a horrible 
 idea. But then, who holds it who preaches it? It is an
 
 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. 45 
 
 idea of Heaven that was prevalent among one sect of Chris- 
 tians a century ago. But even they have not preached it 
 for a century. And yet he says, without a word of limita- 
 tion, "This is the Christian view of Heaven," and makes a 
 powerful appeal to his hearers not to give a " dollar to any 
 man to preach that falsehood." Why, there is not a churc 
 in all the land where he could find a man preaching that 
 to give his dollar to; no, not even if the person were only 
 a stump politician, turned preacher in the slack season be- 
 tween campaigns. 
 
 And the same of his representation of the attitude of 
 Christianity toward those who do not believe in the early 
 traditions of Genesis. He represents Christianity as teach- 
 ing that any man who does not believe the " rib story " will 
 go to Hell, however good he was in other respects. Is that 
 an honest representation? Why, even if all orthodoxy 
 preached that, orthodoxy is not all of Christianity. Has 
 Col. Ingersoll ever heard of Channing and Parker and Starr 
 King? Are the bodies of the Unitarian church, the Uni- 
 versalists, the Christians, the Quakers, not worth a passing 
 word? Did he not know when he put that champion joke 
 about the " rib story " that he was representing as the teach- 
 ing of the churches what many entire churches, and the best 
 men in all churches, never have held, nor preached, nor 
 countenanced in any way? -Yet he comes rampaging into 
 the field, with a whoop and a yell, brandishing his shillelah, 
 delving Christianity, calling ministers "owls " and " idiots," 
 and swooping round as if he were the first who had found 
 out a little common sense about the Bible! But after all, 
 the real matter at issue is not as to this or that exaggerated 
 or Tinfair criticism of the Old Testament, but has it any 
 real, substantial worth? It has. It gives us the origin of 
 the world's noblest religious faith; it shows us the purest 
 faith of to-day in its first roots in the far-off ancient world;
 
 46 
 
 and so I think it strengthens our conviction that that faith 
 is not a temporary or isolated thing that may be mistaken, 
 but part of that long development of man which surelv 
 corresponds to the truth and fact of the universe. 
 
 Dr. Herford's Story of Moses, with an Apt Illustration 
 The Germinal Power of the Pentateuch. 
 
 When I hear people treating the Pentateuch as something 
 they would like to see done away, I cannot help wishing 
 that it could be dug up afresh in these days of curious 
 research into the past. Why, suppose that the Jews had no 
 such books ; and had not known anything of their origin 
 except a vague tradition of some sort of migration under 
 one Moses, and curiously fitting to this the Egyptian tradi- 
 tion which is, you know, that some thirteen hundred years 
 before Christ a great multitude of people had gone out of 
 Egypt led by an Egyptian priest, who taught them many 
 things contrary to the Egyptian religion, and afterward 
 changed his name to Moses. "Well, supposing then theso 
 books of the Pentateuch should be discovered somewhere 
 why, the world would go wild over them. What would 
 it matter whether it could be settled that Moses did or did 
 not write them or that pcssibly they were really not writ- 
 ten till centuries after, and only preserved what was believed 
 about him at that later date still the fact would remain 
 that they take us by traditions, at any rate, so much further 
 back into the past, and show us there one of the very noblest 
 stories of the world; for that is what the story of Moses 
 is. Take off all the discount you will for exaggeration I 
 dare say the numbers are immensely exaggerated suppose 
 the idea of his having been led by God speaking to him to 
 have been only his own intense consciousness of what was 
 best, ascribed to God; suppose the idea of his having been 
 helped by miracles to have been only his own reverent
 
 DR. IIEPFORD'S REPLY. 47 
 
 impression, ascribing every trouble that came on Egypt, 
 and every favoring circumstance to bis own people, to some 
 purposed and direct belp from God; all tbat does not touch 
 the essence of the story of Moses ! There it stands how 
 those Hebrews through many generations had sunk into the 
 Pariah and Helot class of that great rich Egyptian civiliz- 
 ation; and how at last this Moses rose up, to rally them to 
 a mighty effort to get right away into some other land. He 
 had been somehow brought up among the Egyptians, trained 
 in the sacred city, educated among the priests an adopted 
 son of Pharaoh's daughter but he had given it all up, 
 identified himself with his down-trodden people, and at last, 
 won for them the liberty to go! And they went out out 
 into the great desert waste. What does it matter that the- 
 tradition of their numbers got perhaps enormously exagger- 
 ated ? If there were only a hundredth part thirty thousand! 
 instead of three millions in all there were quite enough to 
 task their leader's fortitude to its utmost; and through those 
 books we have at least very living glimpses of him, in his 
 efforts to keep them from grumbling and getting disheart- 
 ened ; in his efforts to keep them true to his simple teach- 
 ing of the one Almighty God; in his lonely hours when he 
 was listening for the eternal word, and shaping his best 
 thoughts which he believed came to him from God, into laws 
 for his people. And there is the great fact, you know 
 however he did it he did guide and lead them through that 
 long migration, and at last brought them to the land from 
 which their fathers had gone out long before, and bade them 
 go in and possess itl And that multitude whom he led out 
 of Egypt a race of slaves, servile with long oppression, at 
 every difficulty talking of going back, he had in that forty 
 years knit into a brave, hardy, fierce race who did go in 
 and possess the land and became the progenitors of one of 
 the world's noblest races. That is the story of Moses 
 4
 
 48 MISTAKES OF LNGEESOLL. 
 
 just the barest skeleton of it taking one, the largest, 
 most unmistakable features; and I say again there is no 
 finer story in history. And what will you say of a man who 
 will make fun of it? 
 
 Why, what would you think of a man who would go 
 around the country, making fierce fun of Abraham Lincoln, 
 holding up his gaunt, lank figure to ridicule, burlesquing 
 his speeches, denouncing as lies some of those quaint little 
 anecdotes, and holding him upas a fool and an idiot? And 
 yet that glorious work that makes Lincoln's name dear not 
 to Americans only but to the lovers of freedom and of man 
 in every nation that work of his was only the modern 
 counterpart of what Moses did in the morning of the world! 
 
 But the Pentateuch is most valuable, not for the light it 
 throws upon the origin of a people, but for the light it 
 throws upon the origin of ideas. In the teachings of Moses, 
 in the religion of that little migrating tribe, by-and-by 
 fighting for its foothold in Palestine, we have the begin- 
 ings of those thoughts from which have sprung the three 
 greatest, most living religions of the world Judaism, 
 Christianity and Mahommedanism. Granted, the begin- 
 nings are only rude, is that any reason for making fun of 
 them? What would you think of a man who should take 
 one of those rude urns that they dig out of the mound build- 
 er's graves and put it side by side with some beautiful porce- 
 lain of to-day, and scoff and sneer at those early dwellers on 
 the earth because the best decoration they could make was 
 a few rude scratches in the clay with their flint-knives? 
 
 Already, even so far off, the idea of one Almighty God, 
 that which the priests of Egypt held as a sacred mystery 
 if they did hold it that leader of the Hebrews taught his 
 people as the truth for all, and the truth to be kept ever- 
 more before them. Already, too, in the old world, where 
 every race shaped out its thought of God in some idol form,
 
 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. 49 
 
 that leader was giving them as the second of his great com- 
 mands that they should make no idol images at all to wor- 
 ship. Already, too, they had that idea of a God of Right- 
 eousness ! True, their idea of righteousness was not yet very 
 high, but the best they knew they ascribed to God. Where 
 in all the ancient world will you find such a description of 
 Deity as that which Moses brought with him out of the soli- 
 tudes of Sinai? "The Lord; the Lord God, merciful and 
 gracious, long suffering and abundant in goodness and 
 truth; keeping mercy for thousands, bearing with iniquity, 
 transgression and sin, but that will by no means clear the 
 guilty." 
 
 The Mosaic Religion of Humanity. 
 
 NOT is this divine side of that old Hebrew religion all. 
 Mr. Ingersoll is very strong on the religion of humanity. 
 Indeed, that is the only real religion, he says. "Well, where 
 did the religion of humanity begin ? Why, it began there 
 among those same old Hebrews. The religion of a truer 
 thought of God and of a better thought of man went to- 
 gether even in their beginnings, as they did afterward when 
 they both reached their culmination together in Christ, with 
 His great teaching of love to God and love to man. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll, however, has nothing but the bitterest 
 contempt for the morality of the Pentateuch, because it is 
 behind the morality of to-day! " See, you are better than 
 your God," he cries; "for four thousand years ago He be- 
 lieved in polygamy, and you don't! " The truth of which 
 simply is that four thousand years ago polygamy existed 
 among the Jews, as everywhere else on earth then, and even 
 their prophets do not come to the idea of its being wrong. 
 But what is there to be indignant about in that? Simply 
 men whom Mr. Ingersoll regards, in other lectures, as 
 Laving come up from the brutes had then got only so far
 
 50 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 in their ideas of marriage. But if their religion is a good 
 one, what do you expect to find it doing? Altogether al- 
 tering, even BO early, the marriage relation, or purifying 
 and elevating it? Surely this is all we can look for, and 
 this we find. I know that Mr. Ingersoll says: "There is 
 not one word about woman in the Old Testament, except 
 the words of shame and humiliation." Well, though he 
 says he has read the Bible over again this year, I can only 
 conclude he has read it very hurriedly and slightly, for not 
 only are there such passages as that of Naomi and Ruth, 
 the Shunamite woman, Hannah, the mother of Samuel, and 
 that most beautiful picture at the close of the book of Prov- 
 erbs of a good wife, but I think that throughout woman is 
 spoken of in the Bible, not as the slave, but as the compan- 
 ion and the helpmate. The " wise-hearted women " share 
 the work of making that goodliest of the tents which was in 
 the desert wanderings to be the tabernacle ; Miriam, the sister 
 of Moses, holds the place of a prophetess, and other prophet- 
 esses we read of; and the whole law of marriage in the Penta- 
 teuch, with its stern punishment of death for adultery, either 
 on the part of man as well as woman, shows the process of 
 elevation towards that higher law of one wife and one husband 
 which had become universal by the time of Christ. 
 
 Or take the slavery question again. Slavery was univer- 
 sal in the ancient world. Men had not come anywhere to a 
 sense of any inherent wrongfulness in it for a thousand 
 years or two after the time of Moses. But mark where 
 this finer humanity of the Mosaic religion comes in; it al- 
 ready brings glimpses of the idea of an inalienable right to 
 liberty though not a perfect sight of it. The law of the 
 Pentateuch abounds with laws about the relation of master 
 and slave, which, as compared with what we know of slavery, 
 e. g.) among the Greeks and Romans a thousand years later, 
 were simply a marvel of noble humanized thought.
 
 DR. HERFORD'S REPLY. 51 
 
 And then as to the general tone and character of that 
 Mosaic law. Mr. Ingersoll pooh-poohs the Ten Command- 
 ments as merely what men knew before; knew all along. 
 But such a law as this: " Thou shalt not have in thy bag 
 divers weights, a great and a small; but thou shalt have a 
 perfect and just weight a perfect and just measure shalt 
 thou have for all that do such things, and all that do un- 
 righteously, are an abomination unto the Lord thy God;" 
 and this: " If a man shall steal an ox or a sheep he shall 
 restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep; " and 
 this: "Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the 
 stranger as for one of your own country, for I am the Lord 
 your God; " and this: "Thou shalt not oppress an hired 
 servant that is poor and needy whether he be of thy breth- 
 ren, or of the strangers that are in the land; at his day thou 
 ehalt give him his hire; neither shall the sun go down upon 
 it, for he is poor and setteth his heart upon it." There is a 
 good deal of the religion of humanity about these, isn't 
 .there? 
 
 And other laws come in here and there with such a kind 
 consideration for poverty and need. "When a man har- 
 vested he must not reap the corners of his field, nor gather 
 up the gleanings, and if he forgot a sheaf and left it in the 
 field he must not go again and fetch it. " Thou shalt leave 
 them for the poor and the stranger." And this: " "When a 
 man hath taken a new wife he shall not go out to war } 
 neither shall he be charged with any business; but he shall 
 be free at home one year and shall cheer up his wife whom 
 he hath taken." And even in regard to war in which cer- 
 tainly they were fierce enough what a gleam of kindnesg 
 comes in in that command that when they were besieging a 
 city they must not cut down the fruit trees about it for 
 their war purposes, but only trees that they knew were not 
 for fruit Why, I might go on for an hour quoting these
 
 52 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 more merciful laws and showing you the large, grand 
 thoughts of duty that pervade that whole system which the 
 Jews believed had been given to them by Moses. 
 
 But there is nothing really to fear. For the moment 
 many may be led to throw the Bible away, and to give up 
 religion as the weak nonsense he so scornfully proclaims it. 
 Religion will abide in the heart of man. And the Bible 
 will stand because in it we have the accumulated utterance 
 of religion in its best beginnings and along its noblest line 
 of development.
 
 THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY. 5S 
 
 TILE JEWISH EABBPS EEPLY. 
 
 WE need not pray for Col. Robert IngersolPs soul, for he 
 says he has none; and in this instance we are bound to be- 
 lieve him, as he is judge, jury and witness in the case; and 
 there may be men without souls, as there are some without 
 conscience, others without reason, and quite a number with- 
 out principle. The first man of whom the Bible says that 
 he prayed, was Abraham. He prayed for Abimelech. But 
 Col. Ingersoll, we suspect, is not smitten with that disease. 
 He prayed for the wicked people of Sodom and Gomorrah, 
 to which class belongs no American citizen, of course, as 
 " Mitchell's Geography" substantially proves. Jacob prayed 
 when his brother Esau approached him with an armed force; 
 and the Colonel has come to us unarmed, and without any 
 force except a few harmless agents of the Boston Lecture 
 Bureau, who take the money, show the show, and depart in 
 peace. Moses prayed for his sister Miriam when she waa 
 leprous, but Mr. Ingersoll is no woman, and his excellent 
 exterior betokens no leprosy. Joshua prayed to make the 
 sun and moon stand still, but Mr. Ingersoll is neither the 
 greater nor the lesser light, and to the best of our knowledge 
 nobody wants him to stand still at any place. 
 
 Speaking of imagination, it reminds me that Col. Inger- 
 soll said he could not imagine the existence of a God. Im- 
 agine God! Any professor of philosophy would faint if he 
 was told that illogical expression. How can God be im-
 
 M MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 agined? Perhaps one of Mr. Ingersoll's manufactured gods 
 could be imagined in a disorderly imagination, as only phys- 
 ical objects of nature or combinations thereof could be im- 
 agined nothing else. What kind of a god would that bo 
 which could be submitted to the imagination of a man with- 
 out a soul? It must be the miniature or pocket edition of 
 an idol, made by man, such as Col. Ingersoll purchases and 
 exhibits to amuse tall babies. It must be that sort of far- 
 cical gods which he describes in his burlesques. lie is not 
 the first quack who would not take his own medicines, 
 although he is certainly among reasoners the first who would 
 imagine Deity, for none tries to imagine that which reason 
 -only can grasp; none will permit himst^f to be led astray 
 by imagination where pure reflection only can reach the 
 aim. 
 
 The perversion of ideas springs from a mistake about 
 Moses. A god or gods have been fabricated at the expense 
 of Moses, until each little priest had his own snug little god 
 that could be used as the Crusader's emblem or the license 
 of the auto-da-fe, to massacre and glut in human gore, or 
 the frail woman's last resort of love to make honest men 
 out of rogues, pure souls out of the dregs of hell. The god 
 or gods variously depicted, miscellaneously described, and 
 promiscuously applied become objects of imagination, hence 
 also of the farce. The mistake is that Moses was charged 
 with all the follies of theological jugglers and sophistical 
 bummers. The God whom Moses taught is emphatically 
 the God whom no man can see and live, the Great I Am, 
 who is the I, the Ego, the Subject of the Universe, the law, 
 the life, the love and the intellect of the cosmos, the Eternal 
 Jehovah, essence itself, and the absolute substance, in whom 
 all things are as all objects of a man's tender love are in his 
 aoul, of whom all things came and into whom all return. 
 This is not a God fabricated by man, hence lie could not
 
 THE JEWISH EABBVS REPLY. 65 
 
 be imagined by man, as no man can imagine a being supe- 
 rior to himself. This is the God taught by Moses; the other 
 gods may be subjected to farce and ribaldry, while the true 
 Deity is too sublime even for the pyrotechnical displays of 
 Mr. Ingersoll's disentangled humor. It is a mistake about 
 Moses which feeds his boiler to tweedle the rusted think- 
 apparatus of twaddlers. The God of Moses is too great for 
 Mr. Ingersoll; he only deals in gods which can be imag- 
 ined, and in speaking of mistakes of Moses he reverently 
 passes by the God of Moses. The man is not as bad as his 
 reputation. 
 
 I maintain that Col. Robert Ingersoll is not half as bad 
 as his reputation. The man was persecuted by his country- 
 men, was defeated in his political aspirations by church- 
 members, and thinks the Presbyterians have done it. He 
 is a man of prominent talents, belonging to the better class; 
 all on account of the Presbyterians, he was teased, perse- 
 cuted, and wounded in his pride, and so he became a public 
 lecturer. But business is business; if one wants to make 
 money he must know how. He could imagine that people 
 go to the circus to see the clown, to the theater to laugh 
 over the comedian. People want fun to be amused, alcohol 
 to force the blood to the brain, to fill up the vacuum. He 
 could see that earnest men who reason on principles would 
 not take with the masses. Aware of his own talents as a 
 humorist and an orator, of the scarcity of humorists in this 
 country, and the plenitude of slang, low comedy, and uncul- 
 tivated taste, he could only choose the career which he did 
 choose a career of ribaldry, to laugh over everything holy, 
 to sneer alike at human follies, frailties, virtue and piety; 
 and as a business man he has chosen well he makes plenty 
 of money and hurts nobody. A moral effect he will never 
 have upon anybody, because there is no moral force in his 
 burlesque. He is no Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, no
 
 56 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 Yoltaire, Strauss, Feuerbach, or even a Tleinrich Heine, 
 because he lacks the research, the erudition, the systematical 
 learning, and the moral backbone of either of them. lie 
 will not set Rome on fire in order to sing from his balcony the 
 destruction of Troy; he lacks the fire and the torch. It i& 
 all pyrotechnical ribaldry, which sweeps away many a con- 
 sumptive superstition and laughs many a prejudice out of 
 existence; but truth takes care of itself. Let the man, 
 alone; he is better than his reputation. 
 
 Yon think, perhaps, I ought to be very angry, because 
 the gentleman spoke of the mistakes of Moses, and ridiculed 
 the great lawgiver of the Jews. Let me tell you first, any- 
 thing over which you laugh leaves no particular impression 
 behind. That which goes not though the avenues of reason 
 or the depth of the moral sentiment in a short time proves 
 effectless. Scorn is a terrible weapon to achieve moment- 
 ary success, but it is worse than worthless after a second 
 sober thought or a healthy action of the feelings. Then let 
 me say, the theology of Moses is certainly beyond the reach 
 of Col. Ingersoll, for ho is no reasoner; he can spit, but he 
 could not think with philosophical minds. Ho never 
 studied through or even read any of the philosophical 
 systems of Germany, England, or France; nor has he the 
 ability to do it. He is no naturalist of any description, has 
 never troubled himself about any specialty thereof, and so 
 he talks about matters and things in general as is the 
 American custom, what the Germans call Wurst-philosophie, 
 good enough as jokes or for beer-house reasonings. When. 
 he speaks of the infinite he becomes too ludicrous for any- 
 thing, especially for men of thought to make anything out 
 of it. lie will not upset the theology of Moses. 
 
 The law of Moses is also secured against the Colonel's- 
 possible attacks. He will commence no trouble with his- 
 Blackstone or Hugo Grotius, or the other writers on lav
 
 THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY. 57 
 
 who maintain that all law rests upon the Mosaic legisla- 
 tion. 
 
 Thirty -five hundred years of history, and the common 
 consent of the civilized world at this end of the nineteenth 
 century, are a little too much for any man to upset. He 
 says lie could write a better Decalogue than Moses did, but 
 that is said only he is not going to do it; he will not even 
 add a category of law to the ten. 
 
 Well, then, if he is not the man to attack successfully the 
 theology or jurisprudence of Moses, I have no cause to ob- 
 ject to his lectures. He ridicules Bible stories, but that 
 concerns literalists only, not us. If all the stories of the 
 Pentateuch be ridiculed, denied, or otherwise disposed of, it 
 does not change an iota in the jurisprudence or theology of 
 Moses. Let the literalists take up that part; it does not 
 concern us so very much. 
 
 Here, again, is a point which makes me feel bad and badly 
 disposed to the eloquent humorist. Why does he continu- 
 ally repeat that which others have said often before him; 
 why does he not hit upon something original? He re- 
 hearses old rags in new shoddy, and that is unworthy of a 
 man who has any pride about him. He does sometimes 
 worse than that; he ignores his opponents, which no honest 
 man must do. He speaks a long yarn about the history of 
 creation, always assuming an air of originality, without 
 Laving the honesty of mentioning even Dr. J. W. Dawson's 
 work, " The Origin of the World," which upsets his whole 
 twaddle. It is dishonest to make people believe that a 
 thing said is indisputable, when it has been completely 
 upset. 
 
 He appeals to the apotheosis of labor to impeach Moses, 
 because it said in the Genesis that God cursed man. "In 
 the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread;" and labor is a 
 blessing .to man. Did all Socialists clap hands? If not,
 
 58 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 some must have thought this is the language of a dema- 
 gogue, who is either a hypocrite or a self-deluded man. La- 
 bor and hard labor are two different things, and the " sweat 
 of thy brow " points to hard labor, which rests like a curs& 
 upon the poor man, and is the severest punishment imposed 
 on the criminal condemned to hard labor. 
 
 He talks about the creation of woman like an ignorant 
 man who has not the remotest idea of the difficulties among 
 
 zj 
 
 biologists, considering the differentiation of man and the 
 origin of sexes. So he talks about the littleness of the ark 
 and smites Charles Darwin in the face, instead of saying 
 this proves Darwin's theory on the origin of species. TL& 
 scoffs at the God who destroyed His own children and 
 undertakes to teach the Colonel of Peoria how he should 
 educate his. It all depends upon what kind of children one 
 wishes to bring up. Usually every parent brings up his own 
 kind. God wanted them to bring up God-like children, and 
 when they would not do it, he got them out of the way in 
 preference to destroying human freedom or perpetuating 
 wickedness. If it is only to bring up such children as Rob- 
 ert Ingersoll, of Peoria, 111., no such stringency is necessary. 
 Musquashes grow spontaneously in abundance. Then he- 
 speaks about 600 pigeons a day for three priests, and does 
 not know that there were no pigeons in the wilderness, and 
 the Mosaic sacrificial polity was not introduced till Joshua 
 had taken the Land of Canaan, and then there were more 
 priests than there are to-day humorists in America, for 
 Joshua gave them quite a number of cities, and I would 
 not be astonished if those American humorists could eat 
 more pigeons than they can do good in this world. 
 
 But what is the use to speak of the mistakes of Moses? 
 Speak of the mistakes about Moses. Did Moses write the 
 Genesis? Says Col. Ingersoll, "I do not know;" and he 
 does not know a great many other things. Did Moses write-
 
 THE JEWISH RABBI'S REPLY. 59 
 
 the historical portions of the Pentateuch? Says the Illinois 
 Colonel again, "I do not know." If he has written all that, 
 did the translators and commentators which the Colonel 
 read represent correctly the ideas of Moses? " Do n't know," 
 says the Colonel. If those writers do represent the matter 
 correctly, have those points which the Colonel ridicules 
 never been discussed and refuted? "Do n't know," says the 
 Colonel; and decent men must not curse; still they are 
 permitted to say, " Why do you talk of matters of which you 
 know so preciously little? That is all excusable, however, 
 in this case. The humorous and eloquent gentleman is out 
 on a lecture tour, and wants to succeed. This can be done 
 by reckless ribaldry only. It makes no difference whether 
 Hell or gods, Devil or Moses, Pope or Presbyterian church 
 anything that will pay must be pressed into the service. 
 The Colonel's field is small; he has no great choice of sub- 
 jects, and he must take the first best to ridicule it and 
 make it pay. lie has that particular talent, and could not 
 do the same work in another field. He cannot criticise 
 Aristotle and Emanuel Kant and make it pay, because he 
 cannot read them. lie cannot ridicule Carlyle or Stuart 
 Mill, because he cannot understand them. So he picks up 
 some small stories which the children know, and dishes them 
 up in his own humoristic way for the amusement of big 
 babies. The man understands his business to the T. I 
 tell you, he is not as bad as his reputation. I beg a thou- 
 sand pardons of Col. Robert Ingersoll if I have wronged 
 him. I did not mean to make fun of him any way.
 
 [Photographed by Mosher-l
 
 DR. GIBSON'S EEPLT. 
 
 DE. GIBSON'S EEPLT.* 
 
 UNHAPPILY, the attention of Bible students has been aj- 
 most exclusively directed to certain difficulties. These difi 
 ficulties all arise, as it seems to me, from three sources, and 
 the Bible is not to blame for any of them. First source: 
 treating the passage as if it were history, whereas it is apoc- 
 alypse. Second source: taking it as intended to teach sci- 
 ence, especially astronomical and geological science. Third 
 source of difficulty: the mistakes of translators. For exam- 
 ple, the unfortunate word firmament continually comes to 
 the front as one of the " mistakes of Moses." Strange that 
 a Latin word should be a mistake of Moses! Did Moses 
 know Latin? Did he ever write the letters f, i, r, m, etc.? 
 Not only is the word "firmament" not in the Hebrew 
 Bible, but it does not represent the Hebrew word at all. 
 The word firmament means something strong, solid. The 
 Hebrew word for which it is an unfortunate translation, 
 signifies something that is very thin, extended, spread out; 
 just the best word that could be chosen to signify the at- 
 mosphere. 
 
 Then there is the word " whales," that Professor Huxley 
 made so merry over a year ago. But the Hebrew does not 
 eay whales. The Hebrew word refers to great sea monsters, 
 and is just the very best word the Hebrew language affords 
 to describe such animals as the plesiosaurus and ichthyo- 
 saurus and other creatures that abounded in the time prob- 
 
 Portions of this reply receutlv apnenred In the daily press signed "CANDOB:" 
 other portions were selected by the Editor from his new work, Just published by 
 Haudolph <5i to,, New York, enuued "The Ages Before Moses."
 
 62 MISTAKES OF INGEBSOLL. 
 
 ably referred to there. Let us only guard against these 
 three sources of error, and we shall not find many diffi- 
 culties. If we would only avoid the mistakes of Moses* 
 critics, we would not show our ignorance by talking about 
 the mistakes of Moses. 
 
 We have said that almost everybody knows about the 
 difficulties, but how few are there comparatively that know 
 about the wonderful harmonies? So much is said and writ- 
 ten about the difficulties, that many have the idea that the 
 narrative is full of difficulties nothing but difficulties in it 
 nothing that agrees with science as we know it now; 
 whereas, when we look at it, we find the correspondencies 
 most wonderful all the way through. Let us look at a few 
 of them. And first, the absence of dates. The fact is very 
 noteworthy that there is such abundance of space left for the 
 long periods, not till quite recently demanded by science. 
 And this does not depend on any theory of day-periods; for 
 those who still hold to the literal days, find all the room re- 
 quired before the first day is mentioned. Not six thousand 
 years ago, but " in the beginning." How grand and how 
 true in its vagueness. 
 
 Another negative characteristic worth noticing here is the 
 absence of details where none are needed. For example, 
 there is almost nothing said in detail about the heavens. 
 What is said about the heavens in addition to the bare fact 
 of creation, is only in reference to the earth, as, for exam- 
 ple, when the sun and moon are treated of, not as separate 
 j worlds, but only in their relation to this earth as giving 
 .light to it and affording measurements of time. There i& 
 no attempt to drag in the spectroscope! 
 
 Ingersoll Betrays His Ignorance. 
 
 A certain infidel lately seemed to think he had made a 
 point against the Bible by remarking that the author of it
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 63 
 
 had compressed the astronomy of the universe into five 
 (vords. Just think of the ignorance this betrays. It pro- 
 ceeds on the assumption that the author of this apocalypse 
 intended to teach the world the astronomy of the universe; 
 and then, of course, it would have been a very foolish thing 
 for him to discuss the whole subject in five words. Whereas, 
 in this very reticence we have a note of truth. If this work 
 had been the work of some mere cosmogonist, some theo- 
 rist as to the origin of the universe, he would have been sure 
 to have given us a great deal of information about the stars^ 
 But a prophet of the Lord has nothing to do with astrono- 
 my as such. All that he has to do with the stars is to make- 
 it clear that the most distant orbs of light are included in. 
 the domain of the Great Supreme, and this he can do as welt 
 in five words as in five thousand; and so, wisely avoiding- 
 all detail, he simply says, " He made the stars also." There 
 was danger that men might suppose some power resident 
 in these distant stars distinct from the power that ruled the 
 earth. lie would have them to understand that the same 
 God that rules over this little earth, rules to the uttermost 
 bounds of the great universe. And this great truth he lays 
 on immovable foundations by the sublimely simple words, 
 " He made the stars also." But passing from that which 
 is merely negative, see how many positive harmonies there 
 are. 
 
 Harmony of Science and Genesis. 
 
 First, there is the fact of a beginning. The old infidel 
 objection used to be that " all things have continued as they 
 were from the beginning of the creation." Nobody pre- 
 tends to take that position now that science points so clearly 
 to beginnings of everything. You can trace back man to 
 his beginning in the geological cycles. You can trace back 
 mammals to their beginning; birds, fishes, insects to their 
 beginnings; vegetation to its beginning; rocks to their 
 5
 
 
 64 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 beginning. The general fact of a genesis is immovably 
 established by science. 
 
 Secondly, u The heavens and the earth." N"ote the order 
 Though almost nothing is said about the heavens, yet what 
 is said is not at all in conflict with what we now know about 
 them. We know now that the earth is not the center of 
 the universe. Look forward to Genesis iv. 2, and you will 
 find the transition to the reverse order quite appropriate 
 there, as we shall see in the next lecture; but here, where 
 the genesis of all things, the origin of the universe, is the 
 subject, it is not the earth and the heavens, but " in the 
 beginning God created the heavens and the earth." 
 t Thirdly, there is the original chaos. " The earth was 
 without form and void." Turn to the early pages of any 
 good modern scientific book, that attempts to set forth the 
 genesis of the earth from a scientific standpoint, and you 
 will find just this condition described. Observe, too, in 
 passing, how carefully the statement is limited to the earth. 
 The universe was not chaotic then. 
 
 Fourthly, the work of creation is not a simultaneous, but 
 an extended one. If the author had been guessing or 
 theorizing, he would have been much more likely to hit on 
 the idea of simultaneous, than successive creation. But the 
 idea of successive creation is now proved by science to be 
 true. 
 
 Fifthly, there is a progressive development, and yet not 
 a continuous progression without any drawbacks. There 
 are evenings and mornings; just what science tells us of 
 the ages of the past. Here it is worth while perhaps to 
 notice the careful use of the word " created." An objec- 
 tion has been made to the want of continuity in the so-called 
 orthodox doctrine of creation, the orthodox doctrine being 
 supposed to be that of fresh creation at every point. Hut 
 the Bible is not responsible for many " fresh creations."
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 65 
 
 The word " created " is only used three times in the record. \ 
 First, as applied to the original creation of the universe, 
 possibly in the most embryonic state. " In the beginning 
 God created the heavens and the earth." Next, in connec- 
 tion with the introduction of life (v. 2), and last, in refer- 
 ence to the creation of man (v. 27). In no other place is 
 anything said about direct creation. It is rather making, 
 appointing, ordering, saying "Let there be." "Let the 
 waters bring forth," etc. Now, is it not a significant fact 
 that these three points where, and where alone, the idea of 
 absolute creation is introduced, are just the three points at 
 which the great apostles of continuity find it impossible to / 
 make their connections? You will not find any one that is 
 able to show any other origin for the spirit of man than the 
 Creator Himself. You cannot find any one that is able to 
 show any other origin of animal life than the Creator Him- 
 self. There have been very strenuous eiforts made a great 
 many times to show that the living may originate from the 
 not-living; but all these eiforts have failed. And the origin 
 of matter is just as mysterious as the origin of life. No 
 other origin can be even conceived of the primal matter of 
 the universe than the fiat of the great Creator. Thus we 
 find the word " creation " used just at the times when 
 modern science tells us it is most appropriate. 
 
 Sixthly, the progression is from the lower to the higher. 
 An inventor would have been much more likely to guess 
 that man was created first, and afterward the other creatures 
 subordinate to him. But the record begins at the bottom 
 of the scale and goes up, step by step, to the top: again, 
 just what geolouy tells us. All these are great general 
 correspondencies; but we might, 
 
 Seventhly, go into details and find harmonies even there, 
 all the way through. Take the fact of light appearing on 
 the first day. The Hebrew word for " light " is wide enough
 
 66 MISTAKES OF INGEKSOLL. 
 
 to cover the associated phenomena of heat and electricity, 
 and are not these the primal forces of the universe? Again, 
 it used to be a standard difficulty with sceptics that light 
 was said to exist before the sun was visible from the earth. 
 Science here has come to the rescue, and who doubts it now? 
 It is very interesting to see a distinguished geologist like 
 Dana using this very fact that light is said to have existed 
 before the sun shone upon the earth as a proof of the divine 
 origin of this document, on the ground that no one would 
 have guessed what must have seemed so unlikely then. So 
 much for the progress toward the Bible which science lias 
 made since the day when a sceptical writer said of the 
 Mosaic narrative, " It would still be correct enough in great 
 principles were it not for one individual oversight and one 
 unlucky blunder! " the oversight being the solid firmament 
 (whose oversight?), and the blunder, light apart from the 
 sun (whose blunder?). 
 
 I have spoken already about the words " created " and 
 " made," in relation to the discriminating use of them. 
 This word raqia, too, how admirable it is to express the 
 tenuity of our atmosphere, especially as contrasted with the 
 clumsy words used by the enlightened Greeks (stereoma) 
 the noble Romans (firmamentum), and even by learned 
 Englishmen of the nineteenth century (firmament)! And 
 not to dwell on mere words, as we well might, look at the 
 general order of creation: vegetation before animal life, 
 birds and fishes before mammals, and all the lower animals 
 before man. Is not that just the order you find in geology? 
 More particularly, while man is last he is not created on a 
 separate day. He comes in on the sixth day along with the 
 higher animals, yet not in the beginning, but toward the 
 close of the period. Again, just what geology tells us.
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 67 
 
 The Harmony of Genesis and Science, not the Result of 
 Guess "Work, but of Inspiration. 
 
 These are only some of the many wonderful harmonies 
 between this old revelation and modern science. I would 
 like to see the doctrine of chances applied to this problem, 
 to determine what probability there would be of a mere 
 guesser or inventor hitting upon so many things that cor- 
 respond with what modern science reveals. I don't believe 
 there would be one chance in a million! Is it not far 
 harder for a sensible man to believe that this wonderful 
 apocalypse is the fruit of ignorance and guess-work, than 
 that it is the product of inspiration? It is simply absurd to 
 imagine that an ignorant man could have guessed so hap- 
 pily. Nay, more. Let any of the scientific men of to-day 
 set themselves down to write out a history of creation in a 
 space no larger than that occupied by the first chapter of 
 Genesis and I do not believe they could improve on it at all. 
 And if they did succeed in producing anything that would 
 pass for the present, in all probability in ten years it would 
 be out of date. Our apocalypse of creation is not only bet- 
 ter than could be expected of an uninspired man in the 
 days of the world's ignorance, but it is better than Tyndall, 
 or Huxley, or Ilaeckel could do yet. If they think not, let 
 them take a single sheet of paper and try! 
 
 . It is of great importance to remember that the sym- 
 bolism attaches to the form, and not to the substance of the 
 history. To call this whole story of the Fall a mere alle- 
 gory, is to take away from it all historical reality. Let us 
 distinguish carefully between the reality of the history, 
 which is a very important thing, and the literalily of it, 
 which is of minor importance. It is very unfortunate that 
 eo much time is often spent upon the mere letter, regardless 
 of the warning of the great apostle: "The letter killeth,
 
 68 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 but the spirit givetli life. This accounts for nine-tenths of 
 the difficulties people have about it. Suppose a person, 
 seeing a cocoanut for the first time, and being told it was 
 good for food, should spend all his time gnawing away at 
 the shell, and never get at the kernel. No wonder of his 
 verdict should be. it is not fit to eat. So you will find that 
 most of the people who have insuperable difficulties with 
 the Bible are those who are busying themselves all the time 
 about the shell and never get hold of the kernel. If they 
 could only seize the kernel they would so readily see the 
 beauty and enjoy the taste, and find the use of it; and then, 
 perhaps, they would begin to see some beauty and some 
 usefulness in the shell too. " The letter killeth, but the 
 Spirit giveth life." 
 
 A very good illustration of this is found in the fifteenth 
 verse of the third chapter, where we read about " the seed 
 of the woman bruising the head of the serpent." The liter- 
 alists get nothing more out of it than a declaration that in 
 time to come serpents will annoy the descendants of Eve by 
 biting at their heels, and on the other hand, the descendants 
 of Eve will destroy serpents by crushing their heads! The 
 mere shell of the thing manifestly. The reality, as pictured 
 there, is of a great conflict to go on throughout all these 
 ages of development; a great conflict between the forces of 
 good on the one hand, and the forces of evil on the other. 
 Of this conflict the issue is not doubtful. There is to be 
 serious trouble all the while from the forces of evil, but in 
 the end these forces will be crushed. There is One coming 
 a descendant of this same woman, called here " the seed 
 of the woman" who will at last "bruise the head of the 
 serpent," and gain the victory, and bring in that glorious 
 era when sin and suffering and pain and death shall have 
 all rolled away into the past. There is a great deal more 
 than this in that wonderful verse more than we would
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 69 
 
 have time to tell though we spent a whole hour on it. "We 
 only refer to it now as an illustration. 
 
 And now, what matters it whether you take the "ser- 
 pent " that tempted Eve to be a real and literal serpent, or 
 the mere (phenomenal) form of a serpent assumed by the 
 Spirit of Evil for the purpose? or even whether the serpent 
 form is connected with the old style of pictorial representa- 
 tion? All that is minor and subordinate. There is no use 
 of wasting time on it. All we want to be sure of is the 
 truth, that there was a tempter, an evil spirit, that in a 
 seductive form tempted our first parents and they fell. Let 
 us by all means beware of allowing our time to be frittered 
 away by mere trivial questions of the letter, instead of mak- 
 ing it our great .aim to see and to seize the great spiritual 
 truths set forth in this old and simple record. 
 
 There are many who represent this book of the Genera- 
 tions as a second edition of the Genesis, or separate account 
 of the creation ; and of course they find difficulty in compar- 
 ing the two. All their difficulty, as we shall see, comes from 
 their not understanding the passage as a whole, their not 
 perceiving what it was intended to teach. It will help us to 
 meet this difficulty if we follow the same order of ideas as in 
 the exposition of Genesis i., viz.: God, Nature, Man. In all 
 we shall find marked differences. But these differences, in- 
 stead of presenting any difficulty, will have their reason 
 made abundantly manifest. 
 
 /God 
 ii 
 
 iifferent name for God introduced 
 here. All through the Genesis it has been " God said," 
 "God made," " God created." Now it is invariably, "Je- 
 hovah God " (LORD God in our version). And this is the 
 only continuous passage in the Bible where the combination 
 is used. How is this explained? Very easily. In the
 
 70 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 apocalypse of the Genesis, God makes Himself known sim- 
 ply ^fts Creator. Sin lias not yet entered, and so the idea of 
 salvation has no place. In this passage sin is coining in, 
 and along with it the promise of salvation. Now the name 
 Jehovah is always connected with the idea of salvation. It 
 is the covenant name. It is the name which indicates 
 God's special relation to His people, as their Saviour and 
 Redeemer. This name is introduced now, because God is 
 about to make Himself known in anew character. lie ap- 
 peared in Genesis simply as Creator. lie appears now in 
 the book of the Generations as Redeemer; and so we get 
 the name Jehovah in place of the name God. But lest any 
 one should suppose from the change of name that there is 
 any change in the person; lest any one suppose that He 
 who is to redeem us from sin and death, is a different being 
 from Him who created the heavens and the earth, the two 
 names are now combined Jehovah God. The combination 
 is retained throughout the entire narrative of the Fall to 
 make the identification sure. Thereafter either name is 
 used by itself without danger of error. 
 
 Nature. 
 
 Look next at the way in which Nature is spoken of here. 
 "When you look at it aright, you find there is no repetition. 
 Nature in the Genesis is universal nature. God created all 
 things. But here, nature comes in, as it has to do immedi- 
 ately with Adam. Now see the effect of this. It at once 
 removes difficulties, which many speak of as of great mag- 
 nitude. 
 
 In the first place, it is not the whole earth that is now 
 epoken of, but a very limited district. Our attention is 
 narrowed down to Eden, and the environs of Eden, a limi- 
 ted district in a particular part of the earth. Hence the 
 difficulty about there not being rain in the district ("earth")
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 71 
 
 disappears. Let me here remind you once or all that the 
 Hebrew word for earth and for land or district is the same. 
 See Gen. xii., 1., where the word is twice used, translated 
 "country" and "land." 
 
 Again, it is not the vegetable kingdom as a whole that is 
 referred to in the fifth verse, but onlv the agricultural and 
 
 */ o 
 
 horticultural products. The words "plant," "field" and 
 "grew" (v. 5) are new words, not found in the creation 
 record.* In Gen. i. the vegetable kingdom as a whole was 
 spoken of. Now, it is simply the cereals and garden herbs, 
 and things of that sort; and here instead of coming into col- 
 lision with the previous narrative, we have something that 
 corresponds with what botanists tell us, that field and gar- 
 den products are sharply distinguished in the history of 
 nature from the old flora of the geological epochs. 
 
 In the same way it is not the whole animal kingdom that 
 is referred to in verse nineteen, but only the domestic ani- 
 mals, those with which man was to be especially associated, 
 and to which he was very much more intimately related 
 than to the wild beasts of the field. It may be easy to 
 make this narrative look ridiculous, by bringing the wild 
 beasts in array before Adam, as if any companionship with 
 them were conceivable. But when we bear in mind that 
 reference is made here to the domestic animals, there is 
 nothing at all inappropriate in noticing that while there is a 
 certain degree of companionship possible between man and 
 eoine of those animals, as the horse and dog, yet none of 
 these was the companion he needed. 
 
 In the first chapter of Genesis, nature is the great theme. 
 We are carried over universal nature, and the great truth is 
 there set forth, that God lias created all things. In the sec- 
 ond chapter of Genesis, man is the great theme, and conse- 
 
 * The correct translation of the fifth verse is: " Now no plant of the 
 field was yet in the land, and no herb of the field was growing."
 
 72 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 "quently nature is treated of only as it circles around him, 
 and is related to him. This sufficiently accounls for the 
 difference between the two. 
 
 Man. 
 
 Passing now from nature to Man, we find again a marked 
 difference. In Gen. i. we are told, " God created man in 
 His own image; in the image of God created lie him." 
 And here: "The Lord God formed man of the dust of the 
 ground." (ii. 7.) Some people tell as there is a contra- 
 diction here. Is there any contradiction, let me ask? Are 
 not both of them true? Is there not something that tells 
 you that there is more than dust in your composition? Is 
 there not something in you that tells you, you are related 
 to God the Creator? When you hear the statement that 
 " God made man in His own image, is there not a response 
 awakened in you something in you that rises up and says, 
 It is true? On the other hand, we know that man's body 
 is formed of the dust of the earth. We find it to be true 
 in a more literal sense than was formerly siipposed, now 
 that chemistry discloses the fact that the same elements 
 enter into the composition of man's body, as are found by 
 analysis in the "dust of the ground." 
 
 And not only are both these statements true, but each is 
 appropriate in its place. In the first account, when man's 
 place in universal nature was to be set forth man as he 
 issued from his Maker's hand was it not appropriate that 
 his higher nature should occupy the foreground? His lower 
 relations are not entirely out of sight even there, for he is 
 introduced along with a whole group of animals created on 
 the sixth day. But while his connection with them is sug- 
 gested, that to which emphasis is given in the Genesis is 
 his relation to his Maker. But now that we arc going to- 
 hear about his fall, about his shame and degradation, is ii
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 73 
 
 not appropriate that the lower rather than the higher part 
 of his nature should be brought into the foreground, inas- 
 much as it is there that the danger lies? It was to that part 
 ef his nature that the temptation was addressed; and so we 
 read liere, " God formed man of the dust of the ground." 
 Yet here, too, there is a hint of his higher nature, for it is 
 added, " He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life," 
 or as we have it in another passage, " The inspiration of the 
 Almighty gave him understanding." 
 
 In this connection it is worth while to notice the use of 
 the words ''created" and "formed." " God created man 
 in His own image." So far as man's spiritual and immor- 
 tal nature was concerned it was a new creation. On the 
 other hand, "God formed man out of the dust of the 
 ground." We are not told He created man's body out of 
 nothing. We are told, and the sciences of to-day confirm 
 it, that it was formed out of existing materials. 
 
 'Woman. 
 
 Then, in relation to Woman, there is the same appropri- 
 ateness in the two narratives. In the former her relations 
 to God are prominent: "God created man in His own im- 
 age. In the image of God created He him; male and fe- 
 male created He them " man in His image; woman in His 
 image. In the latter, it is not the relation of woman to 
 her Maker that is brought forward, but the relation of wo- 
 man to her husband. Hence the specific reference to her 
 organic connection with her husband. 
 
 Here, again, it is very easy for one that deals in literali^ 
 ties to raise difficulties, forgetting that there is no intention \ 
 here to detail scientifically the process of woman's forma- \ 
 tion,but simply to indicate that she is organically connected 
 with her husband. It is here proper to remark that the ren- 
 dering "rib" is probably too specific. The word is more
 
 74 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 frequently used in the general sense of " side." As an ev- 
 idence that there is no intention to give here any physio- 
 logical information as to the origin of woman, we may refer 
 to the words of Adam : " This is now bone of my bone and 
 flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman, because she- 
 was taken out of man." And now, is there anything irra- 
 tional in the idea that woman should be formed out of man?' 
 Is there anything more mysterious or inconceivable in the 
 formation of woman out of man, than in the original form- 
 ation of man out of dust? Let us conceive of our origin 
 in any way we choose, it is full of mystery. Though there- 
 may be mystery connected with what is said in the Bible, 
 there will be just as much mystery connected with any other 
 account you try to give of it. Matthew Henry, in his 
 quaint and half-humorous way, really gets nearer to the 
 -true spirit of the narrative than any physiological inter- 
 /preter can, when he makes the remark that some of you- 
 / may be familiar with, " that woman was taken out of man, 
 / not out of his head to top him, nor out of his feet to be 
 trampled underfoot; but out of his side to be equal to him, 
 under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be 
 beloved." Another remark of his is worth quoting. Re- 
 ferring to the fact of Adam's being first formed and then. 
 Eve, and the claim of priority and consequent superiority, 
 as made on his behalf by the apostle Paul, he says : " If 
 man is the head, she is the crown a crown to her husband, 
 the crown of the visible creation. The man was dust re- 
 fined, but the woman was dust double-refined one remove 
 further from the earth." 
 
 But, Matthew Henry apart, one thing is certain, that this 
 old Bible narrative, while it has not done that which it was 
 never intended to do, while it has given no scientific expla- 
 nation of either man's origin or woman's origin, has never- 
 theless accomplished its great object. It has given woman.
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 7& 
 
 her trne place in the world. It is only in Bible lands that 
 woman has her trne place; and it is only there that marriage 
 has its proper sacredness. Here as everywhere else, we see 
 the practical power of the Bible. It was not written to 
 satisfy curiosity, but to save and to bless; and most salutary 
 and most blessed has been the influence of these earliest 
 words about woman, setting forth her true relation to man 
 and to God, to her earthly husband and her heavenly Father. 
 
 Mistakes Respecting Labor and Death, Corrected. 
 
 . . . The Bible has been charged with representing labor 
 as a curse. The charge is not true. On the contrary, we are 
 told that Adam was appointed in Eden to dress the garden 
 and keep it. The law of labor came in among the blessings 
 of Eden, along with the law of obedience and the marriage 
 law. It is a slander on the Bible to say that it represents 
 labor as a curse. It is not the labor that is the curse. It is 
 the thorns and the thistles. It is the hardness of the labor. 
 " In the sweat of thy brow thou shalt eat bread." Labor 
 would have been easy and pleasant otherwise. 
 
 Then in regard to death. There are those who represent 
 the Bible as if it taught that death was unknown in the 
 world until after the Fall. And then they point us to the 
 reign of death throughout the epochs of geology as contra- 
 dicting the Bible. Now, the Bible teaches nothing of the 
 kind. On the contrary, there seems rather to be a suggestion 
 that death was in existence among the lower animals all the 
 way through. Not to speak of the probability that one of 
 the divisions of animals, mentioned in the first chapter of 
 Genesis, corresponds with the carnivora, is there not some- 
 thing in the way the subject of death is introduced, which 
 rather suggests the idea that it was already known? It was 
 a new thing to Adam. It was not a new thing to animal 
 life. Man had been created with relations to mortality
 
 76 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 below him, but with relations also to immortality above 
 him. Had he not fallen, his immortal nature would have 
 ruled his destiny; but now that he has separated himself 
 from God by his sin, his lower relations, his mortal relations, 
 must rule his destiny. Instead of having as his destiny the 
 prospect of being associated with God in a happy immor- 
 tality, he is degraded from that position, and is henceforth 
 associated with the animals in their mortality. We are told 
 that " death passed upon all men, because all have sinned." 
 But you do not find a passage in the Bible asserting that 
 death passed upon the animals because of man's ein. 
 
 The Deluge and its Difficulties Not Universal Ararat 
 
 Originally a District (Alas ! Ingersoll Calls it a High 
 
 Mountain) Other Deluges. 
 
 ... We must here touch a little on the difficulties con- 
 nected with the story of the flood. These difficulties are 
 almost all founded upon the idea that the deluge was univer- 
 sal; that it covered the highest tops of the Himalayas in 
 India, the Rocky Mountains here, and all the mountains over 
 all the earth. It is but reasonable, then, to ask if there ia 
 good reason for insisting that it was universal? 
 
 I know of only three strong reasons that are given for this 
 position. The first is the use of the term " earth " continu- 
 ally throughout the narrative, which only proves that those 
 who translated the Bible into English, believed the flood to 
 have been universal. As we have had occasion already to 
 prove, the word "earth " in Hebrew means just as readily a 
 limited district. Why do not those who insist so strongly 
 on the wide signification of "earth" here, not insist upon 
 the same interpretation in such a passage as Genesis, xii. 1, 
 and make it an article of faith that Abraham left the world 
 altogether and went to another, when he left Ur of the 
 Chaldees and went to Canaan? The second argument for
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 71 
 
 universality is found in universal expressions, th& strongest 
 of which is Gen. vii. 19: "And the waters prevailed ex- 
 ceedingly upon the earth, and all the high hills that were 
 under the whole heaven were covered." Now remember 
 that this is the account of an eye-witness, vividly describing 
 just what he saw, water on every side, water all around, 
 nothing but water even the mountains to the farthest verge 
 of the horizon covered over with water. When, in the book 
 of Job, we read of the lightning flashing over the whole 
 heaven, the meaning surely can not be that a lightning flash 
 starts at a certain degree of latitude and longitude, and 
 makes a journey right round the world to the point where 
 it started. " The whole heavens " is evidently bounded by 
 the horizon. The third reason which has led people to sup- 
 pose the whole earth was covered with water, is found in 
 the tradition that the ark rested on Mount Ararat. The 
 tradition, we say, for that is all the authority there is for the 
 idea. In Gen. vii. 4, we are told that the ark rested on the 
 mountains or highlands of " Ararat." The word " Ararat " 
 only occurs other two times in the Bible, and in neither 
 place does it refer to what was only long afterward called 
 Mt. Ararat. In Old Testament times Ararat was not a 
 mountain at all, but a district, on some of the highlands of 
 which the ark rested. A moment's thought will show that 
 it could not be on the top of Ararat. It would require one 
 of the hardiest mountaineers to perform such a feat as the 
 climbing of Ararat. It would be the most inconvenient 
 place you could think of for the ark to rest on. When you 
 look fairly at these three arguments that are urged in sup- 
 port of a universal deluge, you will find that none of them 
 really demand it. 
 
 On the other hand, there are things that seem to point 
 the other way. In the eleventh verse of the seventh chap- 
 ter we are told that " in the second month, the seventeenth
 
 78 MISTAKES OF INGEESOLL. 
 
 day of the month, were all the fountains of the great deep 
 broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." 
 There is no indication there of the sudden creation of such 
 a body of water as would cover the earth to the depth of 
 30,000 feet above the old sea-level. The causes that are as- 
 signed are just such as could be most readily and naturally 
 used. It may be worth while to notice here in passing, an 
 attempt which has been made recently to cast ridicule upon 
 the story of the flood, by representing the Bible as if it 
 attributed the deluge to nothing else than a long, heavy 
 rain, whereas the first importance is given to an entirely 
 different cause: "the fountains of the great deep were bro- 
 ken up." That is just what would appear to one who was- 
 describing such a scene as we imagine this to be. Suppose 
 there had been some great submergence of the land there, 
 | as has taken place in other parts of the world. There would 
 ' be a rushing up of water from below, from " the fountains 
 of the great deep." 
 
 Again, in the first verse of the eighth chapter, natural 
 agency is made use of: " God made a wind to pass over the 
 earth, and the waters assuaged." There is no reason why 
 we should suppose a greater miracle performed than waa 
 necessary. Still further; turn to the tenth verse of the ninth 
 'chapter, where God says: " I establish my covenant with 
 you, and with every living creature that is with you; from 
 all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth.'* 
 What were those beasts of the earth thus distinguished from 
 those going out of the ark? Probably they were those that 
 came from the area of land not covered by the flood. 
 
 Then again, attention is called to the purpose of the flood, 
 which was simply to destroy the race of men, and it is not 
 to be supposed they had traveled a great distance by this 
 time from their original place of abode. The extent of the 
 flood need not have been any greater than was necessary to- 
 submerge that area.
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 79 
 
 Further, when we take this view, not only do geological 
 and other difficulties disappear, but there is decided confir- 
 mation from modern scientific research. There is no evi- 
 dence in geology that there was in any period of the earth's 
 history, a flood great enough to overtop the Rocky Moun- 
 tains, but there are evidences of floods as great as this one 
 must have been, for the purpose of destroying the race. I 
 do not know how it is in the immediate region where the 
 flood is supposed to have been. I do not know whether 
 geologists have explored it sufficiently; but this is certain, 
 that there are evidences of similar floods in other parts of 
 the world. Some of our own geologists have discovered 
 evidences of them in this very neighborhood. You have not 
 to go very far from Chicago to find such traces of sudden, 
 powerful, and transient diluvial action. Then, finally, this 
 view of the deluge removes, of course, all difficult}' about 
 the number of animals in the ark, because all that was 
 necessary was, that the species more nearly connected with 
 man, those found in the region that was submerged, should 
 be represented in the ark. 
 
 But after all, the question of extent is of quite minor 
 importance so long as it is conceded that it was universal in 
 the sense of destroying all but the family of Noah. The 
 reality of the judgment is the great thing, and of this we have 
 abundant confirmation from tradition. We find legends of 
 a flood everywhere. "We find them among the Semitic and 
 Aryan and Turanian races. "We find them east and west, 
 and north and south; in savage nations and civilized nations; 
 on continents and in islands; in the old world and in the 
 new. And if Egypt is a solitary exception, which is very 
 doubtful, but if it is, the exception is accounted for by the 
 simple fact that in that country they have floods every year. 
 
 Ilere again, as in the traditions of the Fall, there is 
 difference enough to show which is the original and true.
 
 80 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 Other traditions of the flood are polytheistic, whereas here 
 we have the one living and true God. Those are full of 
 mythological elements, whereas here is a plain narrative, 
 with the impressive scene vividly, but quite simply, depicted. 
 In heathen traditions, too, you find many grotesque items 
 and exaggerations, as for instance, when the ark is described 
 as three-fourths of -a mile long, and drops of rain the size 
 of a bull's head; and, generally speaking, a conspicuous ab- 
 sence of that moral purpose which is so impressive and all- 
 pervading in the narrative before us. 
 
 Faith in Jesus Christ the Essential Factor. 
 
 . . . There are those in our day who find a stumbling- 
 block at the very threshold of the Christian life, in the fancy, 
 that what is required of them in order to salvation, is the cred- 
 iting of all the details of a long history extending from the 
 first man to the last man, from Adam to the consummation 
 of all things; and long accustomed to that sceptical attitude 
 of mind which questions all things, they think it would 
 take them a life-time (as indeed it would) to verify every 
 / statement that is made from Genesis to Revelation, and 
 clear them from all possible objections; and so they do not 
 venture at all. But remember, it is never said: " Believe 
 everything that is in the Bible and you will be saved." Ah, 
 i \\there have been many who believed everything in the Bible, 
 who never thought of questioning a sentence in it, who will 
 find themselves none the better for their easy acquiescence 
 in the statements of a book which they had been taught to 
 accept as inspired. There is no such word written as, 
 "Believe the Bible and you will be saved." No. It is 
 " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt bo 
 saved." Do not trouble yourselves in the first instance about 
 questions connected with the book of Genesis, or difliculties 
 suggested by the book of Revelation. Let the wars of the
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 81 
 
 Jews alone in the meantime, and dismiss Jonah from your 
 mind. Look to Jesus; get acquainted with Him; listen to 
 Ilisworcl; believe in Him; trust Him; obey Him. That 
 is all that is asked of yon in the first instance. After you 
 have believed on Christ and taken Him as your Saviour 
 your Master, your Model, you will not be slow to find out 
 that " all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is 
 profitable for doctrine and for reproof, and for correction, 
 and for instruction in righteousness." You may never 
 have all your difficulties solved, or all your objections met; 
 but though difficulties may still remain, and interrogation 
 points be scattered here and there over the wide Bible-field, 
 you will be sure of your foundation ; you will feel that your 
 feet are planted on the " Rock of Ages," even on Him of 
 whom God, by the mouth of the prophet Isaiah, said: 
 " Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation, a stone, a tried 
 stone, a precious corner-stone, a sure foundation: he that 
 belie veth shall not make haste." 
 
 Candor v. Injustice Dr. Gibson's Pointed Summary. 
 
 The prevailing feeling among intelligent readers of the 
 Bible in reference to the profane and coarse assaults made 
 on it by Mr. Eobert Ingersoll, is that few people are so 
 ignorant as to be imposed upon by his vulgar witticisms. 
 But, inasmuch as there are not a few who accept without 
 inquiry his account of what is in the Bible, it may be well 
 to give a few illustrations of his unscrupulousness in put- 
 tino- "mistakes" into the Bible which he either knows or 
 
 O 
 
 ought to know, are not there. 
 
 He asserts positively that Moses must have understood 
 by firmament something solid, though every one who has 
 studied the subject knows, and the fact has been published 
 again and again, that the Hebrew word means something
 
 82 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. . 
 
 exceedingly attenuated, being the very best word in the 
 language to designate the atmosphere; while the mistake 
 found in the English word " firmament," is due to the sci- 
 ence of Alexandria, where in the third century before 
 Christ, the " expanse " of Moses was translated " stereoma" 
 (firmament) to suit the advanced astronomy of the time. 
 ( When, in speaking of the vegetation of the third day, he 
 says, " Not a blade of grass had even been touched by a 
 single gleam of light," is he dealing fairly with a narrative 
 that makes light its first creation ? 
 
 /' When he accuses Moses of compressing the astronomy 
 of the universe into five words, is he dealing fairly with a 
 narrative that does not profess to give any astronomy at 
 all, but, after a general reference to the heavens and the earth 
 as created in the beginning, restricts itself to the earth and 
 its "environment?" Any intelligent person can see that 
 this is the reason why sun, moon and stars are referred to 
 only in their relations to the earth. 
 
 When he represents the first and second chapters of Gen- 
 esis as a varying repetition of the same story, is it fair to 
 withhold all reference to the different purport and object of 
 the two narratives, which fully and satisfactorily explains 
 the variation? 
 
 / Is it fair to speak of the deluge to represent it as ascribed 
 to nothing but rain, when the Bible expressly says, "All 
 the fountains of the great deep were broken up," evidently 
 pointing to such a subsidence of the land as is familiar to 
 any one acquainted wi th geology. 
 
 ( Is it fair to make the Bible responsible for the Armenian 
 tradition that the ark rested on the top of Mount Ararat, 
 17,000 feet high, when the Bible nowhere, from Genesis to 
 Revelation, makes any such statement? The district of 
 Ararat on the mountains or highlands of which the ark 
 rested is not the " Agri-Dagh" to which the name Ararat
 
 DR. GIBSON'S REPLY. 83 
 
 has in modern times been given; and Mr. Ingersoll's 
 ignorant mistake about it is oi the same kind as that of the 
 bumpkin who should inquire for the Coliseum in Home, N. 
 Y., or seek the tomb of Leonidas in Sparta, Wisconsin. 
 
 It will be at once seen that with this childlike ignorance 
 is connected the Ingersoll nonsense that the water was five 
 and a half miles deep. So says the ignorant critic, while 
 the simple and reasonable statement of the Bible is: 
 "Fifteen cubits upwards did the water prevail." As for the 
 submersion of even the hills to the utmost verge of the 
 horizon, the subsidence of the land was quite sufficient to 
 accomplish it without resorting to the supposition of any 
 unreasonable quantity of water. 
 
 Is it fair, when Mr. Ingersoll wishes to render ridiculous 
 the rate of increase among the Israelites in Egypt, to rep- 
 resent the length of their stay there as 215 years, when 
 Moses says (Exodus, xii., 40): " Now the sojourning of the 
 children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was 430 years." 
 The only other place in the Pentateuch where the length of 
 their stay is referred to is in the prediction concerning it in 
 Genesis xv., where it is put in round numbers at 400 
 years. To do Mr. Ingersoll justice, it is admitted that 
 certain theologians, on the strength of one or two passages 
 in the New Testament and some genealogical difficulties, 
 bave favored shortening the period, but the subject was not 
 the mistakes of Moses, but of theologians; and again we 
 ask, Was it fair, without a word of apology or explanation, 
 to deduct more than two centuries from the time Moses 
 gives, and then make all his coarse, not to say indecent, 
 ridicule turn on the shortness of the time? 
 
 One hardly knows how to characterize the infamy of such 
 a passage as that about the bird-eating priests during the 
 time of rapid increase, in view of the fact that there were 
 GO priests at all, and no such rule as he refers to during the
 
 84 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 entire 430 years! The consecration of Aaron, the first 
 priest, did not take place till after the Law was given at 
 Sinai, and the ordinance relating to the offering of the 
 pigeons was still later. These are mere specimens of the 
 mistakes and misrepresentations which form the warp and 
 woof of this lecture.
 
 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAY OF THE BIBLE. 85 
 
 SCIENTISTS. 
 
 THE grand old book of God still stands, and this old earth, 
 the more its leaves are turned over and pondered, the more 
 it will sustain and illustrate the sacred word. Professor 
 Dana. 
 
 INFIDELITY has, from time, erected her imposing ramparts, 
 and opened fire upon Christianity from a thousand batter- 
 ies. But the moment the rays of truth were concentrated 
 upon their ramparts they melted away. The last clouds of 
 ignorance are passing, and the thunders of infidelity are 
 dying upon the car. The union and harmony of Christian- 
 ity and science is a sure token that the flood of unbelief and 
 ignorance shall never more go over the world. Professor 
 Hitchcock. 
 
 ALL human discoveries seem to be made only for the pur- 
 pose of confirming, more and more strongly, the truths 
 contained in the sacred Scriptures. Sir John Uerschel. 
 
 THE Bible furnishes the only fitting vehicle to express the 
 thoughts that overwhelm us when contemplating the stellar 
 universe. O. M. Mitchell. 
 
 IN my investigation of natural science, I have always- 
 found that whenever I can meet with anything in the Bible,,
 
 86 MISTAKES OF INGEIiSOLL. 
 
 on any subject, it always affords me a fine platform on which 
 to stand. Lieutenant Mau'ry 
 
 IF the God of love is most appropriately worshiped in 
 the Christian temple, the God of nature may be equally 
 honored in the temple of science. Even from its lofty 
 minarets, the philosopher may summon the faithful to 
 prayer; and the priest and the sage exchange altars without 
 the compromise of faith or knowledge. /Sir David llrews- 
 ter. 
 
 A NATION'S intellectual progress has always followed not 
 preceded some moral impulse. The history of the tine arts 
 shows that some form of religion gave them their earliest 
 impulse. There has never been a great genius but lias been 
 inspired in some sense by religion. The thoughts of the 
 intellect are lofty in proportion as the sentiments of the 
 heart are profound. If we begin the attempt to improve 
 men with the intellect we end where we begun. Education 
 will not remove corruption. It may guide vice as in ancient 
 Rome and Athens, but will not uproot it. A godless edu- 
 <sation has no power to purify. Instruction in morality 
 also has failed to regenerate. No man does his duty simply 
 because he knows it unless he loves it; nor are political and 
 social changes effective. Social evil has its root in the 
 individual heart, and cannot be removed except by influ- 
 ences operating within it. This fountain of man's corrup- 
 tion must be purified to corrupt social vice. Prof. Seelye 
 
 STATESMEN. 
 
 TIIEKE is a book worth all other books which were ever 
 printed. Patrick Henry. 
 
 THE Bible is the best book in the world. John Adams.
 
 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAT OF THE SIDLE. 87 
 
 /So great is my veneration for the Bible, that the earlier 
 my children begin to read it, the more confident will be my 
 Lopes that they will prove useful citizens to their country, 
 and respectable members of society. John Quincy Ad- 
 ams. 
 
 IT is impossible to govern the world without God. He 
 must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more 
 than wicked that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge 
 iiis obligation. General George Washington. 
 
 / POINTING to the family Bible on the stand, during his last 
 illness, Andrew Jackson) said to his friend: "That book, sir, 
 \& the rock on which our republic rests." 
 
 ' I DEEM the present occasion sufficiently important and 
 olemn to justify me in expressing to my fellosv citizens a 
 profound reverence for the Christian religion, and a thorough 
 conviction that sound morals, religious liberty, and a just 
 ense of religious responsibility, are essentially connected 
 with all true and lasting happiness. General Harrison's 
 Inaugural Address. 
 
 As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you par- 
 ticularly desire, I think the system of morals, and His relig- 
 ion, as lie left them to us, is the best the world ever saw, or 
 is likely to see. Benjamin franklin. 
 
 Do you think that your pen, or the pen of any "other man, 
 can uncliristianize the mass of our citizens? Or have you 
 hopes of corrupting a few of them to assist you in so bad a 
 cause? Samuel Adams' Letter to Thomas Paine. 
 
 ^r 
 
 Gnu STIAXITY is the only true and perfect religion, and that 
 in proportion as mankind adopt its principles and obey its 
 precepts, they will be wise and happy. And a better knowl- 
 edge of this religion is to be acquired by reading the Bible 
 than in any other way. Benjamin Hush.
 
 88 MISTAKES OF INGEESOLL. 
 
 that illustrious man, Cliicf Justice Joy, was dying, 
 he was asked if lie had any farewell address to leave his 
 children ; he replied, " They have the Bible." 
 
 r 
 
 I ALWAYS have had, and always shall have, a profound re- 
 gard for Christianity, the religion of my fathers, and for its 
 rites, its usages, and observances. Henry Clay. 
 
 A FEW days before his death, " the foremost man of all 
 his times," drew up and signed this declaration of his relig- 
 ious faith: " Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief. 
 Philosophical argument, especially that drawn from the 
 vastness of the universe, in comparison with the insignifi- 
 cance of this globe, has sometimes shaken my reason for 
 the faith that is in me, but my heart has always assured 
 and reassured me that the gospel of Jesus Christ must be a 
 divine reality. The Sermon on the Mount cannot be a 
 merely human production. This belief enters into the very 
 depth of my conscience." Daniel Webster. 
 
 " HOLD fast to the Bible as the sheet anchor of our liber- 
 erties; write its precepts on your hearts, and practice them 
 in your lives. To the influence of this book we are indebted 
 for the progress made in true civilization, and to this we 
 must look as our guide in the future. U. S. Grant. 
 
 PHILOSOPHY has sometimes forgotten God ; as great people 
 never did. The skepticism of the last century could not 
 uproot Christianity, because it lived in the hearts of the 
 millions. Do you think that infidelity is spreading? Chris- 
 tianity never lived in the hearts of so many millions as at 
 this moment. The forms under which it is professed may 
 decay, for they, like all that is the work of man's hands, are 
 subject to the changes and chances of mortal being; but the 
 spirit of truth is incorruptible; it may be developed, illus- 
 trated and applied; it can never die; it never can decline.
 
 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAY OF THE BIBLE. 89 
 
 No truth can perish. No truth can pass away. The flame 
 is undying, though generations disappear. Wherever mor- 
 tal truth lias started into being humanity claims and guards 
 the bequest. Each generation gathers together the imper- 
 ishable children of the past, and increases them by the new 
 eons of the light, alike radiant with immortality. Ban- 
 croft. 
 
 GREAT THINKERS. 
 
 IT is a belief in the Bible which has served me as the 
 guide of my moral and literary life. Goethe. 
 
 I ACCOUNT the Scriptures of God to be the most sublime 
 philosophy. Sir Isaac Newton. 
 
 To give a man a full knowledge of true morality, I 
 should need to send him to no other book than the New 
 Testament. John Locke. 
 
 I KNOW the Bible is inspired, because it finds me at 
 greater depths of my being than any other book. Cole- 
 ridge. 
 
 A NORLB book! All men's book. It is our first state- 
 ment of the never-ending problem of man's destiny and 
 God's way with men on earth. Carlyle. 
 
 I MUST confess the majesty of the Scriptures strikes me 
 with astonishment. Rousseau. 
 
 " THERE is not a boy nor a girl, all Christendom through, 
 but their lot is made better by this great book. Theodore 
 Parker. 
 
 / TAKTC the gospel away, and what a mockery is human 
 philosophy 1 I once met a thoughtful scholar who told me
 
 90 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 that for years he had read every book which assailed the- 
 religion of Jesus Christ. lie said that he should have 
 become an infidel if it had not been for three things: 
 
 " First, I am a man. I am going somewhere. I am to- 
 night a day nearer the grave than last night. I have read 
 all that they can tell me. There is not ono solitary ray of 
 light upon the darkness. They shall not take away the 
 only guide and leave me stone blind. 
 
 " Secondly, I had a mother. I saw her go down into the 
 dark valley where I am going, and she leaned upon an un- 
 seen arm as calmly as a child goes to sleep upon the breast 
 of a mother. I know that was not a dream. 
 
 " Thirdly," he said with tears in his eyes, " I have three 
 motherless daughters. They have no protector but myself. 
 I would rather kill them than leave them in this sinful 
 world if you could blot out from it all the teachings of the 
 Gospel." Bishop Wkipple. 
 
 /WHEN Daniel Webster was in his best moral state, and 
 when he was in the prime of his manhood, he was one day 
 dining with a company of literary gentlemen in the city of 
 Boston. The company was composed of clergymen, law- 
 yers, physicians, statesmen, merchants, and almost all 
 classes of literary persons. During the dinner conversa- 
 tion incidentally turned upon the subject of Christianity. 
 Mr. "Webster, as the occasion was in honor of him, was 
 expected to take a leading part in the conversation, and he 
 frankly stated as his religious sentiments his belief in the 
 divinity of Christ, and his dependence upon the atonement 
 of the Savior. A minister of very considerable literary 
 reputation sat almost opposite him at the table, and he 
 looked at him and said: "Mr. Webster, can you compre- 
 hend how Jesus Christ could be both God and man? " Mr. 
 Webster, with one of those looks which no man can imitate,
 
 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAY OF THE BIBLE. 9* 
 
 fixed his eyes upon him, and promptly and emphatically 
 said: "Is r o, sir, I cannot comprehend it; and I would be 
 ashamed to acknowledge him as my Savior if 1 could com- 
 prehend it. If I could comprehend him, he could be no 
 greater than myself, and such is my conviction of accounta- 
 bility to God, such is my sense of sinfulness before him, 
 and such is my knowledge of my own incapacity to recover 
 myself, that I feel 1 need a superhuman Savior." Bishop 
 Janes. 
 
 WHAT can be more foolish than to think that all this rare 
 fabric of Heaven and earth could come by chance, when all 
 the skill of art is not able to make an oyster? Jeremy 
 Taylor. 
 
 IT would not be worth while to live if we were to die 
 entirely. That which alleviates labor and sanctifies toil is 
 to have before us the vision of a better world through the 
 darkness of this life. That world is to me more real than 
 the chimera which we devour, and which we call life. Itia 
 forever before my eyes. It is the supreme certainty of my 
 reason, as it is the supreme consolation of my soul. Vic- 
 tor Hugo. 
 
 ONCE, had I been called upon to create the earth, I should 
 have done as the many would now. I should have laid it out 
 in pleasure-grounds, and given man Milton's occupation of 
 tending flowers. But I am now satisfied with this wild 
 
 O 
 
 earth, its awful mountains and depths, steeps and torrents. 
 I am not sorry to learn that God's end is a virtue far 
 higher than I should have prescribed. Channing. 
 
 To do good to men is the great work of life; to make 
 them true Christians is the greatest good we can do them. 
 Every investigation brings us round to this point. Begin
 
 92 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 here and you are like one who strikes water from a rock on 
 the summit of the mountains; it flows down all the inter- 
 vening tracts to the very base. If we could make each 
 man love his neighbor, we should make a happy world. 
 The true method is to begin with ourselves and so extend 
 the circle around us. It should be perpetually in our 
 minds. J. TF". Alexander. 
 
 FKOM philosophy, from poetcy and from art, is heard the 
 acknowledgment that there is no repose for the rational 
 spirit but in moral truth. The testimony that the whole 
 creation groaneth and travaileth in pain, together, is as 
 loud and convincing from the domain of letters, as it is 
 from the cursed and thistle- bearing ground. From the 
 immortal longing and dissatisfaction of Plato, down to the 
 wild and passionate restlessness of Byron and Shelley, the 
 evidence is decisive that a spiritual and religious element 
 must enter into the education of man in order to inward 
 harmony and rest. Dr. Shedd. 
 
 "THE mother of a family was married to an infidel, who 
 made a jest of religion in the presence of his own children; 
 jet she succeeded in bringing them all up in the fear of 
 the Lord. I one day asked her how she preserved them 
 from the influence of a father whose sentiments were so 
 openly opposed to her own. This was her answer: 'Because 
 to the authority of a father I did not oppose the authority 
 of a mother, but that of God. From their earliest years my 
 children have always seen the Bible upon my table. This 
 holy book has constituted the whole of their religious 
 instruction. I was silent that I might allow it to speak. 
 Did they propose a question, did they commit any fault, 
 did they perform any good action, I opened the Bible, and 
 the Bible answered, reproved or encouraged them. The
 
 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAY OF THE BIBLE. 93 
 
 constant reading of the Scriptures has alone wrought the 
 prodigy which surprises you.' " Adolphe Monod. 
 
 I PREACHED on Sunday in the parlors at Long Branch. 
 The war was over, and Admiral Farragut and his family 
 were spending the summer at the Branch. Sitting on the 
 portico of the hotel Monday morning, he said to me r 
 " Would you like to know how I was enabled to serve my 
 country? It was all owing to a resolution I formed when 
 I was ten years of age. My father was sent down to New 
 Orleans with the little navy we then had, to look after the 
 treason of Burr. I accompanied him as cabin-boy. I had 
 some qualities that I thought made a man of me. I could 
 swear like an old salt; could drink a stiff glass of grog as 
 if I had doubled Cape Horn, and could smoke like a loco- 
 motive. I was great at cards and fond of gaming in every 
 shape. At the close of the dinner one day, my father 
 turned every body out of the cabin, locked the door, and 
 said to me: 
 
 " 'David, what do you mean to be? ' 
 
 " ' I mean to follow the sea.' 
 
 " ' Follow the sea! Yes, be a poor, miserable drunken 
 sailor before the mast, kicked and cuffed about the world, 
 and die in some fever hospital, in a foreign clime.' 
 
 " ' No,' I said, ' I'll tread the quarter-deck and command 
 as you do.' 
 
 " ' No, David ; no boy ever trod the quarter-deck with 
 Buch principles as you have, and such habits as you exhibit. 
 You'll have to change your whole course of life if you ever 
 become a man.' 
 
 " My father left me and went on deck. I was stunned 
 by the rebuke and overwhelmed with mortification. ' A 
 poor, miserable, drunken sailor before the mast, kicked and 
 cuffed about the world, and to die in some fever hospital!
 
 94 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 That's my fate, is it? I'll change my life, and change it at 
 once. I will never utter another oath, I will never drink 
 another drop of intoxicating liquors, I will never gamble.' 
 And, as God is my witness, I have kept those three vows 
 to this hour. Shortly after, I became a Christian. That 
 act settled my temporal, as it settled my eternal destiny." 
 Anon. 
 
 A BIBLE well worn in that part which contains the Ser- 
 mon on the Mount is the book which our age most needs. 
 There the "Will of the Father, those laws which save souls 
 or damn them lie in perfect plainness. No commentary 
 can throw light upon them, no science or learning can take 
 their light away. They are a part of the universe, only 
 more imperishable than the stars. Christ died for man be- 
 cause man would not respect these laws of the kingdom. 
 Having died for sinners, lie now invites them to come into 
 these laws of the Father. Do not mistake the invitation. 
 David Swing. 
 
 You never can get at the literal limitation of living facts. 
 They disguise themselves by the very strength of their life; 
 get told again and again in different ways by all manner of 
 people; the literalness of them is turned topsy-turvy, inside 
 out, overhand over again; then the fools come and read them 
 wrong side upwards, or else say there never was a fact at all. 
 Nothing delights a true blockhead so much as to prove a neg- 
 ative, to sftow that everybody has been wrong. Fancy the 
 delicious sensation to an empty-headed creature of fancying 
 for a moment that he has emptied everybody else's head as 
 well as his own ! nay, that for once, his own hollow bottle 
 of a head has had the best of other bottles, and has been first 
 empty, first to know nothing. Ituskin. 
 
 IT is not so wretched to be blind as it is not to bo capable 
 of enduring blindness. Let me be the most feeble creature
 
 WHAT DISTINGUISHED MEN SAT OF THE BIBLE. 95 
 
 alive as long as that feebleness serves to invigorate the en- 
 ergies of my rational and immortal spirit; so long as in that 
 obscurity in which I am enveloped the light of the divine 
 presence more clearly shines; and indeed, in my blindness 
 I enjoy in no inconsiderable degree the favor of the Deity, 
 who regards me with more tenderness and compassion in 
 proportion as I am able to behold nothing but Himself. 
 For the divine law not only shields me from injury, but al- 
 most renders me too sacred to attack, as from the overshad- 
 owing of those heavenly wings which seem to have occasioned 
 this obscurity. Milton. 
 
 A PRINCE said to Rabbi Gamaliel: "Your God is a 
 thief; he surprised Adam in his sleep, and stole a rib from 
 him." The Rabbi's daughter overheard this speech, and 
 whispered a word or two in her father's ear, asking his 
 permission to answer this singular opinion herself. He 
 gave his consent. The girl stepped forward, and feigning 
 terror and dismay, threw her arms aloft in supplication, and 
 cried out, " My liege, my liege, justice! revenge! " " What 
 has happened?" asked the prince. "A wicked theft has 
 taken place," she replied. " A robber has crept secretly 
 into our house, carried away a silver goblet, and left a 
 golden one in its stead." " What an upright thief ! " 
 exclaimed the prince. " Would that such robberies were 
 of more frequent occurrence!" "Behold, then, sir, the 
 kind of thief our Creator was; he stole a rib from Adam, 
 and gave him a beautiful wife instead." "Well said!" 
 avowed the prince. Talmud /Sanhedrim. 
 
 ONCE there was a Judge who had a colored man. The 
 colored man was very godly, and the Judge used to have 
 him to drive him around in his circuit. The Judge used 
 often to talk with him, and the colored man would tell tho 
 Judge about his religious experience, and about his battle^
 
 and conflicts. One day the Judge said to him: "Sambo, 
 how is it that you Christians are always talking ^about the 
 conflicts you have with Satan? I am better off than you 
 are. I don't have any troubles or conflicts, and yet I am an 
 infidel and yon are a Christian always in a muss; how's 
 that, Sambo?" This floored the colored man for awhile. He 
 did n't know how to meet the old infidel's argument. So he 
 shook his head sorrowfully and said : " I dunno, Massa, I 
 dunno." The Judge always carried a gun along with him 
 for hunting. Pretty soon they came to a lot of ducks. The 
 Judge took his gun and blazed away at them, and wounded 
 one and killed another. The Judge said quickly: "You 
 jump in, Sambo, and get that wounded duck before he gets 
 off," and did not pay any attention to the dead one. In 
 went Sambo for the wounded duck, and came out reflecting. 
 The colored man then thought he had an illustration. He 
 said to the Judge: "Ihab 'im now, Massa; I'se able to 
 show you how de Christian hab greater conflict dan de infi- 
 del. Do n't you know de moment you wounded dat ar duck, 
 how anxious you was to get 'im out, and you did n't care for 
 de dead, but jus' lef ' him alone? " " Yes," said the Judge. 
 " Well," said Sambo, "ye see as how dat are dead duck 's a 
 sure thing. I 'se wounded, and I tries to get away from the 
 debbil. It takes trouble to cotch me. But, Massa, you are 
 a dead duck dar's no squabble for you; de debbil have you 
 sure!" So the devil has no conflict with the infidel. D- 
 L. Moody.
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 97 
 
 INGERSOLL'S LECTURE 
 
 ON 
 
 THE MISTAKES OF MOSES." 
 
 Now and then some one asks me why I am endeavoring to interfere 
 with the religious faith of others, and why I try to take from the world 
 the consolation naturally arising from a belief in eternal fire. And I an- 
 swer, I want to do what little I can to make my country truly free. I 
 want to broaden the intellectual horizon of our people. I want it so that 
 we can differ upon all those questions, and yet grasp each other's hands 
 in genuine friendship. I want in the first place to free the clergy. I am 
 a great friend of theirs, but they don't seem to have found it out gener- 
 ally. I want it so that every minister will be not a parrot, not an owl sit- 
 ting upon a dead limb of the tree of knowledge and hooting the hoots that 
 have been hooted for eighteen hundred years. But I want it so that each 
 one can be an investigator, a thinker; and I want to make his congregation 
 grand enough so that they will not only allow him to think, but will de- 
 mand that he shall think, and give to them the honest truth of his 
 thought. As it is now, ministers are employed like attorneys for the 
 plaintiff or the defendant. If a few people know of a young man in the 
 neighborhood maybe who has not a good constitution he may not be 
 healthy enough to be wicked a young man who has shown no decided 
 talent it occurs to them to make him a minister. They contribute and 
 send him to some school. If it turns out that that young man has more of 
 the man in him than they thought, and he changes his opinion, every 
 one who contributed will feel himself individually swindled and they 
 will follow that young man to the grave with the poisoned shafts of mal- 
 ice and slander, i want it o that every one will be free so that a pulpit will 
 not be a pillory. They have in Massachusetts, at a place called Audover, 
 7
 
 96 MISTAKES OF INGEBSOLL. 
 
 a kind of minister- factory; and every professor in that factory takes an 
 oath once in every five years that is as long as an oath will last that 
 not only has he not during the last five years, but so help him God, he 
 will not during the next five years intellectually advance; and probably 
 there is no oath he could easier keep. Since the foundation of that insti- 
 tution there has not been one case of perjury. They believe the same 
 creed they first taught when the foundation stone was laid, and now when 
 they send out a minister they brand him as hardware from Sheffield and 
 Birmingham. And every man who knows where he was educated knows 
 his creed, knows every argument of his creed, every book that he re ids, 
 and just what he amounts to intellectually, and knows he will shrink and 
 shrivel, and become solemnly stupid day after day until he meets with 
 death. It is all wrong; it is cruel. Those men should be allowed to 
 grow. They should have the air of liberty and the sunshine of thought. 
 I want to free the schools of our country. I want it so that when a 
 professor in a college finds some fact inconsistent with Moses, he will not 
 hide the fact, that it will not be the worse for him for having: discovered 
 the fact. I wish to see an eternal divorce and separation between church 
 and schools. The common school is the bread of life; but there should 
 be nothing taught in the schools except what somebody knows; and any- 
 thing else should not be maintained by a system of general taxation. I 
 want its professors so that they will tell everything they find; that they 
 will be free to investigate in every direction, and will not be trammeled 
 /by the superstitions of our day. What has religion to do with facts? 
 I Nothing. la there any such thing as Methodist mathematics, Presbyter- 
 l ian botany, Catholic astronomy or Baptist biology? What has any form 
 of superstition or religion to do with a fact or with any science? Nothing 
 but to hinder, delay or embarrass. I want, then, to free the schools; 
 and I want to free the politicians, so that a man will not have to pretend 
 he is a Methodist, or his wife a Baptist, or his grandmother a Catholic; 
 so that he can go through a campaign, and when he gets through will 
 find none of the dust of hypocrisy on his knees. 
 
 I want the people splendid enough that when they desire men to 
 make laws for them, they will take one who knows something, who haa 
 brains enough to prophesy the destiny of the American Republic, no 
 matter what his opinions may be upon any religious subject. Suppose 
 we are in a storm out at sea, and the . billows are washing over our ship, 
 and it is necessary that some one should reef the topsail, and a man pre- 
 ents himself. Would you stop him at the foot of the mast to find out 
 his opinion on the five points of Calvinism? What has that to do with 
 it? Congress has nothing to do with baptism or any particular creed, 
 and from what little experience 1 have had of Washington, very little to
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 99 
 
 do with any kind of religion whatever. Now I hope, this afternoon, thii 
 magnificent and splendid audience will forget that they are Baptists or 
 Methodists, and remember that they are men and women. These are the 
 highest titles humanity can bear man and woman; and every title you 
 add belittles them. Man is the highest ; woman is the highest. Let us 
 remember that we are simply human beings, with interests in common. 
 And let us remember that our views depend largely upon the country in 
 which we happen to live. Suppose we were born in Turkey most of us , 
 would have been Mohammedans; and when we read in the book that 
 when Mohammed visited heaven he became acquainted with an angel 
 named Gabriel, who was so broad between his eyes that it would take a 
 smart camel three hundred days to m ike the journey, we probably would \ 
 have believed it. If we did not, people would say: "That young man 
 is dangerous; he is trying to tear down the fabric of our religion. What 
 do you propose to give us instead of that angel? We cannot afford to 
 trade off an angel of that size for nothing." Or if we had been born in 
 India, we would have believed in a god with three heads. Now we be- 
 lieve in three gods with one head. And so we might make a tour of the 
 world and see that every superstition that could be imagined by the brain 
 of man has been in some place held to be sacred. 
 
 Now some one says, "The religion of my father and mother is good 
 enough for me." Suppose we all said that, where would be the progress 
 of the world? We would have the rudest and most barbaric religion 
 religion which no one could believe. I do not believe that it is showing 
 real respect to our parents to believe something simply because they did. 
 Every good father and every good mother wish their children to find out 
 more than they knew; every good father wants his son to overcome some 
 obstacle that he could not grapple with; and if you wish to reflect credit 
 on your father and mother, do it by accomplishing more than they did, 
 because you live in a better time. Every nation has had what you call a 
 sacred record, and the older the more sacred, the more contradictory and 
 the more inspired is the record. We, of course, are not an exception, and 
 I propose to talk a little about what is called the Pentateuch, a book, or 
 a collection of books, said to have been written by Moses. And right- 
 here in the commencement let me say that Moses never wrote one word 
 of the Pentateuch not one word was written until he had been dust and 
 ashes for hundreds of years. But as the general opinion is that Moses 
 wrote these books, I have entitled this lecture the "The Mistakes of 
 Moses." For the sake of this lecture, we will admit that he wrote it. 
 Nearly every maker of religion has commenced by making the world; 
 and it is one of the safest things to do, because no one can contradict as 
 having been present, and it gives free scope to the imagination. These
 
 100 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 books, in times when there was a vast difference between the educated 
 and the ignorant, became inspired and people bowed down and wor- 
 shipped them. 
 
 I saw a little while ago a Bible with immense oaken covers, with 
 hasps and clasps large enough almost for a penitentiary, and I can imagine 
 how that book would be regarded by barbarians in Europe when not more 
 than one person in a dozen could read and write. In imagination I saw 
 it carried into the cathedral, heard the chant of the priest, saw the swing- 
 ing of the censer and the smoke rising; and when that Bible was put on 
 the altar I can imagine the barbarians looking at it and wondering what 
 influence that black book could have on their lives and future. 1 do not 
 wonder that they imagined it was inspired. None of them could write a 
 book, and consequently when they saw it they adored it; they were 
 stricken with awe; and rascals look advantage of that awe. 
 ,* Now they say that, the book is inspired. I do not care whether it is or 
 J not; the question is: Is it true? If it is true it don't need to be inspired. 
 I Nothing needs inspiration except a falsehood or a mistake. A fact never 
 ^went into partnership with a miracle. Truth scorns the resistance of won- 
 ders. A fact will fit every other fact in the universe, and that is how you 
 can tell whether it is or is not a fact. A lie will not fit anything except 
 another lie made for the express purpose; and, finally, some one gets tired 
 of lying, and the last lie will not fit the next fact, and then there is a 
 chance for inspiration. Right then and there a miracle is needed. The 
 real question is: In the light of science, in the light of the brain and 
 heart of the nineteenth century, is this book true ? The gentlemen who 
 wrote it begins by telling us that God made the universe out of nothing. 
 That I cannot conceive; it may be so, but I cannot conceive it. Nothing, 
 regarded in the light of raw material, is, to my mind, a decided and dis- 
 astrous failure. I cannot imagine of nothing being made into something, 
 any more than I can of something being changed back into nothing. I 
 cannot conceive of force aside from matter, because force to be force must 
 be active, and unless there is matter there is nothing for force to act upon, 
 and consequently it cannot be active. So I simply say I cannot compre- 
 hend it. I cannot beileve it. I may roast for this, but it is my honest 
 opinion. The next thing he proceeds to tell us is that God divided the 
 darkness from the light; and right here let me say when I speak about 
 God I simply mean the being described by the Jews. There may be 
 in immensity some being beneath whose wing the universe exists, whose 
 very thought is a glittering star, but I know nothing about Him, not 
 the slig test, and this afternoon I am simply talking about the being 
 described by the Jewish people. When I say God, I mean Him. Moses 
 describes God dividing the light from the darkness. I suppose that at
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 101 
 
 that time they must have been mixed. You can readily see how light and 
 darkness can get mixed. They must have been entities. The reason I 
 think so is because in that same book I find that darkness overspread 
 Egypt so thick that it could be felt, and they used to have on exhibition 
 in Rome a bottle of the darkness that once overspread Egypt. The gen- 
 tleman who wrote this in imagination saw God dividing light from the 
 darkness. I am sure the man who wrote it, believed darkness to be an 
 entity, a something, a tangible thing that can be mixed with light. 
 
 The next thing that he informs us is that God divided the waters above 
 the firmanent from those below the firmanent. The man who wrote that 
 believed the firmanent to be a solid affair. And that is what the goda 
 did. You recollect the gods came down and made love to the daughters 
 of men and I never blamed them for it. I have never read a description 
 of any heaven I would not leave on the same errand. That is where the 
 gods lived. That is where they kept the water. It was solid. That is 
 the reason the people prayed for rain. They believed that an angel could 
 take a lever, raise a window and let out the desired quantity. I find in the 
 Psalms that " He bowed the heavens and came down;" and we read that 
 the children of men built a tower to reach the heavens and climb into the 
 abode of the gods. The man who wrote that believed the firmanent to 
 be solid. He knew nothing about the laws of evaporation. It He did not 
 know that the sun wooed with amorous kiss the waves of the sea, and 
 that, disappointed, their vaporous sighs changed to tears and fell again 
 as rain. The next thing he tells us is that the grass began to grow, and 
 the branches of the trees laughed into blossom, and the grass ran up the 
 shoulder of the hills, and yet not a solitary ray of light had left the 
 eternal quiver of the sun. Not a blade of grass had ever been touched 
 by a gleam of light. And I do not think that grass will grow to 
 hurt without a gleam of sunshine. I think the man who wrote that 
 simply made a mistake, and is excusable to a certain degree. The next 
 day he made the sun and moon the sun to rule the day and the moon to 
 rule the night. Do you think the man who wrote that knew anything 
 about the size of the sun ? I think he thought it was about three feet in 
 diameter, because I find in some book that the sun was stopped a whole 
 day, to give a general named Joshua time to kill a few more Amalekites; 
 and the moon was stopped also. Now it seems to me that the sun would 
 give light enough without stopping the moon; but as they were in the 
 stopping business they did it just for devilment. At another time, we 
 read, the sun was turned ten degrees backward to convince Hezekiah 
 that he was not going to die of a boil. How much easier it would have 
 been to cure the boil. The man who wrote that thought the sun was two 
 or three feet in diameter, and could be stopped and pulled around like the- 

 
 102 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 inn and moon in a theatre. Do you know that the sun throws out every 
 second of time as much heat as could be generated by burning eleven 
 thousand millions tons of coal? I don't believe he knew that, or that he 
 knew the motion of the earth. I don't believe he knew that it was turn- 
 ing: on its axis at the rate of a thousand miles an hour, because if he did, 
 he would have understood the immensity of heat that would have been 
 generated by stopping the world. It has been calculated by one of the 
 best mathematicians and astronomers that to stop the world would cause 
 as rnucu h at as it would take to burn a lump of solid coal three times as 
 big as the globe. And yet we find in that book that the sun was not only 
 stopped, but turned back ten degrees, simply to convince a gentleman 
 that he was not going to die of a boil. They may say I will be damned 
 if I do not believe that, and I tell them I will if I do. 
 
 Then he gives us the history of astronomy, and he givos it to us in five 
 words: "He made the stars also." He came very near forgetting the 
 stars. Do you believe that the man who wrote that knew that there are 
 stars as much larger than this earth as this earth is larger than the apple 
 which Adam and- Eve are said to have eaten? Do you believe that he 
 knew that this world is but a speck in the shining, glittering universe of 
 existence ? I would gather from that that he made the stars after he got 
 the world done. The telescope, in reading the infinite leaves of the 
 heavens, has ascertained that light travels at the rate of 192,000 miles 
 per second, and it would require millions of years to come from some of 
 the stars to this earth. Yet the beams of those stars mingle in our 
 atmosphere, so that if those distant orbs were fashioned when this world 
 began, we must have been whirling in space not six thousand, but many 
 millions of years. Do you believe the man who wrote that as a history 
 of astronomy really knew that this world was but a speck compared with 
 millions of sparkling orbs? I do not. He then proceeds to tell us ihat 
 God made fish and cattle, and that man and woman were created male 
 and female. The first account stops at the second vers^- of the second 
 chapter. You see, the Bible originally was not divided into chapters; 
 the first Bible that was ever divided into chapters in our language was 
 made in the year of grace 1550. The Bible was originally written in the 
 Hebrew language, and the Hebrew language at that time had no vowels 
 in writing. It was written entirely with consonants, and without being 
 divided into chapters or into versos, and there was no system of punctu- 
 ation whatever. After you go home to-ni^ht write an English sen ence 
 or two with only consonants close toircthfr, and you will find that it will 
 take twice as much inspiration t read it as it did to write it. When the 
 Bible was divided into versefi an" rim piers, the divisions were not always 
 correct, and so the division between the first and second chapter of Gen-
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 103 
 
 esis is not in the right place. The second account of the creation com- 
 mences at the third verse, and it differs from the first in two essential 
 points. In the first account man is the last made; in the second, man is 
 made before the beasts. In the first account, man is made " male and 
 female; " in the second only a man is made, and there is no intention of 
 making a woman whatever. 
 
 You will find by reading that second chapter that God tried to palm 
 off on Adam a beast as his helpmeet. Everybody talks about the Bible 
 and nobody reads it; that is the reason it is so generally believed. I am 
 probably the only man in the United States who has read the Bible 
 through this year. I have wasted that time, but I had a purpose in 
 view. Just read it, and you will find, about the twenty-third verse, that 
 God caused all the animals to walk before Adam in order that he might 
 name them. And the animals came like a menagerie into town, and as 
 Adam looked at all the crawlers, jumpers and creepers, this God stood by 
 to see what he would call them. After this procession passed, it was 
 pathetically remarked, "Yet was there not found any helpmeet for 
 Adam. ' ' Adam didn't see anything that he could fancy. And I am glad 
 he didn't. If he had, there would not have been a free-thinker in .this 
 world; we should have all died orthodox. And finding Adam was so par- 
 ticular, God had to make him a helpmeet, and having used up the nothing 
 he was compelled to take part of the man to make the woman with, and 
 he took from the man a rib. How did he get it? And then imagine a 
 God with a bone in his hand, and about to start a woman, trying to make 
 up his mind whether to make a blonde or a brunette. 
 
 Right here it is only proper that I should warn you of the consequences 
 of laughing at any story in the holy Bible. When you come to die, your 
 laughing at this story will be a thorn in your pillow. As you look back 
 upon the record of your life, no matter how many men you have wrecked 
 and ruined, and no matter how many women you have deceived and 
 deserted all that may be forgiven you; but if you recollect that you have 
 laughed at God's book you will see through the shadows of death, 
 the leering looks of fiends and the forked tongues of devils. Let me show 
 you how it will be: For instance, it is the day of judgment. When the 
 man is called up by the recording secretary, or whoever does the cross- 
 examining, he says to his soul: " Where are you from?" " I am from 
 the world." "Yes, sir. What kind of a man were you?" "Well, I 
 don't like to talk about myself." "But you have to. What kind of a 
 man were you? " " Well, I was a good fellow; I loved my wife, I loved 
 my children. My home was my heaven; my fireside was my paradise, 
 and to sit there and see the lights and shadows falling on the faces of 
 those I love, that to me was a perpetual joy. I never gave one of them a
 
 104 MISTAKES OF INGEBSOLL. 
 
 olitary moment of pain. I don't owe a dollar in the world, and I left 
 enough to pay my funeral expenses and keep the wolf of want from the 
 door of the house I loved. That is the kind of a man I am." " Did you 
 belong to any church?" "I did not. They were too narrow forme. 
 They were always expecting to be happy simply because somebody else 
 was to be damned." " Well, did you believe that rib story?" " What rib- 
 story? Do you mean that Adam and Eve business? No, I did not. To 
 tell you the God's truth, that was a little more than I could swallow." 
 "To hell with him! Next. Where are you from?" " I'm from the 
 world, too." "Do you belong to any church?" "Yes, sir, and to the 
 Young Men's Christian Association." "What is your business?" 
 "Cashier in a bank." " Did you ever run off with any of the money?" 
 "I don't like to tell, sir." "Well, but you have to." "Yes, sir; Idid." 
 "What kind of a bank did you have?" " A savings bank." "How 
 much did you run off with?" " One hundred thousand dollars." " Did 
 you take anything else along with you?" "Yes, sir." "What?" "I 
 took my neighbor's wife." " Did you have a wife and children of your 
 own?" "Yes, sir." " And you deserted them?" " Oh, yes; bu such 
 was my confidence in God that I believed he would take care of them." 
 " Have you heard of them since?" " No, sir." " Did you believe that 
 rib story?" "Ah, bless your soul, yes! I believe all of it, sir; I often 
 used to be sorry that there were not harder stones yet in the Bible, so that 
 I could show what my faith could do." " You believed it, did you?" 
 "Yes, with all my heart." "Give him a harp." 
 
 I simply wanted to show you how important it is to believe these sto- 
 ries. Of all the authors in the world God hates a critic the worst. Hav- 
 ing got this woman done he brought her to the man, and they started 
 housekeeping, and a few minutes afterward a snake came through a crack 
 in the fence and commenced to talk with her on the subject of fruit. She 
 was not acquainted in the neighborhood, and she did not k/iow whether 
 snakes talked or not, or whether they knew anything about the apples or 
 not. Well, she was misled, and the husband ate some of those apples 
 and laid it all on his wife; and ^here is where the mistake was made. 
 God ought to have rubbed him out once. He might have known that no 
 good could come of starting the world with a man like that. They were 
 turned out. Then the trouble commenced, and people got worse and 
 worse. God, you must recollect, was holding the reins of government, 
 but he did nothing for them. He allowed thorn to live six hundred and 
 Bixty-nine years without knowing their A. B. C. He never started a 
 school, not even a Sunday school. He didn't even koep His own boys at, 
 home. And the world got worse every day, and finally he concluded to 
 drown them. Yet that same god has the impudence to tell me how to
 
 \ 
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 105 
 
 raise my own children. What would you think of a neighbor, who had just 
 killed his babes giving 1 you his views on domestic economy? God found 
 that he could do nothing with them and He said; " I will drown them 
 all, except a few." And He picked out a fellow by the name of Noah, 
 that had been a bachelor for five hundred years. If I had to drown any- 
 body, I would have drowned him. I believe that Noah had then been 
 married something like one hundred years. God told him to build a boat, 
 and he built one five hundred feet long, eighty or ninety feet broad and 
 fifty-five feet high, with one door shutting on the outside, and one win- 
 dow twenty-two inches square. If Noah had any hobby in the world it 
 was vetilation. Then into this ark he put a certain number of all the 
 animals in the world. Naturalists have ascertained that at that time 
 there were at least eleven hundred thousand insects necessary to go into 
 the ark, about forty thousand mammalia, sixteen hundred reptilia, to say 
 nothing about the mastodon, the elephant and the animalculse, of which 
 thousands live upon a single leaf and which cannot be seen by the naked 
 eye. Noah had no microscope, and yet he had to pick them out by pairs. 
 You have no idea the trouble that man had. Some say that the flood 
 was not universal, that it was partial. Why then did God say: " I will 
 destroy every living thing beneath the heavens." If it was partial why 
 did Noah save the birds? An ordinary bird, tending strictly to business, 
 can beat a partial flood. Why did he put the birds in there the eagles, the 
 vultures, the condors if it was only a partial flood? And how did he 
 get them in there? Were they inspired to go there, or did he drive them' 
 up? Did the polar bear leave his home of ice and start for the tropics 
 inquiring for Noah; or could the kangaroo come from Australia unless 
 he was inspired, or somebody was behind him? Then there are animals 
 on this hemisphere not on that. How did he get them across? And 
 there are some animals which would be very unpleasant in an ark unless 
 the ventilation was very perfect. 
 
 When he got the animals in the ark, God shut the door and Noah 
 pulled down the window. And then it began to rain, and it kept on 
 raining until the water went twenty- nine feet over the highest mountain. 
 Chimborazo, then as now, lifted its head above the clouds, and then as 
 now, there sat the condor. And yet the waters rose and rose over every 
 mountain in the world twenty-nine feet above the highest peaks, cov- 
 ered with snow and ice. How deep were these waters? About five and 
 a half miles. How long did it rain? Forty days. How much did it 
 have to rain a day? About eight hundred feet. How is that for damp- 
 ness ? No wonder they said the windows of the heavens were open. If I 
 had been there I would have said the w'aole side of the house was out. How 
 long were they in this ark ? A year and ten days, floating around with
 
 106 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 no rudder, no sail, nobody on the outside at all. The window was shut, 
 and there was no door, except the one that shut on the outside. Who 
 ran this ark who took care of it ? Finally it came down on Mount Ararat, 
 a peak seventeen thousand feet above the level of the sea, with about 
 three thousand feet of snow, and it stopped there simply to give the ani- 
 mals from the tropics a chance. Then Noah opened the window and got 
 a breath of fresh air, and he let out all the animals; and then Noah took 
 a drink, and God made a bargain with him that He would not drown us 
 /any more, and He put a rainbow in the clouds and said: " When I see 
 that I will recollect that I have promised not to drown you." Because 
 if it was not for that He is apt to drown us at any moment. Now can 
 anybody believe that that is the origin of the rainbow? Are you not 
 all familiar with the natural causes which bring those beautiful arches 
 before our eyes ? Then the people started out again, and they were as 
 bad as before. Here let me ask why God did not make Noah in the first 
 place ? He knew he would have to drown Adam and Eve and all his 
 family. Then another thing, why did He want to drown the animals ? 
 What had they done? What crime had they committed? It is very 
 hard to answer these questions that is, for a man who has only been 
 born once. After a while they tried to build a tower to get into heaven, 
 and the gods heard about it and said : " Let's go down and see what man 
 is up to." They came, and found things a great deal worse than they 
 thought, and thereupon they confounded the language to prevent them 
 succeeding, so that the fellow up above could not shout down " mortar " 
 or /' brick " to the one below, and they had to give it up. Is it possible 
 that any one believes that that is the reason why we have the variety of 
 languages in the world? Do you know that language is born of human 
 experience, and is a physical science? Do you know that every word has 
 been suggested in some way by the feelings or observations of man that 
 ^here are words as tender as the dawn, as serene as the stars, and others 
 as wild as the beasts? Do you know that language is dying and being 
 born continually that every language has its cemetery and cradle, its 
 bud and blossom, and withered leaf? Man has loved, enjoyed and suf- 
 fered, and language is simply the expression he gives those experiences. 
 Then the world began to divide, and the Jewish nation was started. 
 Now I want to Bay that at one time your ancestors, like mine, were bar- 
 barians. If the Jewish people had to write these books now they would be 
 civilized books, and I do not hold them responsible for what their ancestors 
 did. We find the Jewish people first in Canaan, and there were seventy 
 of them, counting Joseph and his children already in Egypt. They lived 
 two hundred and fifteen years, and they then went down into Egypt and 
 stayed there two hundred and fifteen yean; they were four hundred and
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 107 
 
 thirty years in Canaan and Egypt. How many did they have when 
 they went to Egypt? Seventy. How many were they at the end 
 of two hundred and fifteen years? Three millions. That is a good 
 many. We had at the time of the Revolution in this country three mil- 
 lions of people. Since that time there have been four doubles, until we 
 have forty-eight millions to-day. How many would the Jews number at 
 the same ratio in two hundred and fifteen years? Call it eight doubles 
 and we have forty thousand. But instead of forty thousand they had 
 three millions. How do I know they had three millions? Because they 
 had six hundred thousand men of war. For every honest voter in the 
 State of Illinois there will be five other people, and there are always more 
 voters than men of war. They must have had at the lowest possible esti- 
 mate three millions of people Is that true? Is there a minister in the 
 city of Chicago .that will certify to his own idiocy by claiming that they 
 could have increased to three millions by that time? If there is, let him / 
 fay so. Do not let him talk about the civilizing influence of a lie. 
 
 When they got into the desert they took a census to see how many first- 
 born children there were. They found they had twenty-two thousand 
 two hundred and seventy-three first born males. It is reasonable to sup- 
 po e there was about the same number of first born girls, or forty-five 
 thousand first born children. There must have been about as many 
 mothers as first-born children. Dividing three millions by forty-five 
 thousand mothers, and you will find that the women in Israel had to have 
 on the average sixty-eight children apiece. Some stories are too thin. 
 This is too thick. Now, we know that among three million people there 
 will be about three hundred births a day; and according to the Old Testa- 
 ment, whenever a child was born the motaer had to make a sacrifice a 
 sin-offering for the crime of having been a mother. If there is in this uni- 
 verse anything that is infinitely pure, it is a mother with her child in her 
 arms. Every woman had to have a sacrifice of a couple of doves, a couple 
 of pigeons, and the priests had to eat those pigeons in the most holy place. 
 At that time there were at least three hundred births a day, and the priests 
 had to cook and eat those pigeons in the most holy place; and at that 
 time there were only three priests. Two hundred birds apiece per day! 
 I look upon them as the champion bird-eaters of the world. 
 
 Then where were these Jews? They were upon the desert of Sinai; 
 and Sahara compared to that is a garden. Imagine an ocean of lava, torn 
 by storm and vexed by tempest, suddenly gazed at by a Gorgon and 
 changed to stone. Such was the desert of Sinai. The whole supplies of 
 the world could not maintain three millions of people on the desert of 
 Sinai for forty years. It would cost one hundred thousand millions of 
 dollars, and would bankrupt Christendom. And yet there they were
 
 108 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 with' flocks and herds so many that they sacrificed over one hundred and 
 fifty thousand first-born lambs at one time. It would require millions of 
 acres to support those flocks, and yet there was no blade of grass, and 
 there is no account of it raining baled hay. They sacrificed one hundred 
 and fifty thousand lambs, and the blood had all to be sprinkled on the 
 altar within two hours, and there were only three priests. They would 
 have to sprinkle the blood of twelve hundred and fifty lambs per minute. 
 Then all the people gathered in front of the tabernacle eighteen feet deep. 
 Three millions of people would make a column six miles long. Some 
 reverend gentlemen say they were ninety feet deep. Well, that would 
 make a column of over a mile. 
 
 Where were these people going? They were going to the Holy Land. 
 How large was it? Twelve thousand square miles one-fifth the si/.e of 
 Illinois a frightful country, covered with rocks and desolation. There 
 never was a land agent in the city of Chicago that would not have blushed 
 with shame to have described that land as flowing with milk and honey. 
 Do you believe that God Almighty ever went into partnership with 
 hornets? Is it necessary unto salvation? God said to the Jews: " I will 
 Bend hornets before you, to drive out the Canaanites." How would a 
 hornet know a Canaanite? Is it possible that God inspired the hornets 
 that he granted letters of marque and reprisal to hornets? I am 
 willing to admit that nothing in the world would be better calculated to 
 make a man leave his native country than a few hornets attending 
 strictly to business. God said "Kill the Canaanites slowly." Why? 
 " Lest the beasts of the field increase upon you." How many Jews were 
 there? Three millions. Going to a country, how large? Twelve thou- 
 sand square miles. But were there nations already in this Holy Land? 
 Yes, there were seven nations "mightier than the Jews." Say there 
 would be twenty-one millions when they got there, or twenty-four millions 
 with themselves. Yet they were told to kill them slowly, lest the beasts 
 of the field increase upon them. Is there a man in Chicago that believes 
 that! Then what docs he teach it to little children for? Let him tell 
 the truth. 
 
 So the same God went into partnership with snakes. The children 
 of Israel lived on manna one account says all the time, and another only 
 a little while. That is the reason there is a chance for commentaries, 
 and you can exercise faith. If the book was reasonable everybody could 
 get to heaven in a moment. But whenever it looks as if it could not be 
 that way and you believe, you arc almost a saint, and when you know it 
 is not that way and believe you are a saint. He fed them on manna. 
 Now manna is very peculiar stuff. It would melt in the sun, and yet 
 they used to cook it by seething and baking. I would as soon think of
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 109 
 
 frying snow or boiling icicles. But this manna had other peculiar qual- 
 ities. Jt shrank to an omer. no matter how much they gathered, and 
 swelled up to an omer, no matter how little they gathered. What a 
 magnificent thing manna would be for the currency, shrinking and swel- 
 ling according to the volume of business! There was not a change in the 
 bill of fare for forty years, and they knew that God could just as well give 
 them three square meals a day. They remembered about the cucumbers, 
 and the melons, and the leeks and the onions of Egypt, and they said: 
 " Our souls abhoreth this light bread." Then this God got mad you 
 know cooks are always touchy and thereupon He sent snakes to bite 
 the men, women and children. He also sent them quails in wrath and 
 anger, and while they had the flesh between their teeth, He struck 
 thousands of them dead. He always acted in that way, all of a sudden. 
 People had no chance to explain no chance to move for a new trial 
 nothing. I want to know if it is reasonable he should kill people for 
 asking for one change of diet in forty years. Suppose you had been 
 boarding with an old lady for forty years, and she never had a solitary 
 thing on her table but hash, and one morning you said : " My soul abhor- 
 eth hash. " What would you say if she let a basketful of rattlesnakes 
 upon you? Now is it possible for people to believe this? The Bible 
 says that their clothes did not wax old, they did not get shiny at the 
 knees or elbows; and their shoes did not wear out. They grew right 
 along with them. The little boy starting out with his first pants grew 
 up and his pants grew with him. Some commentators have insisted that 
 angels attended to their wardrobes. I never could believe it. Just think 
 of one angel hunting another and saying: " There goes another button." 
 I cannot believe it. 
 
 There must be a mistake somewhere or somehow. Do you believe 
 the real God if there is one ever killed a man for making hair-oil? 
 And yet you find in the Pentateuch that God gave Moses a recipe for 
 making hair-oil to grease Aaron's beard; and i-aid if anybody made the 
 same hair- oil he should be killed. And He gave him a formula for 
 making ointment, and He said if anybody made ointment like that he 
 should be killed. I think that is carrying patent-laws to excess. There 
 must be some mistake about it. I cannot imagine the infinite Creator 
 of all the shinoig worlds giving a recipe for hair-oil. Do you believe 
 that the real God came down to Mount Sinai with a lot of patterns for 
 making a tabernacle patterns for tongs, for snuffers, and such things? 
 Do you believe that God came down on that mountain and told Moses 
 how to cut a coat, and how it should be trimmed? What would an infi- 
 nite God care on which side he cut the breast, what color the fringe was, 
 or how the buttons were placed? Do you believe God told Moses to
 
 110 MISTAKES OF INGLRSOLL. 
 
 make curtains of fine linen? Where did they get their flax in the des- 
 ert? How did they weave it? Did He tell him to make things of gold, 
 silver and precious stones, when they hadn't them? Is it possible that 
 God told them not to eat any fruit until after the fourth year of planting 
 the trees ? You see all these things were written hundreds of years after- 
 wards, and the priests, in order to collect the tithes, dated the laws back. 
 They did not say, " This is our law," but, " Thus said God to Moses in 
 the wilderness." Now, can you believe that? Imagine a scene: The 
 eternal God tells Moses, " Here is the way I want you to consecrate my 
 priests. Catch a sheep and cut his throat." I never could understand 
 why God wanted a sheep killed just because a man had done a mean 
 trick; perhaps it was because his priests were fond of mutton. He tells 
 Moses further to take some of the blood and put it on his right thumb, a 
 little on his right ear, and a little on his right big toe? Do you believe 
 God ever gave such instructions for the consecration of His priests? If 
 you should see the South Sea Islanders going through such a perform- 
 ance you could not keep your face straight. And will you tell me that it 
 had to be done in order to consecrate a man to the service of the infinite 
 God? Supposing theljlood got on the left toe? 
 
 Then we find in his book how God went to work to make the Egyp- 
 tians let the Israelites go. Suppose we wish to make a treaty with the 
 mikado of Japan, and Mr. Hayes sent a commissioner there; and suppose 
 he should employ Hermann, the wonderful German, to go along with 
 him; and when they came in the presence of the mikado Hermann threw 
 down an umbrella, which changed into a turtle, and the commissioner 
 said : " That is my certificate." You would say the country is disgraced. 
 You would say the president of a republic like this disgraces himself with 
 jugglery. Yet we are told God sent Moses and Aaron before Pharaoh, 
 and when they got there Moses threw down a stick which turned into a 
 snake. That God is a juggler he is the infinite prestidigitator. Is that 
 possible? Was that really a snake, or was it the appearance of a snake? 
 If it was the appearance of a snake, it was a fraud. Then the necroman- 
 cers of Egypt were sent for, and they threw down sticks, which turned 
 into 6n;ikes, but those were not so large as Moses' snakes, which swal- 
 lowed them. 1 maintain that it is jnst as hard to make small snakes as 
 it is to make large ones; the only diiference is that to make largo snakes 
 either larger sticks or more practice is required. 
 
 Do you believe that God rained hail on the innocent cattle, killing them 
 in the highways and in the field? Why should he inflict punishment on 
 cattle for something their owners had done? 1 could never have any 
 respect for a God that would so inflict pain upon a brute beast simply on 
 vxount of the crime of ita owner. Is it possible that God worked uiira-
 
 I 
 
 r 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." Ill 
 
 cles to convince Pharaoh that slavery was wrong? Why did he not tell 
 Pharaoh that any nation founded on slavery could not stand? Why did he 
 not tell him, " Your government is founded on slavery, and it will go down, 
 and the sands of the desert will hide from the view of man your temples, 
 your altars, and your fanes? " Why did he not speak about the infamy 
 of slavery? Because he believed in the infamy of slavery himself. Can 
 we believe that God will allow a man to give his wife the right of divorce- 
 ment and make the mother of his children a wanderer and a vagrant. 
 There is not one word about woman in the Old Testament except the word 
 of shame and humiliation. The God of the Bible does not think woman 
 is as good as man. She was never worth mentioning. It did not take 
 the pains to recount the death of the mother of us all. I have no respect 
 for any book that does not treat woman as the equal of man. And if 
 there is any God in this universe who thinks more of me than he thinks 
 of my wife, he is not well acquainted with both of us. And yet they say 
 that that was done on account of the hardness of their hearts; and that was 
 done in a community where the law was so fierce that it stoned a man to 
 death for picking up sticks on Sunday. Would it not have been better / 
 to stone to death every man who abused his wife and allowed them to / 
 pick up sticks on account of the hardness of their hearts? If God wanted I 
 to take those Jews from Egypt to the land of Canaan, why didn't He do- ' 
 it instantly ? If He was going to do a miracle, why didn't He do one 
 worth talking about? 
 
 After God had killed all the first-born in Egypt, after he had killed all 
 the cattle, still Egypt could raise an army that could put to flight six hun- 
 dred thousand men. And because this God overwhelmed the Egyptian 
 army, he bragged about it for a thousand years, repeatedly calling the 
 attention of thy Jews to the fact that he overthrew Pharaoh and his hosts. 
 Did he help much with their six hundred thousand men? We find by the 
 records of the day that the Egyptian slanding army at that time was 
 never more than one hundred thousand men. Must we believe all these / 
 stories in order to get to Heaven when we die ? Must we judge of a man's 
 character by the number of stories he believes? Are we to get to Heaven 
 by creed or by deed? That is the question. Shall we reason, or shall we 
 simply believe? Ah, but they say the Bible is not inspired about those 
 little things. The Bible says the rabbit and the hare chew the cud. But 
 they do not. They have a tremulous motion of the lip. But the Being 
 that made them says they chew the cud. The Bible, therefore, is not 
 inspim.1 in natural history. Is it inspired in its astrology? No. Well, 
 what is it inspired in? In its law? Thousands of people say that if it 
 had not been for the ten commandments we would not have known any 
 better than to rob and steal. Suppose a man planted an acre of potatoes,.
 
 OF INC 
 
 112 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 hoed them all summer, and dug 1 them in the fall ; and suppose a man had 
 sat upon the fence all the time and watched him; do you believe it would 
 be necessary for that man to road the ten commandments to find out who, 
 in his judgment, had a right to take those potatoes? All laws against 
 larceny have been made by industry to protect the fruits of its labor. 
 Why is there a law ag-ainst murder? Simply because a large majority of 
 people object to being murdered. That is all. And all these laws were 
 in force thousands of years before thcit time. 
 
 One of the commandments said they should not make any graven 
 images, and that was the death of art in Palestine. No sculptor has 
 ever enriched stone with the divine forms of beauty in that country; and 
 any commandment that is the dea^h of art is not a good commandment. 
 But they say the Bible is morally inspired; and they tell me there is no 
 civilization without this Bible. Then God knows that just as well as you 
 do. God always knew it, and if you can't civilize a nation without a 
 Bible, why didn't God give every nation just one Bible to start with? 
 Why did God allow hundreds of thousands and billions of billions to go 
 down to hell just for the lack of a Bible? They say that it is morally in- 
 spired. Well, let us examine it. I want to be fair about this thing, bo- 
 cause I am willing to stake my salvation or damnation upon this ques- 
 tion whether the Bible is true or not. I say it is not; and upon that I 
 am willing to wager my soul. Is there a woman here who believes in the 
 institution of polygamy? Is there a man here who believes in that in- 
 famy? You say: "No, we do not." Then you are better than your 
 God was four thousand years ago. Four thousand years ago he believed 
 in it, taught it and upheld it. I pronounce it and denounce it the infa- 
 my of infamies. It robs our language of every sweet and tender word 
 in it. It takes the fireside away forever. It takes the meaning out of the 
 words father, mother, sister, brother, and turns the temple of love into 
 a vile den where crawl the slimy snakes of lust and hatred. I was in 
 Utah a little while ago, and was on the mountain where God used to talk 
 to Brigham Young. He never said anything to me. I said it was just as 
 reasonable that God in the nineteenth century should talk to a polygamist 
 in Utah as it was that four thousand years ago, on Mount Sinai, he talked 
 to Moses upon that hellish and damnable question. 
 
 I have no love for any God who believes in polygamy. There is no 
 heaven on this earth save where the one woman loves the one man n.nf 
 the one man loves the one woman. 1 guess it is not inspired on th 
 polygamy question. Maybe it is inspired about religious liberty. (Jod 
 aya that if anybody dillers with you about religion, "kill him." He 
 told His peculiar people, " If any one toadies a different religion, kill 
 himl " lie did not say, " Try and convince him. that ho is wroiitf, " but
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 113 
 
 "kill him!" ITe did not say, " I am in the miracle business, and I will 
 convince him;" but "kill him." He said to every husband, "If your wife, 
 that you love as you love your own soul, says, ' let us go and worship 
 other gods,' then 'thy hand shall be first upon her and she shall be 
 stoned with stones until she dies.' " Well, now, I hate a God of that kind, 
 and I cannot think of being nearer heaven than to be away from Him. A 
 God tells a man to kill his wife simply because she differs with him on 
 religion ! If the real God were to tell me to kill my wife, I would not do 
 it. If you had lived in Palestine at that time, and your wife the muther of 
 your children had woke up at night and said: " I am tired of Jehovah. 
 He is always turning up that board-bill. He is always telling about 
 whipping the Egyptians. He is always killing somebody. I am tired of 
 Him. Let us worship the sun. The sun has clothed the world in beauty; 
 it has covered the earth with green and flowers; by its divine light I first 
 saw your face; its light has enabled me to look into the eyes of my beautiful 
 babe. Let us worship the sun, father and mother of light and love and 
 joy." Then wi at would it be your duty to do kill her? Do you be- 
 lieve any real god ever did that ? Your hand should be first upon her, 
 and when you took up some ragged rock and hurled it against the white 
 bosom filled with love for you, and saw running away the red current of 
 her sweet life, then you would look up to heaven and receive the con- 
 gratulations of the infinite fiend whose commandments you had to obey. 
 I guess the Bible was not inspired about religious liberty. Let me ask 
 you right here: Suppose, as a matter of fact, God gave those laws to the 
 Jews and told them " whenever a man preaches a different religion, kill 
 him," and suppose that afterwards the same God took upon himself 
 flesh, and came to the world and taught and preached a different re- 
 ligion, and the Jews crucified him did he not reap exactly what he 
 gowed ? 
 
 May be this book is inspired about war. God told the 'Israelites to 
 overrun that country, and kill every man, woman and child for defending 
 their native land. Kill the old men? Yes. Kill the women ? Certainly. 
 And the little dimpled babes in the cradle, that smile and coo in the face 
 of murder dash out their brains; that is the will of God. Will you tell 
 me that any god ever commanded such infamy? Kill the men and the 
 women, and the young men and the babes! "What shall we do with 
 the maidens?" " Give them to the rabble murderers!" Do you believe 
 that God ever allowed the roses of love and the violets of modesty that 
 Bhed their perfume in the heart of a maiden to be trampled beneath the 
 brutal feet of lust? If there is any God, I pray him to write in the book 
 of eternal remembrance opposite to my name, that I denied that lie. 
 Whenever a woman reads a Bible and comes to that passage, she ought 
 8
 
 114 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 to throw the book from her in contempt and scorn. Do you tell me that 
 any decent god would do that? What would the devil have done under 
 the same circumstances? Just think of it; and yet that is the God that 
 we want to get into the Constitution. That is the God we teach our 
 children about, BO that they will be sweet and tender, amiable and kind! 
 That monster that fiend! I guess the Bible is not inspired about relig- 
 ious liberty, nor about war. 
 
 Then, if it is not inspired about these things, maybe it is inspired 
 about slavery. God tells the Jews to buy up the children of the heathen 
 roundabout and they should be servants for them. What is a "ser- 
 vant? " If they struck a " servant " and he died immediately, punish- 
 ment was to follow; but if the injured man should linger a while, there 
 was no punishment, because the servant represented their money! Do 
 you believe that it is right that God made one man to work for another 
 and to receive pay in rations? Do you believe God said that a whip on 
 the naked back was the legal tender for labor performed? Is it possible 
 that the real God ever gave such infamous, blood-thirsty laws? \Miat 
 more does he say? When the time of a married slave expired, he could 
 not take his wife and children with him. Then if the slave did not wish 
 to desert his family, he had his ears pierced with an awl, and became his 
 master's property forever. Do you believe that God ever turned the 
 dimpled checks of little children into iron chains to hold a man in slave- 
 ry? Do you know that a God like that would not make a respectable 
 devil? I want none of his mercy. I want no part and no lot in the 
 heaven of such a God. I will go to 'perdition, where there is human 
 sympathy. The only voice we have ever had from either of those other 
 worlds came from hell. There was a rich man who prayed his brothers 
 to attend to Lazarus so that they might " not come to this place." That 
 is the only instance, so far as we know, of souls across the river having 
 any sympathy. And I would rather'be in hell, asking for water, than in 
 heaven denying that petition. Well, what is this book inspired about? 
 Where does the inspiration come from ? Why was it that so many ani- 
 mals were killed? It was simply to make atonement for man that is all. 
 They killed something I hat had not committed a crime, in order that the 
 one who had committed the crime might be acquitted. Based upon that 
 idea is the atonement of the Christian religion. That is the reason I 
 attack this book because it is the basis of another infamy, viz: that one 
 man can be good for another, or that one man can sin for another. I 
 deny it. You have got to be good for yourself ; you have got to sin for 
 yourself. The trouble about the atonement ia, that it saves the wrong 
 man. For instance, I kill some one. He is a good man. lie loves his 
 wife and children and tries to make them happy; but he is not a Chris-
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 115 
 
 tian, nnrl he goes to hell. Just as soon as I am convicted and cannot get 
 a pardon I get religion, and I go to heaven. The hand of mercy cannot 
 reach down through the shadows of hell to my victim. 
 
 There is no atonement for the saint only for the sinner and the crim- 
 inal. The atonement saves the wrong man. I have said that I would 
 never make a lecture at all without attacking this doctrine. I did not 
 care what I started out on. 1 was always going to attack this doctrine. 
 Ami in my conclusion 1 want to draw you a few pictures of the Christian 
 heaven. But before I do that I want to say the rest I have to say about 
 Moses. I want you to understand that the Bible was never printed until 
 1488. I want you to know that up to that time it was in manuscript, in 
 possession of those who could change it if they wished; and they did 
 change it, because no two ever agreed. Much of it was in the waste bas- 
 ket of credulity, in the open mouth of tradition, and in the dull ear of 
 memory. I want you also to know that the Jews themselves never agreed 
 as to what books were inspired, and that there were a lot of books written 
 that were not incorporated in the Old Testament. I want you to know 
 that two or three years before Christ, the Hebrew manuscript was trans- 
 lated into Greek, and that the original from which the translation was 
 made has never been seen since. Some Latin Bibles were found in Africa 
 but no two agreed; and then they translated the Septuagint into the lan- 
 guages of Europe, and no two agreed. Henry VIII. took a little time 
 between murdering his wives to see that the Word of God was translated 
 ;onvctly. You must recollect that we are indebted to murderers for our 
 Bibles and our creeds. Constantine, who helped on the good work in its 
 early stage, murdered his wife and child, mingling their blood with the 
 blood of the Savior. 
 
 The Bible that Henry VIII. got up did not suit, and then his daughter, 
 the murderess of Mary, Queen of Scotts, got up another edition, which also 
 did not suit; and finally, that philosophical idiot, King James, prepared 
 the edition which we now have. There are at least one hundred thousand 
 rrors in the Old Testament, but everybody sees that it is not enough to 
 invalidate its claim to infallibility. But these errors are gradually being 
 fixed, and hereafter the prophet will be fed by Arabs instead of "ravens," 
 ind Samson's three hundred foxes will be three hundred "sheaves" 
 ilivady bound, which were fired and thrown into the standing wheat. I 
 want you all to know that there was no contemporaneous literature at the 
 time the Bible was composed, and that the Jews were infinitely ignorant 
 in their day and generation that they were isolated by bigotry and wick- 
 edness from the rest of the world. I want you to know that there are 
 tburU'L'rrhundred millions of people in the world; and that with all the 
 talk and work of the societies, only one hundred and twenty millions have
 
 116 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 got Bibles. I want you to understand that not one person in one hundred 
 in this world ever read the Bible, and no two ever understood it alike who 
 did read it, and that no one person probably ever understood it aright. 
 I want you to understand that where this Bible has been, man has hated 
 fcis brother there have been dungeons, racks, thumbscrews, and the 
 word. I want you to know that the cross has been in partnership with 
 the sword, and that the religion of Jesus Christ was established by mur- 
 derers, tyrants and hypocrites. I want you to know that the church 
 carried the black flag. Then talk about the civilizing influence of this 
 religion ! 
 
 Now, I want to give an idea or two in regard to the Christian's heaven. 
 Of all the selfish things in this world, it is one man wanting to gut to 
 heaven, caring nothing what becomes of the rest of mankind. "If I 
 can only get my little soul in! " 1 have always noticed that the people 
 who have the smallest souls make the most fuss about getting them saved. 
 Here is what we are taught by the church to-day. We are taught by it 
 that fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters can all be happy in heaven, 
 no matter who may be in hell; that the husband can be happy there 
 with the wife that would have died for him at any moment of his life in 
 hell. But they say, " We don't believe in fire. What we believe in now 
 is remorse." What will you have remorse for? For the mean things 
 you have done when you are in hell? Will you have any remorse for the 
 mean things you have done when you are in heaven? Or will you be so 
 good then that you won't care how you used to be? Do n't you see what 
 an infinitely mean belief that is? I tell you to-day that, no matter in 
 what heaven you may be, no matter in what star you are spending 
 the summer, if you meet another man whom you have wronged you 
 will drop a little behind in the tune. And, no matter in what part 
 of hell you are, and you meet some one whom you have succored, whose 
 nakedness you have clothed, and whose famine you have fed, the fire will 
 cool up a little. According to this Christian doctrine, when you are in 
 heaven you won't care how mean you were once. What must be the 
 social condition of a gentleman in heaven who will admit that he never 
 would have been there if he had not got scared? What must l>e the 
 social position of an angel who will always admit that if another had not 
 pitied him he ought to have been damned? Is it a compliment to an infi- 
 nite God to say that every being He ever made deserved to be damned 
 the minute He got him done, and that He will damn everybody He has 
 not had a chance to make over? Is it possible that somebody else can be 
 good for me, and that this doctrine of the atonement is the only anchor 
 for the human soul? 
 
 For instance: here is a man seventy years of age, who has been
 
 "MISTAKES OF MOSES." 117 
 
 splendid fellow and lived according to the laws of nature. He has got 
 about him splendid children, whom he has loved and cared for with all 
 his heart. But he did not happen to believe in this Bible; he did not 
 believe in the Pentateuch. He did not believe that because some child- 
 ren made fun of a gentleman who was short of hair, God sent two bears 
 and tore the little darlings to pieces. He had a tender heart, and he 
 thought about the mothers who would take the pieces, the bloody frag- 
 ments of the children, and press them to their bosom in a frenzy of grief; 
 he thought about their wails and lamentations, and could not believe 
 that God was such an infinite monster. That was all he thought, but he 
 went to Hell. Then, there is another man -who made a hell on earth for 
 his wife, who had to be taken to the insane asylum, and his children 
 were driven from home and were wanderers and vagrants in the world. 
 But just between the last sin and the last breath, this fellow got religion, 
 and he never did another thing except to take his medicine. He never 
 did a solitary human being a favor, and he died and went to heaven. 
 Do n't you think he would be astonished to see that other man in hell, 
 and say to himself, " Is it possible that such a splendid character should 
 bear such fruit, and that all my rascality at last has brought me next to 
 God?" 
 
 Or, let us put another ease. You were once alone in the desert no 
 provisions, no water, no hope. Just when your life was at its lowest ebb, 
 a man appeared, gave you water and food and brought you safely out. 
 How you would bless that man. Time rolls on. You die and go to 
 heaven ; and one day you see through the black night of hell, the friend 
 who saved your life, begging for a drop of water to cool his parched lips. 
 He cries to you, " Remember what I did in the desert give me to drink." 
 How mean, how contemptible you would feel to see his suffering and be 
 enable to relieve him. But this is the Christian heaven. We sit by the 
 fireside and see the flames and the sparks fly np the chimney everybody 
 happy, and the cold wind and sleet are beating on the window, and out 
 on the doorstep is a mother with a child on her breast freezing. How 
 happy it makes a fireside, that beautiful contrast. And we say " God is 
 good," and there we sit, and she sits and moans, not one'night but for- 
 ever. Or we are sitting at the table with our wives and children, every- 
 body eating, happy and delighted, and Famine comes and pushes out its 
 shriveled palms, and, with hungry eyes, implores us for a crust. How 
 that would increase the appetite! And yet that is the Christian heaven. 
 Don't you see that these infamous doctrines petrify the human heart? 
 And 1 would have every one who hears me, swear that he will never con- 
 tribute another dollar to build another church, in which is taught such 
 infamous lies. 1 want every one of you to say that you never will, direct-
 
 118 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 ly or indirectly, give a dollar to any man to preach that falsehood. It 
 has done harm enough. It has covered the world with blood. 11 has 
 filled the asylums for the insane. It has cast a shadow in the heart, in 
 the sunlight of every good and tender man and woman. ] say let us rid 
 the heavens of this monster, and write upon the dome " Liberty, love 
 and law." 
 
 No matter what may come to me or what may come to you, lot us do 
 exactly what we believe to be right, and let us give the exact thought in 
 our brains, leather than have this Christianity true, I would rather all 
 the gods would destroy themselves this morning. I would rather the 
 whole universe would go to nothing, if such a thing were possible, this 
 instant. Rather than have the glittering dome of pleasure reared on the 
 eternal abyss of pain, I would see the utter and eternal destruction of this 
 universe. I would rather see the shining fabric of our universe crumble 
 to unmeaning chaos, and take itself where oblivion broods and memory 
 forgets. I would rather the blind Samson of some imprisoned force, re- 
 leased by thoughtless chance, should so rack and strain this world I hat 
 man in stress and straint, in astonishment and fear, should suddenly fall 
 back to savagery and barbarity. 1 would rather that this thrilled and 
 thrilling globe, shorn of all life, should in its cycles rub the wheel, the 
 parent s.ar. on which the light should fall as fruitlessly as falls the gaze 
 of love on death, than to have this infamous doctrine of eternal punish- 
 ment true; rather than have this infamous selfishness of a heaven for a 
 few and a hell for the many established as the word of God! 
 
 One world at a time is my doctrine. Let us make some one happy 
 here. Happiness is the interest that a decent action draws, and the more 
 decent actions you do, the larger your income will be. Let every man 
 try to make his wife happy, his children happy. Let every man try to 
 make every day a joy, and God cannot afford to damn such a map. I 
 cannot help God; 1 cannot injure God. I can help people; I can injure 
 people. Consequently humanity is the only real religion. 
 
 I cannot better close this lecture than by quoting four lines from 
 Robert Burns: 
 
 "To make a happy fireside clime 
 
 To wiMiiis and wile 
 That's tin- inn- |ulins and sublime 
 Of liuiiiau life."
 
 MISTAKES 
 
 OF 
 
 INGERSOLL 
 
 AS SHOWN BY 
 
 REV. W. F. CRAFTS, BISHOP CHARLES E. CHENEY, CHAPLAIN C. C 
 
 McCABE, D.D., ARTHUR SWAZEY, D.D., ROBERT COLLYER, D.D., 
 
 FRED. PERRY POWERS, AND OTHERS. 
 
 INCLUDING INGERSOLL'S LECTURE 
 
 ON 
 
 SKULLS, AND HIS ANSWER 
 
 TO 
 
 PROF. SWING, DR. RYDER, DR. HERFORD, DR. COLLYER, 
 DR. THOMAS, DR. KOEHLER, AND OTHER CRITICS. 
 
 ALSO 
 INGERSOLL'S ORATION AT HIS BROTHER'S GRAVE, 
 
 TOGETHER WITH 
 
 HENRY WARD BEECIIER'S AND HON. ISAAC N. ARNOLD'S 
 
 COMMENTS ON THE SAME. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 J. IB. 
 
 CHICAGO: 
 RHODES & McCLURE, PUBLISHERS. 
 
 1880.
 
 Not satisfied with his recent parade of the "Mistakes of 
 Moses " before the Chicago public (which called forth our 
 first book, entitled the " Mistakes of Ingersoll, as Shown By 
 Prof. Swing and Others"), Mr. I. has since returned and 
 delivered another lecture against the Bible and against his 
 critics, Prof. Swing, Dr. Ryder, Dr. Ilcrford and Dr. 
 Collyer. These last efforts of Mr. Ingersoll have called forth 
 the present volume, in which will be found additional 
 "Mistakes," as shown by Rev. "W. F. Crafts, who is the 
 well-known successor of Dr. Tiffany in Trinity Methodist 
 Episcopal Church; by Chaplain C. C. McCabe, Bishop 
 Cheney, Arthur Swazey, D.D., Robert Collyer, D.D., whose 
 names are all familar to the public; and by Fred Perry 
 Powers, who is favorably identified with Chicago journalism. 
 The " commendable fairness," mentioned by the press, in 
 printing both the "text and replies " in the former volume? 
 requires in this instance, also the text, which is given at the 
 close and which includes Mr. Ingersoll's replies to Prof. 
 Swing, Dr. Ryder, Brooke Ilerford and others. 
 
 J. B. McCLURE. 
 CHICAGO, May 17, 1879. 
 
 Entered according; to Act ft Congreen, In the ycnr 1879, liy J. B. McCuriiK & R. S. 
 Rue DES, in the Office of the Librarian of Congresx, at Washington, D. r. 
 
 OTTAWAV & COMPANY, 
 Printer*. 
 
 UONOHUK it llKNNtBEURIT, 
 
 Binders.
 
 PAGE. 
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY ...... 7 
 
 Ingersollism Outlined "Ten Points" instead of " Five " Infi- 
 del Protoplasm '. . . . . 7 
 
 First Point in the Ten Sepulchral Hoots of the Ingersoll Owl 
 A Theological Rip Van Winkle .... 10 
 
 Ingersoll Mistakes a Part for the Whole Gross Misrepresenta- 
 tions ........ 12 
 
 The Great Ingersoll Boomerang How it Works Further Mis- 
 representations Examined ..... 13 
 
 Misrepresenting Bible Passages . . . 14 
 
 Sun and Moon Standing Still ..... 15 
 
 Hell 16 
 
 The Present vs. the Future ..... 17 
 
 Ingcrsoll's Horrible Estimate of Truth ... 19 
 
 The Bible the Best of Books, and Christ the Best of Men . 20 
 Something New if True Infidelity the Essential Factor in Pro- 
 grcssive Civilization But Coleridge, Win. H. Seward, Bis- 
 marck, and other Great Statesman can not see it Civilization 
 goes only with Christianity .... 21 
 
 .Marvelous Power of Time and Circumstance Tragic Effect of 
 Iso-thcrmal Lines Peoria Mud Necessarily the Seventh 
 Heaven as Ingersoll Sees it . . . .24 
 
 Law is Ingersoll 's God ..... 26 
 
 Liberty and Infidelity What DC Tocqueville Says About it 26 
 
 Woman Ingcrsoll's Theory at Variance with Facts . . 27 
 Ingersoll's Theory of Childhood Some of His Little Stories 
 The Whole Subject Carefully Examined Significant Incident 
 in the Life of Abraham Lincoln .... 28 
 
 Ingersoll Says Christianity Fetters Thought The Bible and a 
 
 Host of Distinguished Men Say Otherwise . . .82 
 A Cloud of Witnesses ..... 34 
 Jesus Christ ..... 87 
 Amazing Ignorance of Infidels Concerning the Scriptures 
 Hume's Ignorance of the New Testament Tom Paine With- 
 out a Bible 8 
 
 8
 
 4 CONTENTS, 
 
 Distributed Ignorance and Concentrated Hatred Probable Cause 
 
 of Ingersoll's Infidelity . .... 89 
 
 The Trutk of the Whole Matter ..... 40 
 
 CHAPLAIN MCCABK'S REPLY . . . . .43 
 
 The'Famous Chaplain lias a Remarkable Dream He Sees ihe 
 Great City of Ingersollville Which Ingersoll and the Infidel 
 Host Enter And are Shut in for Six Months Remarkable 
 Condition of Things Outside and Inside Happiness and 
 Misery Ingersoll Finally Petitions for a Church and sends 
 for a Lot of Preachers . . . . 43 
 
 DR. SWAZEY'S REPLY . . . . . 49 
 
 Momentary View of Col. Ingersoll Through the Doctor's Glass 
 The Bible on the Meridian What the Doctor Sees in the 
 Great Book . . . . . . .49 
 
 Occultation of Ingersoll's Good Sense General Survey of 
 
 Deities Scope of Divine Revelation . . 51 
 
 The Great Central Figure Absolute Unity of the Bible System 53 
 The Bible Law of Development vs. Infidel Philosophy . 54 
 
 Common Sense View of the Subject How it Eliminates Polyg- 
 amy, Slavery, Etc. ...... 56 
 
 More Common Sense The Great Ingersoll Orb Approaching 
 the Nihilistic Belt Nebulae . ' . , . .58 
 
 DR. COLLYER'S REPLY . . . . . . 63 
 
 Dr. Collyer Relates a Little Story A Book that Cost Mr. Inger- 
 soll the Governorship of Illinois The Volume Philosophically 
 Considered Heavy Blows . . . . .63 
 
 Sparks Flying in all Directions Singular Mental Phenomenon 
 Occasioned by $23,000 a Year . . . .64 
 
 The Clear Ring of Truth vc. the Dull Thud of the Baser Metal- 
 Potency of Simple Statement The Doctor's Objections to 
 Ingersoll's Talk . . . . . . 67 
 
 Putting the Fine Edge on Orthodoxy Taking a Weld with Prof. 
 Swing and Dr. Thomas Borax and Bigotry . . 69 
 
 A Touching Illustration Eloquence and Truth Ilavelock's 
 Saints . . . . . . . . 73 
 
 Atheism Not an Institution but a " Destitution ! " The True 
 Life '.'.-' 74 
 
 FKI-.H. PERRY POWERS' REPLY .... 75 
 
 The Sinaitic Code Solvent Powers of the Historic Method 
 Graphic Illustration of the Two Schools ... 75
 
 CONTENTS. 5 
 
 Divine Adjustment of the Moral Law Progressive Elimination 
 
 of Polygamy, Slavery, Etc. Mount Sinai and Mount Calvary 78 
 
 Purpose and Potency of the Mosaic Law ... 80 
 Excessive Wickedness and Proportionate Punishment The 
 
 Court of Heaven vs. the Couit of Earth . .82 
 
 Able Bodied Mendacity and Civilization Love and Obedience 84 
 
 Mr. Powers' Pungent Peroration .... 85 
 
 BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY . . . . . .89 
 
 How the Question of Forgery Applies to the Five Books of 
 
 Moses ........ 89 
 
 The " Common Ground " of the Contending Parties Logical 
 
 Po^i'ionof Ezra ....... 91 
 
 The Bishop PI anting Signals on the Mountain Tops of History 
 
 Survey of t'.ie New Moses Air Line .... 92 
 
 Termination of ihc Great Air Line . . . .95 
 
 Genealogical Reflections, ..... 96 
 
 Cutting the Gordian Knot . . . . . .97 
 
 The Bishop's Challenge Moses and Ingersoll as Chronologists 99 
 Mud Calendars vs. Facts Some Sad and Sorrowful Scientific 
 
 Figuring in the Sand . . ; . . . ' 101 
 
 A Mistake of Ingersol), Tom Paine & Co. Corrected Conclusion 103 
 
 INGERSOLL'S LECTURE ox SKULLS and his Replies to Prof. Swing, 
 
 Dr. Ryder, Dr. Herford, Dr. Collyer, and Other Critics, . . 107 
 
 INOERFOLL AT His BROTHER'S GRAVE 146 
 
 Colonel Ingersoll's Fuueral Oration .... 147 
 
 HENKY WARD BEECHER'S Comments on Mr. Ingersoll's Faith, 
 
 and Funeral Discourse ...... 148 
 
 HON. ISAAC N. ARNOLD'S Comments on Ingersoll's Funeral 
 
 Oration ........ 160
 
 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL 
 
 AS SHOWN BY 
 
 W. F. CRAFTS, 
 CHAPLAIN McCABE, 
 ARTHUR SWAZEY, D. D. 
 
 ROBERT COLLYER, D. D. 
 F. P. POWERS, 
 BISHOP CHENEY, 
 
 AND OTHERS. 
 ALSO INCLUDING 
 
 INGERSOLL'S LECTURE IN FULL ON "SKULLS," AND HIS RE- 
 PLIES TO PUOF. SWING, W. II. RYDER, BROOKE 
 HERFORD, AND OTHER CRITICS. 
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' HEPLY. 
 
 Ingersollism Outlined " Ten Points " instead of " Five "Infidel 
 
 Protoplasm. 
 
 "I WAR with principles, not with men" the motto of 
 Webster in political debates should be the law in all con- 
 flicts of ideas, especially in the realm of religion. It ia 
 not of the person, Mr. Ingersoll, that I speak, but rather 
 of the principles of which he is the most popular spokes- 
 man, and which make up that shallowest, but loudest 
 Jericho book of infidelity's bitter waters which begins in 
 a few tears of pretended martyrdom to love of truth ; spat- 
 ters the mud of epithets upon Christians, while condemn- 
 ing that very vice in a part of the Church in less advanced 
 
 7
 
 8 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 ages; babbles shallowly along its little channel about law 
 as an almighty executive, as if the rails that give direction 
 to a train took the place of the engine that draws it; winds 
 very crookedly through the Old Testament, avoiding every 
 passage except those few that can be used for ridicule; 
 plows still more crookedly through church history, shun- 
 ning every part except the unchristian swamps of bigotry 
 and superstition; keeps up the same snaky crookedness in 
 its passage through religion of to-day, hurrying noisily 
 among only the few rocky and marshy places, where it can 
 find the reptiles of superstition and error; passes with great 
 dash of spray along the audacious theory that Christian 
 civilization is the result of anti-Christian forces; plunges 
 with loud roar of waters down its claim that infidelity is 
 the only liberator of man, woman, and child; and still flow- 
 ing within its narrow little channel babbles of itself as an 
 emancipated ocean of untrammeled thought. 
 
 These characteristics of the brook are the ten points of 
 Ingersollisra. I have read and re-read, carefully, the nine 
 published lectures of Mr. Ingersoll on religious themea, 
 besides hearing the one entitled " Skulls," and every one of 
 them has something on each of these ten points of his fixed 
 and unchanging creed, and not one or all has anything 
 beyond these ten " doctrines" for he often uses the words, 
 " That is my doctrine." "While attacking creeds of the 
 Church he holds and urges all to believe his own unformu- 
 lated but distinct creed, offering in place of the " five points 
 of Calvinism " the ten points of Ingersollism, the latter 
 occurring as regularly in every one of his lectures in this 
 age as the former did a century ago in the sermons of Cal- 
 vinists, which he ridicules for their sameness. 
 / What is this frightful monster that we call "a creed?" 
 / Simply a statement of what one believes. Every man, 
 t unless he is an idiot, lias a creed in which ho agrees
 
 W. F. CRAFTS 1 REPLY. 9 
 
 with somebody. The only question is to find by " reason, 
 observation, and experience," which is the best. It 
 would hardly be considered bigotry for a scientist to 
 believe a few things as a creed of fixed scientific truths 
 which no progress can ever erase, for instance, the rotund- 
 ity and revolution of the earth, the attraction of the 
 planets upon each other, and scores of other things which 
 every scientist has held for many years unchanged, and is 
 6ure are unchangeable because proved conclusively. There 
 are some certainties in the science of religion, such as are 
 referred to in the Apostles' Creed, which may, without any 
 greater bigotry, be considered as proved and established. 
 The Christian Church of to-day does not generally insist 
 upon anything further than these few concrete facts of the 
 Apostles' Creed " as essentials " in Christian belief. When 
 Evangelical churches shout their watchword, " In essentials, 
 unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity," it is 
 as if a company of scientists should say, "On proved facts 
 we will all agree, but in the realms of hypothesis and 
 opinion, we will agree to disagree." 
 
 But the special point we wish to notice is, that Mr. 
 Ingersoll attacks creed with creed. lie is as bigoted a par- 
 tisan of his own creed as ever called hard names. The very 
 lieart of his creed seems to be the belief that his mission is 
 to destroy the creed of everybody else. 
 
 It is a suggestive fact that the naturally-gifted mind of 
 Mr. Ingersoll, who declares that godless and soulless mate- 
 rialism is the emancipator and inspirer of thought, should 
 be able, in all the years which these ten lectures represent, 
 to produce but ten ideas, the same ten ideas which made 
 ii]) his earliest lecture, years ago, appearing successively in 
 each of the succeeding lectures, including that of to-day, 
 there being no change save in the cap and bells of his 
 jokes. Heading these ten ideas over and over for as many
 
 10 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 hours in going through these lectures, brought back a 
 ludicrous scene in our college burial of mathematics when 
 fifteen notes of Ploy el's hymn were played dolefully over 
 and over again for nearly an hour, as marching music. 
 In reading these lectures, which arc but ten combinations 
 
 C3 * 
 
 and permutations of ten ideas, one is reminded also of tho 
 lecturer's own illustration of the boarding house keeper, 
 who, for years, had no change of diet from hash, for every 
 lecture is the same hash of ten ideas, changed only in 
 . the name and in the order of putting in the ten elements. 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 First Point in the Ten Sepulchral Hoots of the Ingersoll Owl 
 A Theological Rip Van Winkle. 
 
 As in the beet hash of New England the blood red beet 
 predominates and gives color to the whole, so the principal 
 element in these lectures against Christianity is the blood 
 -Of past persecutions by a corrupt part of tho Church, for 
 /which true Christianity has no more responsibility than a 
 / loyal colonel in our war of 1770, or 1SG1, for the robberies 
 ! and crimes of camp-followers or traitors. In every published 
 lecture on religion, Mr. Ingersoll deliberately cites tho acts 
 of tho Benedict Arnolds of the Christian army as repre- 
 senting the Washingtons and Grants. He describes past 
 counterfeits of religion as specimens of its accepted cur- 
 , Tency. It is as if one should attack present astronomers by 
 relating ridiculous stories of the old astrologers, or assail 
 present physicians by quoting the strange practices of tho 
 ancient alchemists. 
 
 In one lecture a fair representative of all in this respect 
 I found that in forty-three pages only two did not con- 
 tain these stale references to past persecutions, except a few 
 pages given to the trial of Professor Swing, which were 
 equally stale as assailing chiefly abandoned features of
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 11 
 
 human Calvinism. Past errors and follies of the human 
 Calvinism, human Catholicism, and heathen religions are 
 constantly spoken of as if vital elements of Christianity. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll ought to have a hymn to sing at the open- 
 ing and close of his lectures, made on the pattern of that 
 one whose first verse is: 
 
 Go on, go on, go on, go on, 
 
 Go on, go 0:1, go on, 
 Go on, go on, go on, go on, 
 
 Go on, go on, go on, 
 
 with forty-two verses more of the same, substituting " past 
 persecutions," instead of "go on," which is too progressive 
 for a "go-back" lecture. 
 
 Mr. Ingcrsoll is a Rip Van Winkle in theology, who 
 seems to have slept ever since the days of persecution. 
 He is a Sancho Panza who assails imaginary foes of his own 
 making, and thinks he has captured the golden helmet of 
 Christianity when he has only secured the abandoned brass 
 kettle of old traditions and discarded superstitions. He is 
 a Falstaff killing the dead Percy of past follies. His lectures 
 bustle with the antiquated and misused words "priests," 
 " dark ages," " witches," " fagots," " religious wars," " church 
 fathers," "damned infants," "martyrs," "gods," etc., as 
 if he were speaking in a heathen land, and also in some 
 dead century. And he uses the past tense so exclusively 
 in his " progressive " lectures that one would suppose 
 English as well as Hebrew had no present tense. It 
 must have been Mr. Ingersoll, in his boyhood, that came 
 from his first hunt crying, "I've shot a cherub," 
 having mistaken an owl for a cherub, because of the 
 wretched pictures of the latter on the old grave stones. 
 Mr. Ingersoll logically destroys some Church owl of the 
 dark ages, and beranse it corresponds with his own carica- 
 ture of the Church thinks ho has dethroned Christianity
 
 12 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL, 
 
 itself. Like Poe's " raven " who had but one word, " Never- 
 more," Mr. Ingersoll is continually crying in the ears of 
 the present that worn-out strain about abuses which we all 
 condemn, *' Galileo-Servetus, Galileo-Servctus." 
 
 This ten-idea champion of popular materialism, while 
 talking of progress and condemning those who hold fast to 
 things of the pa;-t, is nevertheless so largely devoted to 
 showing his carefully preserved martyr-mummies from the 
 long-past ages of persecution, that we find Mark Twain's 
 question constantly arising at each new charge against 
 Christianity: "Is he is lie dead?" and we are also 
 tempted to cry out for a " fresh corpse " in place of 
 these very dry and dead mummies of past abuses. To 
 paraphrase the lecturer's own words, we want one pres- 
 ent fact. We pass our hats through the lectures in vain 
 for some present facts against pure Christianity, which he 
 assumes to assail and overthrow. There is far more excuse 
 for Thomas Paine, in an age when the old Calvinistic errors 
 were largely held, and for Voltaire, surrounded by the 
 superstitions of Romanism, misunderstanding Christianity, 
 than for this modern lecturer, who very well knows that 
 the caricatures which he represents as Christianity are 
 very old pictures of its ancient camp-followers. 
 
 ARTICLE II. 
 
 Ingersoll Mistakes a Part for the Whole Gross Misrepresen- 
 tations. 
 
 Article Second of Ingersollism, like unto the first, but 
 with present instead of past tense, is about as follows: 
 Christianity to-day is proved to be false by the present 
 errors and abuses that arc found in some of the churches. 
 
 Romish superstitions and the errors of those who have 
 grossly misinterpreted the Bible ao a support of slavery, 
 polygamy, etc., are continually used by this champion of
 
 W. P. CRAFTS' REPLY. IS 
 
 " liberty of thought," and " charity " and " brotherhood," 
 as representing true Christianity to-day, whicli is quite as 
 honorable as if a man should attack the principles of med- 
 icine by citing the tricks of quacks. An examination of 
 the hull of the Great Eastern found adhering to the iron- 
 plates of the bottom an enormous multitude of mussels, 
 whose weight is estimated at three hundred tons. The 
 great ship has been carrying on her hull a burden equal to 
 full cargoes for six or eight sailing ships. 
 
 Suppose I should show you a few of those barnacles as 
 specimens of what the Great Eastern is made of, and then 
 denounce its builders as fools? Mr. Ingersoll is constantly 
 confounding barnacles of some " church " with Christian- 
 ity. Suppose I should take the belts and whips of torture J 
 that are used by Romanists in Mexico and show them in 
 lectures as specimens of the barbarism of Congregational- 
 ists and Methodists? It is certainly most palpable unfair- 
 ness for Mr. Ineersoll to use the word "gods'' indiscrimi- 
 
 o o 
 
 nately of heathen and Christian objects of worship, and to 
 employ the words, " The Church," as if there were no false 
 or true, past or present in connection with it, and as if its 
 meaning were as much a unit as " The Moon." So also he 
 unfairly classes all ministers as "priests." It would be 
 quite as fair to speak of all "medicine men," past and 
 present, savage and civilized, under the words, " The 
 Doctors." 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 The Great Ingersoll Boomerang How it Works Further Mis- 
 representations Carefully Examined. 
 
 Far less prominent, but ever present, is the third element 
 in Ingersollism an oft-recurring moan " Infidels to-day 
 are martyrs at whom men cast epithets, but not ballots." 
 
 The defeated infidel politician appears as regulaiiy and
 
 14 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 revengefully in every lecture (indirectly, of course) as the 
 misanthropic Byron shows himself in each of his poems as 
 the real hero under the various names of " Childe Harold " 
 " Don Juan," " Corsair," etc. lie who cries out against 
 the past for calling infidels by hard names hurls in the 
 more kindly present more anathemas than any other Pope. 
 
 " You are an infidel." 
 
 u Tou're a bigot ! Arn't you ashamed to be calling 
 names, you old hypocrite?" 
 
 In this debate of Mr. Ingersoll's bigotry with the big- 
 otry of the past, a printer might fitly misprint the "pros 
 and cons," " pigs and cows." It is like the English lady 
 who criticised an American friend for saying, at a mistake 
 in croquet, "What a horrid scratch," and when asked 
 what would have been better, replied, "You might have 
 said, 'What a beastly fluke." 3 It is not strange that the 
 people will not elect to represent them in politics, one who 
 so audaciously misrepresents them, as docs Air. Ingersoll 
 in nearly every attempt to declare the belief of Christians. 
 
 Misrepresenting Bible Passages. 
 
 , Dr. Ryder, Prof. Swing, and Dr. Ilerford, have abund- 
 antly shown his numerous and inexcusable misrepresenta- 
 tions of Bible passages, to which may be added another 
 more atrocious, if possible, the implication that the perse- 
 cutions of Saul of Tarsus, and the adulteries of Solomon, 
 are a part of the Christian system, and also that Jephthali 
 really killed his daughter as a sacrifice, which the Bible 
 does not declare, nor any Christian believe, and the mis- 
 interpretation of the passage about women keeping silence 
 in the churches, which the Christian Church of to-day con- 
 siders of only temporary force, a command to Corinth, and 
 not to Christendom, no more binding upon us tlum Paul's 
 request that Timothy should bring his cloak that was left
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 15 
 
 at Troas. It is a kindred misrepresentation to say the 
 assertion that those who tortured the martyrs were the 
 same ones who made the Bible an assertion which his- 
 tory clearly refutes, as the Old Testament was ar- 
 ranged in its present form 388 B. C., and the New 
 Testament was collected as it is at present before the days 
 of persecution by the church began. 
 
 It is also a misrepresentation, not only of the Bible, out 
 of the common principles of interpretation in every 
 department of literature, to intimate that an explanation 
 of passages as poetic and figurative, is unfair and begging 
 the question. Suppose we should put a literal interpreta- 
 tion upon the tropical figures of Mr. Ingersoll's eloquence, 
 and when ho speaks of the sun's rays " as arrows from the 
 q-.-.ivcr of the sun," declare him an ignorant idolater, who 
 thinks the sun an intelligent being who has caught the 
 passion for archery. 
 
 Sun and Moon Standing Still. 
 
 It is equally absurd for him to interpret the poem about 
 the sun and moon standing still by the rules of prose. Mr. 
 Ingersoll also says, poetically: "Think of that wonderful 
 chemistry by which bread was changed into the divine 
 tragedy of Ilamlet." Suppose we should interpret that 
 sentence as fact rather than figure, and say that Mr. Ingpr- 
 6oll believes that by tho combination of certain liquids and 
 solids in the chemist's retort this marvelous literary pro- 
 duction was created! It would be quite as reasonable as 
 to insist upon absolute literalness in the bold figures of 
 Oriental eloquence and poetry. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll also misrepresents the Christian's Sunday 
 in the home, speaking of it as "a day too good for a child 
 to be happy in," saying: " The idea, that any God would 
 hate to hear a child laugh." "We all know (?) that in the
 
 1 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 Christian homes of to-day the smiles and laughter of 
 childhood are strictly forbidden, and any one who smiles in 
 church is carried out by the police (?). 
 
 Hell. 
 
 Especially does Mr. Ingersoll continually and grossly 
 {misrepresent Christianity in regard to the conditions by 
 which men are believed to bring themselves to Hell. Hear 
 him: " It is infinitely absurd to suppose that a God would 
 address a communication to intelligent beings, and yet 
 make it a crime, to be punished in eternal flames, for them 
 to use their intelligence for the purpose of understanding 
 
 /' His communication. Neither can they show why any one 
 should be punished, either in this world or another, for 
 acting honestly in accordance with reason; and yet a doc- 
 trine with every possible argument against it has been, 
 and still is, believed and defended by the entire orthodox 
 world. If I should say ninety-nine in a hundred go down 
 
 \ to Hell, I should have the support of the entire orthodox 
 world. You can see for yourselves the justice of damn- 
 ing a man if his parents happened to baptize him in the 
 wrong way. Think of a God who will damn his children 
 for the expression of an honest thought!" 
 \ Few, if any, intelligent Christians teach that a man must 
 accept their denominational creed in all its details in order 
 to be saved, as the careless critics of Christianity so often 
 assert, but rather all evangelical Christians repeat the New 
 Testament conditions of salvation, " Believe on the Lord 
 Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved," and declare nega- 
 tively, not as has been said by Mr. Ingersoll, said by 
 infidels, that all who do not believe will not bo saved, but 
 rather in the words of Martin Luther, " No man shall die 
 in his sins, except him who, through disbelief, thrusts from 
 him the forgiveness of sin, which in the name of Jesus is 

 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 17 
 
 offered him." It is the firm of Ignorance and Bigotry that 
 declare that evangelical Christianity teaches that a man can 
 not be saved who does not believe in its statement of the 
 Trinity and its interpretations of the Bible. 
 
 He also utterly misrepresents the Christian conception 
 of saving faith as ignoring reason and action, both of which 
 it includes, and as resting chiefly on a book or a creed as 
 its end, rather than on the person, Christ. Every church 
 teaches that intelligent faith and faithfulness toward Christ x 
 {not creeds in detail) is the condition of salvation. " Faith," \ 
 says Bishop "Wightman, "believes on competent testi- 
 mony what it could not otherwise know." Or, as Dr. / 
 Arnold says: " Faith is reason leaning on God." Reason/ 
 is the foundation of belief. 
 
 The Present vs. the Future. 
 
 Another of the almost countless misrepresentations of 
 religion by Mr. Ingersoll, is the frequent statement that 
 Christianity is wholly devoted to the future, and ignores man's 
 present needs, which reminds us that it was Thomas Paine 
 (?) and not the Bible that said, "Pure religion and unde- 
 filed before God the Father, is this, to visit the fatherless 
 and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself 
 unspotted from the world." And you have all observed 
 that the organized societies and benevolences, by which 
 orphans, and the aged, and the helpless, are aided in asy- 
 lums and refuges, were not (?) established by this Chris- 
 tianity which " ignores man's present needs, and devotes 
 itself exclusively to the future." Christian ministers never 
 preach on combining works with faith, or showing charac- 
 ter by conduct, or loving their neighbors as themselves. 
 Mr. Ingersoll declares that a little restitution is better than 
 a great deal of repentance, and we have noticed that when 
 Ingersoll has delivered a lecture or two in our large cities, 
 2
 
 18 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 those among his hearers who have defrauded others have, 
 at once, begun the work of restitution (?) by sending back 
 the money they had stolen from employers, creditors and 
 customers. (?) Mr. Moody, who preaches repentance as 
 well as restitution, of course (?) has no such results follow- 
 ing his work, as he proclaims the Christianity whose entire 
 interest is in the future life. (?) You smile at this practical 
 test of Mr. Ingersoll's theory, in view of the fact that wo 
 have no record of a single instance where one of his lectures 
 has led to the restitution of stolen property; while such 
 cases are constantly occurring in connection with the work 
 of Mr. Moody and other Christians. Several very notable 
 ones have come under my own immediate notice. 
 
 It is an equally astounding, barefaced misrepresentation, 
 or to put it in fewer letters, false, when lie states that all of 
 the orthodox religion of the day is Calvinistic. Part of 
 the so-called Calvinistic churches are not Calvinistic in the 
 usual sense of the word, and we had fondly dreamed that 
 there was such a body of Christians as Methodists who are 
 distinctly anti-Calvinistic, and hold the first place in num- 
 bers among Protestant Churches in America. 
 
 It is also a misrepresentation to say, " Whoever thinks 
 he has found it all out, he is orthodox," for every orthodox 
 pulpit constantly preaches the duty of growth, intellectual 
 and spiritual. Mr. Ingcrsoll declares that Protestants to- 
 day would persecute, as in the past, if they had the power, 
 a statement in which he assumes the role of the prophet, 
 and shows the profundity of his insight into the spirit of 
 Christianity to-day, which binds up the broken-hearted 
 and ministers to the troubled arid sorrowing. It is cunning 
 sophistry to say that every one is opposed to the union of 
 Church and state, because they know that the Church 
 could not be trusted with power, a statement which obtains 
 its force by suppressing the very important fot, that the
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 19 
 
 Church when united with political power draws into itself 
 unprincipled politicians, and becomes entirely a different 
 body through the opportunities it offers to selfishness and 
 ambition. It is also a misrepresentation to say that " Prot- 
 estants stand up for Protestant persecutors of the past," 
 for all Protestant churches of to-day condemn the burning 
 of Servetus and such acts as much as any one. It is also \ 
 a misrepresentation by holding back half tho truth to tell \ 
 us of that base or mistaken element of the Church that 
 made the rack and not of that other noble element of the 
 Church that was upon the rack, for the martyrs were sel- 
 dom if ever infidels. 
 
 Ingersoll's Horrible Estimate of Truth. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll, in his recent lecture on " Skulls," twice 
 said that truth was not worth a little suffering, that one 
 had better lie or recant than suffer a little pain, or lose a 
 drop of blood. He would " turn Judas Iscariot to his own 
 soul " to save a thumb. This significant item as to his 
 whole estimate cf truth helps us to account for the whole- 
 sale manufacture of falsehoods in his lectures. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll's most gross misrepresentation is the 
 habitual custom of telling only one side of a fact, quoting 
 difficult Bible passages but never sublime ones, bad cus- 
 toms of the Church but never good ones, defects in Chris- 
 tians but never excellences. When Mr. Ingersoll speaks 
 of " a lawyer whipping his child for holding back part of 
 the truth," he describes his own partisan and one-sided 
 method, as Professor Swing has shown, attacking Christian- 
 ity as the hired attorney of infidelity, or the hired cam- 
 paigner of the anti-Christian party who is to present only 
 one side. This, too, from a man who claims that infidelity 
 unfetters thought and broadens mind.
 
 20 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 The Bible the Best of Books, and Christ the Best of Men. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll also misrepresents the differences among 
 the various forms of Christianity. All men of broad 
 scholarship of the last and best century who have written 
 in religion, both skeptics and Christians, agree on two 
 things the Bible as the best of books, and Christ as the 
 best of men. So much at least may be said to be indorsed 
 by all scholarship, and when a man rests down upon these 
 two truths as proved and established, and follows them out 
 into the truths to which they lead, he will not be likely to 
 go far astray, for if Christ is confessedly the greatest and 
 best of men, the "Teacher sent from God," then His 
 teachings are to be accepted, and those teachings are the 
 foundations of all essential Christianity; and if the Bible 
 is the best of books, the moral and spiritual guide of man, 
 then its teachings are to be carefully read and deeply 
 regarded, and all who take this book as life's guide book 
 will be led into all truths of Christianity that are funda- 
 mental and important. 
 
 All Christians, Romanists and Protestants, agree that 
 Christ is the living embodiment and pattern of Christian 
 manhood, and that the Bible, at least, contains the " Word 
 of God." All evangelical Christians agree on that broad 
 and simple platform of the Apostles Creed, and declare 
 not "many," but one way to Heaven, and that not by 
 " believing an incomprehensible creed," but by faith and 
 faithfulness of intellect, will, heart and life, toward tho 
 person, Jesus Christ. Two quotations fairly represent all 
 
 (the evangelical churches on this matter. Bishop Whipple, 
 an Episcopalian, recently remarked, " As the grave grows 
 nearer, my theology is growing strangely simple, and it 
 begins and ends with Christ, as the only refuge for the 
 lost," Dr. Alexander, of Princeton, a Presbyterian, when
 
 W. P. CRAFTS 1 REPLY. 21 
 
 dyiag said; U A11 my theology is reduced to this narrow 
 compass, ' Jesus Christ came into the world to save sin- 
 nera.' " Mr. Ingersoll, misrepresents the most familiar 
 facts when he says, " Just in proportion as the human race 
 has advanced, the church has lost power. There is no 
 exception to this rule." It is a fact so familiar that every 
 intelligent child knows it, that Christianity was never so 
 powerful in the world, as to-day never had so many fol- 
 lowers. By the multiplied agencies of church work, six 
 thousand are converted per day two Pentecosts every 
 twenty-four hours. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll misrepresents not only the Bible and 
 church history, by leaving out all that would not help his 
 theories, and stating one half the truth, but he also mis- 
 represents the Declaration of Independence as "retiring 
 God from politics," as if the words were not there, "the 
 station to which the laws of nature, and nature's God entitle 
 them," " All men are endowed by their Creator with cer- 
 tain inalienable rights " " and for the support of this 
 declaration, and in a firm reliance upon Divine Providence, 
 we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, 
 and our sacred honor." It is surely infinitely absurd to 
 expect a man broadly and truly to represent us in politics, 
 who so inexcusably and grossly misrepresents us in religion. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. 
 
 Something New if True Infidelity the Essential Factor in Pro- 
 gressive Civilization But Coleridge, Wm. H. Seward, 
 Bismarck, and other great Statesmen can not see it 
 Civilization goes only with Christianity. 
 
 The fourth article in Ingersollism is as follows: " The 
 civilization of this country is not the child of faith, but of 
 unbelief the result of free thought. But for the efforts 
 of a few brave infidels, the church would have taken the
 
 22 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 world back to the midnight of barbarism." How ignorant 
 we have all been! Luther, who led Europe out of the 
 Dark Ages, was not, it seems, a child of faith, but of free 
 thought (?) and Paul also, who brought civilization into 
 barbarous Europe, peopled with savage tribes, as 
 described by Julius Caesar in his Commentaries. The 
 transformation of savage Gaul and Britain into civilized 
 France and England was accomplished by the efforts of 
 unbelief." (?) 
 
 Long ago, Christianity had a contest with Atheism. Pan- 
 theism, and Culture, as to which was the best civilizer. 
 Christianity selected Europe, and gave the other three con- 
 testants Asia, with several centuries the start. Atheism, 
 or Buddhism, which ignores all spiritual things and devotes 
 itself to the present life, has operated for thousands of 
 years in India. Pantheism, or Brahminism, made its 
 experiment in the same country; and Culture obtained 
 exclusive control of China, ruling both church and state, 
 As a result, in accordance with Mr. Ingersoll's theory, these 
 elements of Ingersollism have developed a lofty civiliza- 
 tion (?) in China and India, given education to woman, 
 torn away the veil of her slavish seclusion, made her the 
 equal of man, treated female infants as honorably as the 
 boys, developed a high morality in the community, 
 and supplied the world with its standard literature, its 
 foremost science, and its chief inveiitions.(?) On the other 
 hand, Christianity came into barbarous Europe a dozen 
 centuries later, caused the degradation and enslavement of 
 women and children, (?) repressed scientific investigation, (?) 
 prevented invention, (?) checked thought, (?) and thus hin- 
 dered literary activity, and, by the barbarism of the Bible, 
 " brought bondage to man, woman, and child " in body and 
 brain.(?) If the facts do not correspond to these legitimate 
 deductions from Mr. Ingersoll's theories as to the effect of
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 23 
 
 atheistic culture, on the one hand, and Christianity, on the 
 other, upon national life, so much the worse for the facts. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll says much against the wars of Christian 
 nations. He forgets that peace societies and arbitration 
 were never known outside of Christianity, and that wars in 
 Christian lands are the gradually disappearing remains of 
 previous barbarism. He talks of science and invention as 
 opening up this era! How does it happen that all this is 
 in Christian rather than in heathen lands? He talks of 
 charity and benevolence of infidels! "Why is it that all 
 benevolent societies are Christian, and that Thomas Paine 
 halls can not be supported? He talks of liberty of speech 
 and thought and government! "Why is it that such liberty 
 is only found in Christian countries? He has much to say 
 of the barbarous age of dug-outs, tom-toms, and wooden 
 plows! Has he not seen in the World's Expositions these 
 very things as representing nations to-day, that have not 
 risen from their primitive degradation and ignorance 
 because Christianity has not yet reached them? 
 
 As to the relation of the Bible to civilization, Samuel 
 Taylor Coleridge declares that " for more than a thousand 
 jears the Bible, collectively taken, has gone hand in hand 
 with civilization, science, law, in short, with moral and 
 intellectual cultivation, always supporting, and often lead- 
 ing the way." 
 
 William H. Seward says, "The whole hope of human 
 progress is suspended on the ever-growing influence of the 
 Bible." 
 
 Bismarck utters a similar sentiment, as quoted in his 
 recent biography: " How, without faith in a revealed 
 religion, in a God who wills what is good, in a Supreme 
 Judge, and a future life, men can live together harmoniously 
 each doing his duty and letting every one else to do his 
 I do not understand." Similar sentiments are uttered by
 
 24 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 the leading statesmen of all lands, the unanimous verdict 
 of statesmanship being that civilization can not be carried 
 forward without Christianity. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 Marvelous Power of Time and Circumstance Tragic Effect ot 
 
 Iso-thermal Lines Peoria Mud Necessarily the Seventh 
 
 Heaven as Ingersoll Sees it. 
 
 The fifth article of Ingersoll ism is, that gods and men 
 are but evolutions of matter and circumstance, the differ- 
 ence between heathen gods and the Christian's God being- 
 the result of a difference in their worshippers, and the dif- 
 ference in men being the result of varying soils and sur- 
 roundings. He says : " No god was ever in advance of the 
 nation that created him." In answer to this last statement, 
 which is true, of course, of all imaginary deities, but not of 
 the One True God, it is only necessary to ask any candid 
 and intelligent man to read the description of God given 
 in the Bible, where both Testaments declare Him to be 
 " merciful and gracious, long suffering and abundant in 
 goodness and truth, but will by no means spare the guilty," 
 and then say whether this God is nothing more than the reflec- 
 tion of the stiff-necked and perverse people who held to this- 
 conception of Deity. The fact is, God as described in the 
 Bible is infinitely loftier and purer than the Jewish people,. 
 or any people of any age. It is still more absurd, if pos- 
 sible, for Mr. Ingersoll to assert that " men are but the- 
 creatures of their surroundings, made what they arc wholly 
 by material causes, such as soil and climate." It is OTIC of 
 the characteristic contradictions of history, such as are found 
 BO frequently in Mr. Ingersoll's lectures, when he asserts 
 that great minds have never been found except in the " lands 
 of respectable winters," with the intimation that no great 
 achievements in art or literature are possible iu warm
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 25 
 
 Oriental lands. As if Babylon, and Nineveh, and Egypt 
 had not been in early ages the universities of the world. 
 Carlyle must have been very ranch deceived when he declared 
 Job of the Oriental land of Uz to bo the greatest poet the 
 world has known. Mohammed of those warm lands was 
 certainly great, even though wrong, and scores of others, 
 equally eminent, might be mentioned, although, of course,, 
 it is evident that greatness of men or peoples in tropical 
 lands is rather in spite of circumstances than by their help. 
 Mr. Ingersoll in his lecture on "Man, Woman, and 
 Child," speaking of one of these warm countries as the rep- 
 resentative of all, says: "You might go there with five 
 thousand Congregational preachers, five thousand deacons,, 
 five thousand professors in colleges, five thousand of the- 
 solid men of Boston and their wives, settle them all, and 
 you will see the second generation riding upon a mule bare- 
 back, no shoes, a grapevine whip, with a rooster under each 
 arm going to a cock fight on Sunday. Such is the influence 
 of climate." But like most of Mr. Ingersoll's theories, this 
 one is unfortunately the direct opposite of facts. The 
 Sandwich Islands have all these disadvantages of climate, 
 and fifty years ago were plunged in the deepest barbarism,, 
 with all the vices of savage life; but to-day, as all well- 
 informed persons know, they are as truly civilized as any 
 land, with industries, education, protection of life and 
 property, equal to what is found in our own favored coun- 
 try. And this is all due, as King Kalikua said in New 
 York, to the Christianizing of his people. Indeed, Mr. 
 Ingersoll contradicts his own theory as to the dependence 
 of the individual upon surroundings in his lectures on 
 Ilumboldt and Paine, both of whom he represents as 
 becoming great in spite of surroundings that would natu- 
 rally have led in the opposite direction, thus involuntarily 
 recognizing something in man deeper than mere physical 
 evolution.
 
 26 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 The whole absurd theory of individuals and nations being 
 wholly dependent upon soil, and climate, and surroundings 
 for their character, is fairly represented in the following 
 incident: 
 
 " Pa," said a little six-year old, " what makes me grow ?" 
 
 " "Why, the bread and potato I feed you with." 
 
 " Does potatoes make our pig grow, too ?" 
 
 " Yes." 
 
 " Then, what makes him be a pig and me be a boy?" 
 
 That boy's simple question explodes all the theories of 
 evolution. 
 
 ARTICLE VI. 
 Law is Ingersoll's God. 
 
 The sixth article of Ingersollism is, <k I believe in law, the 
 Almighty maker of Heaven and earth." One might as 
 well say that the United States Constitution made our 
 country, or try to rule the land by laws without enforcers. 
 
 That the universe is governed according to a system of 
 ]aw is recognized by Christians as much as by any one, and 
 the laws of the Bible are not new arbitrary enactments, but 
 recognitions and proclamations of that part of the law-sys- 
 tem of the universe that relates to religion and morality. 
 Laws of spirit are as eternal as laws of matter. Natural 
 science proclaims the latter, religious science the former. 
 
 ARTICLE VII. 
 
 Liberty and Infidelity What De Tocqueville Says About it. 
 
 The seventh article is made up of the following statements: 
 41 All religions are inconsistent with mental freedom. The 
 doubter, the investigator, the infidel, have been the saviours 
 of liberty." 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll, when talking of liberty contradicts what 
 he himself has said of law, and fails to remind his hearers
 
 W. f_ (? AFT S 1 REPLY. 87 
 
 and readers that the circle of law bounds on every side the 
 privileges or* liberty, that one has liberty only within the 
 range of propriety, and that all beyond that is license. lie 
 ulso forgets the very evident fact that the prevailing ideas of 
 personal liberty in the world are duo to the general dissem- 
 ination, by Christianity, of the truth that a man is a soul as 
 well as a body. Wherever men are regarded as mere phys- 
 ical beings, with no life deeper than the bodily life, the 
 stronger will enslave the weaker woman, child and captive. 
 When the idea that each man is an immortal soul takes 
 hold upon man, with it there comes the idea of individual 
 rights. If Ingersollism should ever persuade a civilized 
 people that man has no soul, this form of bondage of the 
 weaker to the stronger will be resumed. Not soil, but soul, 
 is the secret of liberty. 
 
 Even Mr. Frothingham recently declared that the Bible is 
 a democratic book, and that we get out of it our ideas of 
 equality. lie remembered what Mr. Ingersoll seems to for- 
 get, that all through the Bible, the idea of personal and relig- 
 ious liberty is found, especially in those words of the Apostles 
 to the rulers who attempted to tyrannize over their con- 
 sciences, u We ought to obey God rather than man," which 
 lias fitly been termed the concisest of all statements of the 
 principles of personal liberty. We may show this relation of 
 religion to liberty in the words of the greatest modern 
 writer upon such questions, De Tocqueville, who says, 
 " Bible Christianity is the companion of liberty in all its 
 conflicts, the cradle of its infancy, and the divine source of 
 its claims." 
 
 ARTICLE VIII. 
 Woman Ingersoll's Theory at Variance with Facts. 
 
 The eighth article of Ingersollism, is in regard to woman, 
 and is as follows: "As long as woman regards the Bible 
 as the charter of her rights, she will be the slave of man.
 
 28 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 The Bible was not written by a woman. Within ils lids 
 there is nothing but humiliation and shaine for her." 
 
 You have all doubtless observed that in heathen coun- 
 tries, where the Bible has not jet come with its enslaving 
 (?) influence woman has (?) liberty and honor, and educa- 
 tion, and opportunities of public activity and benevolence 
 (?), but in Christian lands she is veiled, degraded, shut out 
 of sight and restrained from education (?). I have always 
 observed, as a pastor, that it is the religious, and church- 
 going husbands that tyrannize over their wives as "bosses," 
 and deny them their liberties of conscience, and other 
 rights. (?) 
 
 Tou smile at the absurd statement, knowing that the 
 " heathen at home," who as husbands are harsh and brutal 
 to the wives they have promised to cherish, arc frequently 
 ardent believers in Ingersollism, and seldom in any way 
 connected with even nominal Christianity, while every 
 school boy is familiar with the fact that woman, in all 
 except Christian lands, is hardly better than a slave, nota- 
 bly so, in that land where Ingersollism under the name of 
 Buddhism has the controlling influence. Mr. Ingersoll 
 utters many true sentiments about the family, but all of 
 these he learned of Christianity, not from China, or Egypt. 
 
 ARTICLE IX. 
 
 Ingersoll's Theory of Childhood Some oi His LiUle Stories The 
 
 Whole' Subject Carefully Examined Significant Incident 
 
 in the Life cf Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 The ninth article of Ingersollism is a theory of child- 
 nood which attacks the principles of sound government and 
 health even more than religion: " Do not have it in your 
 mind that you must govern them; that they (children) must 
 obey. Let your children eat what they desire. They know 
 what they wish to eat. Let them begin at which end of 
 the dinner they please."
 
 TF. F. CltAFTS' REPLY. S9 
 
 Such a theory is worthy of nothing more than the smile 
 with which you hear it. It is all answered in the following 
 representative fact of childhood: A little bit of a girl 
 wanted more and more buttered toast, till she was told that 
 too much would make her sick. Looking wistfully at the 
 <lish for a moment, she thought she saw a way out of her 
 difficulty, and exclaimed, " Well, give me annuzer piece, 
 and send for the doctor!" . 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll, in connection with his theory of child*, 
 hood, often refers to the fact, that he leaves his pocket- 
 book around where his children can help themselves to 
 whatever they wish, and urges the same course upon all 
 parents. It is said that one of the lecturer's admirers, being 
 convinced that this was the correct theory, determined to 
 give up punishing his child, and try the new plan. Accord- 
 ingly, he said to his boy, " John, I am convinced I have 
 been taking the wrong course to try to make you a better 
 boy. I am going to trust you more, and give up whip- 
 pings. I am going away for a few days, and I have left 
 my pocket-book in the top drawer of the bureau. Help 
 yourself to money whenever you need it." After a few 
 days the father returned to his home, late at night. As he 
 opened the door he stumbled over a large canoe in the 
 entry, and was then attacked by a large bull-dog that his 
 boy had bought. Entering the boy's room, he found it 
 hung round with guns, and fishing poles, and daggers, with 
 another canoe, and several small dogs his pocket-book lying 
 empty on the top of the bureau. lie is now less enthusi- 
 astic in regard to Ingersoll's knowledge of domestic gov. 
 crnment. 
 
 The leading point which Mr. Ingersoll endeavors to 
 make in connection with his lecture on Thomas Paine is 
 that the Bible shocks a child, and, therefore, can't be true. 
 You have all observed how much children are shocked as
 
 80 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 they gather about the mother's knees in the twilight, and 
 hear her tell the stories of Jesus, and Joseph, arid Moses, 
 and Samuel, and Daniel (?). As to the relation of th& 
 Bible to childhood and home life, let me quote the opinion 
 of several eminent men, mostly skeptics, for whom even 
 Mr. Ingersoll cherishes the highest regard: 
 
 Thomas Jefferson, speaking of the Bible and home life,, 
 says: " I have always said, and always will say, that the 
 studious perusal of the sacred volume will make better 
 citizens, better fathers, and better husbands." 
 
 John Quincy Adams says: " So great is my veneration 
 for the Bible, that the earlier my children begin to read it, 
 the more confident will be my hopes that they will prove 
 useful citizens to their country and respectable members of 
 society." 
 
 Theodore Parker says: " There is not a boy on the hill* 
 of New England, not a girl born in the filthiest cellar which 
 disgraces a capital in Europe, and cries to God against 
 the barbarism of modern civilization; not a boy nor a girl 
 all Christendom through, but their lot is made better by 
 that great book." 
 
 Diderot, the French philosopher and skeptic, was wont 
 to make this confession : " No better lessons than those 
 of the Bible can I teach my child." 
 
 Huxley, in an address upon education, says: "I have 
 always been strongly in favor of secular education, in tho 
 sense of education without theology; but I must confess I 
 have been no less seriously perplexed to know by what 
 practical measures the religious feeling, which is the essen- 
 tial basis of conduct, was to be kept up, in the present 
 utterly chaotic state of opinion on these matters, without 
 the use of the Bible. The pagan moralists lack life and 
 color, and even tho noble stoic, Marcus Aurelius, is too high 
 and refined for an ordinary child. Take the Bible as
 
 W. F. CRAFTS 1 REPLY. 81 
 
 whole, make the severest deductions which fair criticism \ 
 can dictate, and there still remains in this old literature a 
 vast residuum of moral beauty and grandeur. By the study 
 of what other book could children be so humanized? If 
 Bible reading is not accompanied by constraint and solem- 
 nity, I do not believe there is anything in which children 
 take more pleasure." 
 
 What would " shock the mind of a child " would be to hear 
 Mr. Ingersoll excuse them for telling a lie, in order to 
 escape a whipping. What would shock a child would be 
 to hear Mr. Ingersoll uttering profanity 
 
 What would shock the mind of a child would be to 
 hear Mr. Ingersoll telling to a crowded audience with a 
 smile of approval the story of a boy's oath. 
 
 Speaking of swearing reminds me of that incident of 
 Abraham Lincoln, whom Mr. Ingersoll calls " the grandest 
 man ever President of the United States," who said to a 
 person sent to him by one of the Senators, and who, 
 in conversation, uttered an oath, " I thought the Sen- 
 ator had sent me a gentleman; I see I was mistaken. 
 There is the door, and I bid you good-day." 1 hold in my 
 hand the last report of the New York Society for the Pre- 
 vention of Cruelty to Children. Of course, the bruised and 
 beaten little ones, here described, were the victims of 
 cruelty in Christian homes (?). Their fathers and mothers 
 had taken too much religion (?)', had become brutalized by 
 reading the Bible ( ?), and hence abused the children by 
 their own fireside until the law was compelled to interfere 
 for their .Vf^po r?Y
 
 S3 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 In my work as a member of the Citizen's League for the 
 auppression of the sale of liquors to minors, I have noticed 
 that this supreme cruelty to children selling them in their 
 immature years the liquors that make them self-destroyers, 
 violators of the public peace, and candidates for drunkards* 
 graves is perpetrated by Christian men, not by the infidels 
 who applaud so lustily at Mr. Ingersoll's lectures (?). Hero 
 I am reminded of the published report, which seems well 
 authenticated, that Mr. Ingersoll in his childhood lived in 
 one of those exceptional homes where nominal Christianity 
 was combined with harshness, cruelty and bigotry. If so, 
 this would be some slight excuse for his present conduct, 
 were it not for the fact that inaturer years have given him 
 .abundant opportunity to see the bright and sunny side of 
 Christian gentleness in other homes. And there arc no 
 true homes that do not owe their existence to the influence 
 of Christianity upon the family relation. 
 
 Having myself made childhood a special study for several 
 years, I find that the degree of recognition given to the 
 opinions and importance of childhood in various ages and 
 countries, is exactly in proportion to the degree of Chris- 
 tianity there, children being scarcely noticed in heathen 
 lands, either in poetry, or history, or ethics, while the Bible 
 religion has always given childhood an exceedingly prom- 
 inent place. All the attention given to the education and 
 development of the little ones is but the starlight that 
 shines down upon us from the manger of the God-child. 
 
 ARTICLE X. 
 
 Ingersoll Says Christianity Fcttors Thought The Bible and a 
 Host of Distinguished Men Say Otherwise. 
 
 The tenth article of Ingersoilism is the frequent asser- 
 tion that Christianity fetters thought, while infidelity 
 emancipates it, in such passages as these: " In all ages,
 
 W. P. CRAFTS' REPLY. 33 
 
 reason has been regarded as the enemy of religion." "The 
 gods dreaded education and knowledge then (in the time of 
 the Garden of Eden) just as they do now." "For ages 
 a deadly conflict has been waged by a few brave men of 
 thought and genius, on the one side, and the great, 
 ignorant, religious mass, on the other. The few have 
 said: 'Think.' The many have said: 'Believe." 
 
 In order to ascertain what freedom and power of thought 
 materialism had given to the mind of Mr. Ingersoll, I 
 made special examination of the logic in the lecture on 
 " The Gods," and found there, in a very short time, one or 
 more specimens of all the fallacies laid down in the text- 
 books of logic. " "Waiter," said John Randolph, at a cer- 
 tain hotel, " if this is coff e, bring me tea; if this is tea, 
 bring me coffee " And so we say, if this is the " power of 
 thought," give us weakness. 
 
 Instead of the Bible forbidding us to think, as Inger- 
 sollism so often declares, it is full of ringing appeals to 
 "reason," "think," ''consider," "ponder," "prove all 
 things." 
 
 Prov. 26 : 16 : " The sluggard is wiser in his own conceit than seven 
 men that can render areason." 
 
 Eccl. 7 : 25 : "I applied mine heart to know, and to search, and to 
 seek out wisdom, and the reason of things, and to know the wickedness 
 of folly, even of foolishness and madness." 
 
 Isa. 1:18: "Come now and let us reason together, saith the Lord; 
 though your sins be as scarlet, they shall he as white as snow ; though they 
 be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." 
 
 Matt. 22 : 42 : " What think ye of Christ ?" 
 
 Acts 17 : 2: " Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three 
 Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures." 
 
 Acts 18: 4: " He reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and per- 
 suaded the Jews and the Greeks." 
 
 Acts 13 : 19 : " And he came to Ephesus, and left them there ; but he 
 himself entered into the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews." 
 
 Acts 24 : 25 : " And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and 
 judgment to come 1 , Felix trembled." 
 3
 
 84 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 Rom. 19:1: "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of 
 God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable 
 unto God, -which is your reasonable service." 
 
 Phil. 4:8: "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatso- 
 ever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things, 
 are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good 
 report, if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these 
 things." 
 
 1 Thess. 5:21: " Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good." 
 
 Let us look into biography, and make a practical test of 
 this theory that the Bible fetters thought. If so, those 
 who believe and love it will not be strong and leading 
 thinkers. Let us apply the test in the ranks of science. 
 
 A Cloud of Witnesses. 
 
 Professor Benjamin Pierce, of Harvard College, has- 
 recently completed a very remarkable course of lectures at 
 the Lowell Institute, Boston, on "Ideality in Science." 
 Professor Pierce, who is now in his seventieth year, is,, 
 perhaps, the most eminent mathematical scholar in this 
 country, and the author of some of the most profound 
 investigations and speculations that have been made in the 
 realm of astronomical science. This man of mighty thought 
 must have been emancipated and inspired by infidelity (?). 
 This scholar, whose mind may be supposed to feed on fact, 
 holds an unquestioning faith in a personal God and the 
 immortal life. 
 
 The late Professor Henry, of the Smithsonian Institute,. 
 was one of the broadest and best of scientific thinkers 
 because infidelity gave him freedom of thought (?). No, 
 ho was a sweet-spirited Christian in his daily life. 
 
 Sir David Brewster, another eminent scientist, said of 
 his Christian experience: "I have had this light for many 
 years, and oh! how bright it is to me." 
 
 Professor Silliman, who is unsurpassed in his scientific-
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 35 
 
 department, must also be classed under the head of " the 
 ignorant religious mass," for he was another of the very 
 many Christian scientists, whom the world has ignorantly ( ?) 
 supposed a thinker, in spite of Mr. Ingersoll's theory of 
 faith as being a mental bondage. lie says: " I can truly 
 declare that, in the study and exhibition of science to my 
 pupils and fellow men, I have never forgotten to give all 
 honor and glory to the infinite Creator happy if I might 
 be the honored interpreter of a portion of his works, and 
 of the beautiful structure and beneficent laws discovered 
 therein by the labors of many illustrious predecessors."" 
 We might add scores of others in each department of sci- 
 ence, who have found no discord between the Word and! 
 world of God. 
 
 Who are the four greatest thinkers in the realm of states- 
 manship of this century? Daniel Webster, Gladstone,. 
 Thiers, and Bismarck. All of them, of course, are enabled 
 to be thus broad and prominent as national thinkers by the 
 power of infidelity (?). No, each one of them is most posi- 
 tive in his Christian belief. 
 
 Webster declares the grandest thought which ever entered 
 his mind was that of " personal accountability to God." 
 
 Gladstone gives much of time and attention to religious 
 writing. 
 
 Thiers says, in his last days: "I often invoke that God 
 in whom I am happy to believe, who is denied by fools and 
 ignorant people, but in whom the enlightened man finds 
 his consolation and hope." 
 
 Bismarck is called, in derision, " the God-fearing man," 
 in reference to his well-known religious principles. (Busch's 
 Bismarck, p. 200). 
 
 We might add to these Charles Sumner, who called 
 Christianity the u true religion " and " our faith," and whose 
 speeches constantly recognize God and Christianity.
 
 86 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 Who arc the leading literary characters of the century? 
 Victor Hugo, what of him ? Did you ever read his chapter 
 on prayer in Les Miserables, and his grand tribute to 
 immortality, uttered as a rebuke to a company of French 
 physicians, a few years ago? Moore have you read his 
 " Paradise and the Peri," the Gospel of repentance, and do 
 you know him as the author of the hymn, " Come, ye Dis- 
 consolate?" "Walter Scott have you read his translation 
 of "Dies Irae," uttered so devoutly in his last days: 
 
 " Oh ! in that day, that dreadful day, 
 When Heaven and earth shall pass away, 
 Be Thou, oh Christ, the sinner's st iy, 
 When Heaven and earth shall pass away." 
 
 And Shakspeare, whom Mr. Ingersoli accounts one of 
 the grandest of human minds, was great enough to believe 
 in the Bible. And so Thackeray, AVhittier, Dickens, Gold- 
 smith, Longfellow, and Irving were intellectual believers in 
 Ohristianity. 
 
 The following men, also lacking the freedom and power 
 of thought that comes by materialism (?) became mentally 
 so weak (?) that they declared, in varying terms, after read- 
 ing largely in all departments of literature, that the Bible 
 is the best book in the world: Sir Walter Scott, Sir Wil- 
 liam Jones, George Gilfillan, Milton, Pollok, Coleridge, 
 Collins, Bacon, John Adams, Napoleon, James Freeman 
 Clarke, Lange, Kitto, Robertson. And Channing put the 
 Gospels where these others place the whole Bible above 
 all other literature. 
 
 / The following persons strongly commend the Bible as a 
 
 /whole: Dr. Samuel Johnson, Carlyle, Dryden, Young, 
 
 / Cowper, Locke, Newton, Seward, Dawson, Franklin, John 
 
 Quincy Adams, Bellows, Bartol, Theodore Parker, Kons- 
 
 \ Beau, Guizot, Bunsen, Story, Webster, Diderot, Matthe\r 
 
 Arnold, and Huxley.
 
 W. F. GRAFTS' REPLY. 37 
 
 The following persons among many others declare that/ \ 
 they found in the Bible, not fetters for thought, but their \ 
 itrongest inspiration to thought : Daniel Webster, Fisher J 
 A.mes, Mitchell, the Astronomer, Ruskin and Goethe. 
 
 It is evident that very many others might truly have 
 said the same, including Theodore Parker and Mr. Froth- 
 ingham and other skeptics, whose writings show plainly 
 that they owe their beauties of style to a familiarity with 
 the Bible. 
 
 Jesus Christ. 
 
 With these great men who have commended the Bible 
 should be mentioned one who is confessed by Christians and 
 skeptics the greatest and best of men, JESUS CHRIST, who 
 used the Psalms as His prayer and hymn book, and always 
 spoke of the whole Old Testament as the Eternal Law Book 
 of humanity. There is not time, nor is it necessary now 
 to answer in detail all the hard questions that can be asked 
 about single Bible passages. But these great men and 
 Christ saw all these points of difficulty, and yet accepted 
 the Bible as the pre-eminent book, commending it to the 
 perusal of all as the source of the mind's grandest inspira- 
 tions. Side by side with these scores of the world's fore- 
 most men who declare the Bible the best of books, or 
 strongly commend it, or point to it as the source of their 
 grandest thoughts, put the opinion of that more learned (?), 
 more profound (?), more unprejudiced (?) scholar and phi- 
 losopher, Colonel Ingersoll, who stands almost alone among 
 educated men in strongly condemning the Bible, which his 
 bigotry prints with a small " b " in spite of the rules of 
 grammar, and describes it as about the worst book of the 
 world, in these words among others: "If men will read 
 the Bible as they read other books, they will be amazed that 
 they ever, for one moment, supposed a being of infinite 
 wisdom to be the author of such ignorance and of such
 
 88 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 atrocity. The Bible burned heretics, built dungeons, 
 founded the inquisition, and trampled upon all the liberties 
 of men. All the philosophy of the Bible would not make 
 one scene in Hamlet. I could write a better book than the 
 Bible, which is full of barbarism." 
 
 Amazing Ignorance of Infidels Concerning the Scriptures Hume's 
 
 Ignorance of the New Testament Tom Paine 
 
 Without a Bible. 
 
 " But some one asks, Are there not other eminent men 
 who have despised and condemned the Bible? Most cer- 
 tainly, as there are those who have entered their protest 
 against almost any and everything mentionable. It is, 
 nevertheless, worthy of note that, in most instances, those 
 who have sought the more resolutely to defame the Holy 
 Scriptures are those who are comparatively unacquainted 
 with them. David Hume, distinguished both as essayist 
 and historian, standing among the most noted of modern 
 skeptical philosophers, was a resolute objector of the Bible, 
 but was notoriously ignorant of its contents. Dr. Johnson, 
 in conversation with several literary friends, once observed, 
 in his usual, direct, and unequivocal manner, that no hon- 
 est man could be a' deist, because no man could be so after 
 a fair examination of the truths of Christianity. When 
 the name of Hume was mentioned to him as an exception 
 to his remark, he replied: 'No, sir; Hume once owned to 
 a clergyman in the bishopric of Durham, that he had never 
 read even the New Testament with attention.' "* 
 
 Let us cross-question another important witness as to his 
 knowledge of the book against which he offers testimony. 
 We ask Thomas Paine as to his familiarity with the Bible, 
 which he so bitterly condemns, and he replies, " I keep no 
 Bible." I hold in my hand a sermon preached in New 
 
 *Froin " What Noted Men Think of the Bible." 

 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 89 
 
 York City, by Rev. W. F. Ilatfield, in reply to Mr. Inger- 
 eoll's lecture on Thomas Paine, in which reply, with abund- 
 ant facts, such as would convince a court, it is shown con- 
 clusively that Thomas Paine was vicious and corrupt in life, 
 .and miserable and remorseful in death. As to the value of 
 Voltaire's testimony against Christianity, Carlyle declares it 
 worthless on the ground of lack of knowledge on the sub- 
 ject of which he testifies. lie feays: "It is a serious 
 ground of offense against Voltaire that he intermeddled in 
 religion without being himself, in any measure, religious; 
 that, in a word, he ardently, and with long-continued effort, 
 warred against Christianity, without understanding, beyond 
 .the mere superfices, what Christianity was." 
 
 There are also a class of specialists who are quoted against 
 the Bible, and who manifest a hostility to it, whose testi- 
 mony is of little value because of the narrow range in 
 which they have studied, making them authorities only in 
 their special department. Ilalley, the astronomer, once 
 avowed his skepticism in presence of Sir Isaac Newton. 
 The venerable man replied: " Sir, you have never studied 
 these subjects and I have. Do not disgrace yourself as a 
 philosopher by presuming to judge on questions you have 
 never examined." 
 
 Distributed Ignorance and Concentrated Hatred Probable Cause 
 of Ingersoll's Infidelity. 
 
 The largest proportion of skeptics, however, are mere 
 sophomores, spoiled with a little learning which is only 
 "distributed ignorance," well represented by a precocious 
 boy of fourteen, whom I found writing an essay on " Mat- 
 rimony," and who left it during my call to argue in favor 
 of Ingersollism and against the Bible (of which he knew 
 as little as of matrimony), which he admitted he had never 
 read, as do nearly all skeptics when questioned on this
 
 40 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 matter. The bitterness of the opposition to Christianity 
 of Mr. Ingersoll and other infidels is explained by the Earl 
 of Rochester, who was converted from infidelity and said,. 
 in explanation of his former course and that of others: " A 
 bad heart, a bad heart is the great objection against the Holy 
 Book." " The fool hath said in his Jieart " (not his head) 
 " there is no God." The bad heart is father to the infidel 
 thought. It is like the case of the old woman who broke 
 her looking-glass because it showed the wrinkles creeping 
 into her fading faco. Men strive to break the Bible glass 
 that shows the wrinkles and defects of character. The 
 whole appearance and tone and spirit of Mr. Ingersoll in 
 his lectures is suggestive of this heart hatred against the 
 book which he attacks, "kicks," "hates," not with the 
 calmness of logic, but with the bitterness of a heart-hos- 
 tility. Those infidels who have faithfully examined the 
 Bible have usually been convinced of its truth and con- 
 verted to Christianity. Among them, such distinguished 
 names as Lord Lyttleton, Gilbert West, Soame Jenyus, 
 Bishop Thompson, and at least a score of notable cases in 
 connection with Mr. Moody's revival meetings in England. 
 "What comparison, let us ask, will the number of cele- 
 brated skeptics, even when the best possible showing is 
 made, hold with the distinguished men who have ranked 
 the sacred volume above all others? Remember that your 
 mother's love for the Bible and your own early reverence 
 for it, have the indorsement of the grandest and profound- 
 est minds which have been known and honored among 
 humanity." 
 
 The Truth of the Whole Matter. 
 
 But salvation is not by belief in a book, or a creed, or a ), 
 Church, but by belief in the person of Jesus Christ. Mr. 
 Ingersoll skips this hard problem, " What think ye of I
 
 W. F. CRAFTS' REPLY. 41 
 
 Christ?" He hardly refers to this citadel of Christianity 
 half a dozen times in all his lectures, making his attacks 
 chiefly on human outposts and then claiming to have over- 
 borne the citadel of Christianity. Even Strauss, Kenan, 
 Rousseau, Theodore Parker, Napoleon, and Richter none 
 of them experimental Christians unite as a jury in the 
 verdict expressed by Richter in regard to Christ, " He is 
 the purest among the mighty, the mightiest among the 
 pure." We have, then, two facts as a sure anchorage of our 
 Christianity to-day. All scholarly skepticism agrees with 
 Christianity that the Bible is the best of books and that 
 Christ is the best of men. He who thus accepts the Bible 
 and Christ can not logically or consistently stop short of a 
 Christian life, following Christ as his pattern, and walking 
 by the Bible as his rule. 
 
 We may differ about creeds, and Church forms, and Bible 
 interpretation, but he who has faith and faithfulness toward 
 the person, Jesus Christ shall be saved. Let us then 
 devoutly utter the creed of Daniel Webster, as inscribed 
 by his own request on his tombstone at Marshfield: 
 
 " LORD, I 
 BELIEVE, HELP 
 THOU MINE UNBELIEF. 
 PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENT 
 ESPECIALLY THAT DRAWN FROM 
 THE VASTNESS OF THE UNIVERSE IN COM- 
 PARISON WITH THE APPARENT INSIGNIFICANCE 
 OF THIS GLOBE, HAS SOMETIMES SHAKEN MY REASON 
 FOR THE FAITH THAT 18 IN ME; BUT MY HEART HAS 
 ASSUKED ME THAT THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST MUST 
 BE A DIVINE REALITY. THE SERMON ON THE 
 MOUNT CAN NOT BE A MERELY HUMAN 
 PRODUCTION. THIS BELIEF ENTERS 
 INTO THE VERY DEPTH OF MY 
 CONSCIENCE. THE WHOLE 
 HISTORY OF MAN 
 PROVES IT."
 
 CHAPLAIN McCABE'S REPLY. 43 
 
 CHAPLAIN M'CABE'S REPLY. 
 
 The Famous Chaplain has a Remarkable Dream He Sees the 
 Great City of Ingtrsollville Which Ingersoll and the Infidel 
 Host Enter And are Chut in for Six Months Remarkable 
 Condition of Things Outcido and Inside Happiness and Mis- 
 ery Ingersoll Finally Petitions for a Church and sends for 
 a Lot of Preachers. 
 
 I had a dream which was not all a dream. I thought I 
 was on a long journey through a beautiful country, when 
 suddenly I came to a great city with walls fifteen feet high. 
 At the gate stood a sentinel, whoso shining armor reflected 
 back the rays of the morning sun. As I was about to 
 salute him and pass into the city, he stopped me and said: 
 
 "Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ?" 
 
 I answered: " Yes, with all my heart." 
 
 " Then," said he, ' you can not enter here. No man or 
 woman who acknowledges that name can pass in here 
 Stand aside!*' said he, " they are coming." 
 
 I looked down the road, and saw a vast multitude 
 approaching. It was led by a military officer. 
 
 " Who is that?" I asked of the sentinel. 
 
 "That," he replied, "is the great Colonel KobertI , 
 
 the founder of the City of Ingersollville." 
 
 " Who is he?" I ventured to inquire. 
 
 " He is a great and mighty warrior, who fought in many 
 bloody battles for the Union during the great war." 
 
 I felt ashamed of my ignorance of history, and stood 
 silently watching the procession. I had heard of a Colonel
 
 44 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 I , ****** but> of 
 
 course, this could not be the man. 
 
 The procession came near enough for me to recognize- 
 some of the faces. I noted two infidel editors of national 
 celebrity, followed by great wagons containing steam presses. 
 There were also five members of Congress. 
 
 All the noted infidels and scoffers of the country seemed 
 to be there. Most of them passed in unchallenged by tho 
 sentinel, but at last a meek-looking individual with a white 
 necktie approached, and he was stopped. I saw at a glanco- 
 it was a well-known " liberal " preacher of New York. 
 
 " Do you believe ia the Lord Jesus?" said the sentinel. 
 
 " Not much!" said the doctor. 
 
 Everybody laughed, and he was allowed to pass in. 
 
 There were artists there, with glorious pictures; singers, 
 with ravishing voices; tragedians and comedians, whose 
 names have a world- wide fame. 
 
 Then came another division of the infidel host saloon- 
 keepers by thousands, proprietors of gambling hells, brothels,, 
 and theatres. 
 
 Still another division swept by: burglars, thieves, thugs, 
 incendiaries, highwaymen, murderers all all inarching 
 in. My vision grew keener. 1 beheld, and lo! Satan him- 
 self brought up the rear. 
 
 High afloat above the mass was a banner on which was 
 inscribed: " What has Christianity done for the country?" 
 and anotlier on which was inscribed: "Down with the 
 churches! Away with Christianity it interferes with our 
 happiness!" And then came a murmur of voices, that 
 grew louder and louder until a shout went up like the roar 
 of Niagara: "Away with Him! Crucify Him, crucify 
 Him!" I felt no desire now to enter Ingersollville. 
 
 As the last of the procession entered, a few men and 
 women, with broad -brim mod hats and plain bonnets, made
 
 CHAPLAIN McCABE'S REPLY. 45 
 
 their appearance, and wanted to go in as missionaries, but 
 they were turned rudely away. A zealous young Metho- 
 dist exhorter, with a Bible under his arm, asked permission 
 to enter, but the sentinel swore at him awfully. Then I 
 thought I saw Brother Moody applying for admission, but 
 he was refused. I could not help smiling to hear Moody 
 say, as he turned sadly away: 
 
 " Well! they let me live and work in Chicago; it is very 
 strange they won't let me into Ingersollville." 
 
 The sentinel went inside the gate and shut it with a 
 bang; and I thought, as soon as it was closed, a mighty 
 angel came down with a great iron bar, and barred the gate 
 on the outside, and wrote upon it in letters of fire, " Doomed 
 to live together six months." Then he went away, and all 
 was silent, except the noise of the revelry and shouting that 
 came from within the city walls. 
 
 I went away, and as I journeyed through the land I could 
 not believe my eyes. Peace and plenty smiled everywhere. 
 The jails were all empty, the penitentiaries were without 
 occupants. The police of great cities were idle. Judges 
 sat in court-rooms with nothing to do. Business was brisk. 
 Many great buildings, formerly crowded with criminals, 
 were turned into manufacturing establishments. Just about 
 this time the President of the United States called for a 
 Day of Thanksgiving. I attended services in a Presby- 
 terian Church. The preacher dwelt upon the changed con- 
 dition of affairs. As he went on, and depicted the great 
 prosperity that had come to the country, and gave reasons 
 for devout thanksgiving, I saw one old deacon clap his 
 handkerchief over his mouth to keep from shouting right 
 out. An ancient spinster, who never did like the "noisy" 
 Methodists a regular old blue-stocking Presbyterian 
 couldn't hold in. She expressed the thought of every heart 
 by shouting with all her might, "Glory to God for Inger-
 
 46 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 sollville!" A young theological student lifted up his hand 
 and devoutly added, " Esto perpetua" Everybody smiled. 
 The country was almost delirious with joy. Great pro- 
 cessions of children swept along the highways, singing, 
 
 " We'll not give up the Bible, 
 God's blessed Word of Truth." 
 
 Vast assemblies of reformed inebriates, with their wives 
 and children, gathered in the open air. No building would 
 hold them. I thought I was in one meeting where Bishop 
 Simpson made an address, and as he closed it a mighty 
 shout went up till the earth rang again. O, it was won- 
 derful ! and then we all stood up and sang with tears of joy, 
 
 " All hail the power of Jesus' name ! 
 
 Let angels prostrate fall ; 
 Bring forth the royal diadem, 
 
 And crown him Lord of all." 
 
 The six months had well-nigh gone. I made iny way 
 back again to the gate of Ingersollville. A dreadful silence 
 reigned over the city, broken only by the sharp crack of a 
 revolver now and then. I saw a man trying to get in at the- 
 gate, and I said to him, " My friend, where are you from?'* 
 
 " I live in Chicago," said he, " and they've taxed us to 
 death there; and I've heard of this city, and I want to go- 
 in to buy some real estate in this new and growing place." 
 
 He failed utterly to remove the bar, but by some means 
 he got a ladder about twelve feet long, and with its aid, he 
 climbed up upon the wall. With an eye to business, he 
 shouted to the first person ho saw: 
 
 " Hallo, there ! what's the price of real estate in Inger- 
 sollville ?" 
 
 "Nothing !" shouted a voice; "you can have all yon 
 want if you'll just take it and pay the taxes." 
 
 " What made your taxes so high?" said the Chicago man. 
 I noted the answer carefully; I shall never forget it.
 
 CHAPLAIN McCABE'S REPLY. 47 
 
 " We've had to build forty new jails and fourteen peni- 
 tentiaries a lunatic asylum and an orphan asylum in 
 every ward; we've had to disband the public schools, and 
 it takes all the city revenue to keep up the police force." 
 
 ""Where's my old friend, I ?" said the Chicago man. 
 
 " O, he is going about to-day with a subscription paper 
 to build a church. They have gotten up a petition to send 
 out for a lot of preachers to come and hold revival services. 
 If we can only get them over the wall, we hope there's a 
 future for Ingersollville yet." 
 
 The six months ended. Instead of opening the door, 
 however, a tunnel was dug under the wall big enough for 
 one person to crawl through at a time. First came two 
 
 bankrupt editors, followed by Colonel I himself; and 
 
 then the whole population crawled through. Then I 
 thought, somehow, great crowds of Christians surrounded 
 the city. There was Moody, and Hammond, and Earle, 
 and hundreds of Methodist preachers and exhorters, and 
 they struck up, singing together, 
 
 " Come, ye sinners, poor and needy." 
 A needier crowd never was seen on earth before. 
 
 I conversed with some of the inhabitants of the aban- 
 doned city, and asked a few of them this question: 
 
 " Do you believe in Hell?" 
 
 I can not record the answers; they were terribly orthodox. 
 
 One old man said, " I've been there on probation for six 
 months, and I don't want to join." 
 
 I knew by that he was an old Methodist backslider. The 
 sequel of it all was a great revival, that gathered in a 
 mighty harvest from the ruined City of Ingersollville.
 
 [Photographed by Moshet-.]
 
 DR. aWAZEY'8 REPLY. 49 
 
 DR. SWAZEY'S REPLY. 
 
 Momentary View of Col. Ingersoll Through the Doctor's Glass 
 
 The Bible on the Meridian What the Doctor Sees in 
 
 the Great Book. 
 
 THE genial, eloquent, sensational, unfair, evasive Colonel 
 Ingcrsoll has come and gone. Nobody has been alarmed. 
 But out of 400,000 people a large audience was found to 
 laugh with him at Moses and the Bible. He eschewed 
 argument altogether. He did not attempt to instruct any- 
 body. He had only a campaign speech to make against 
 God. This article is simply an invitation to any fair- 
 minded doubter to consider the reasonableness of a laugh 
 at the Christian's Bible. Is this book a bad book, or a 
 silly book, just fit for jeer and sarcasm ? Take a common- 
 sense view. In order to do so, it is necessary to take a 
 common-place view, to bring to the foreground that which 
 all assailants like to leave in the background, namely, that 
 the Bible teaches by commandment and Drecept only that 
 which is pure and good. 
 
 Relating to man's duty to himself, it teaches personal 
 purity, sexual and otherwise; temperance in meats, drinks, 
 opinions and ambition, responsibleness for inclinations, 
 thoughts and actions; a paramount love for the truth; 
 courage and hopefulness in all lawful purposes; self-im- 
 provement, and a cheerful enjoyment of the good things of 
 life. Relating to man's duty to others, the Bible teaches 
 honesty between man and man; restitution when wrong 
 has been done, wittingly or unwittingly; the damnableness 
 4
 
 50 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 of adultery, seduction, and everything that violates the 
 purity of a family or a person; the forgiveness of injuries; 
 a charitable view of human actions, including patience and 
 forbearance, mercy; the duty of life-long usefulness, kind- 
 ness and helpfulness; a genial temper in social and business- 
 life; obedience to magistrates; and a multitude of minor 
 virtues. Relating to the moral order of things, the Bible 
 teaches that wrong-doing is unavoidably the way of sorrow, 
 and right-doing the way of happiness. 
 
 These teachings, given not in bald outline, but in fresh 
 and animated pictures and discourses, make up the ethical 
 system of the Bible from the first lesson of the antediluvian 
 age to the last words of the book, which are against whore- 
 mongers, and all makers and lovers of a lie, and in praise 
 of all who are just and good. And, still further, in no- 
 instance is there left on record an immoral precept, or one 
 which impurity, or injustice, or dishonesty, or unkindncss, 
 or selfishness in any form are proposed. There is no mis- 
 take in that direction. Still further, we challenge any 
 assailant to name a virtue, acknowledged to be such by the 
 mass of mankind, which is wanting in the catalogue of 
 Bible virtues. The ethical system is as complete as it ia 
 pure, as comprehensive as it is sound and true, absolutely 
 covering the whole area of man's duty to himself and to- 
 his fellow-man; a system sounding all depths, touching the 
 most delicate fibres of life, and without a flaw or an omis- 
 sion. Its precepts and laws come in their own order, but 
 VThey all appear in the record first or last. The Buddhistic 
 "decalogue" seems to have been in advance of the Mosaic 
 \ in this that it had two commandments wan ting in the lat- 
 ter "Thou shaltnot lie," "Thoushalt not get drunk." 
 But these commandments, although not in our own deca- 
 logue, are written over and over again in the Old Testament 
 as well as the New. And yet once more the moral require-
 
 DR. SWAZET'S REPLY. 51 
 
 ments of the Bible, are as clear of puerilities as they are of 
 impurity or oblique vision. The Buddhistic decalogue 
 steps right down to a moral weakness of which the Bible is 
 never guilty. " Thou shalt not visit dances nor theatrical 
 representations." " Thou shalt not use ornaments nor per- 
 fumery in dress." 
 
 Occultation of Ingersoll's Good Sense General Survey of Deities 
 Scope of Divine Revelation. 
 
 Now the common-sense question occurs whetner a book 
 containing such a system, always teaching men what is 
 good and pure, always warning him against evil, and 
 encouraging him to be a strong, sound, pure, complete man 
 in everything, is worthy of sneers, ribaldry and irrever- 
 ence, even though it were full of unbelievable fables and 
 fantastic ideas of immortality. In what spirit can a com- 
 pany of people shout their applause when a book whose 
 lines of thought aro always leading a man above himself 
 is made the target of sarcasm and ridicule, and the cry is 
 almost in so many words, " Down with the Bible!" Let 
 us go a little beyond the strictly ethical. The general ideas 
 of our Bible about God commend themselves to the best 
 wisdom of mankind. We make no reference now to any 
 sect of theologies, but to the theological atmosphere both 
 of the Old and New Testaments, namely, that God is,, 
 and being the Creator, the life and force of all things, in 
 other words, as our Bible has it, the Living God, superin- 
 tends all human affairs. As a Creator He has not forgotten 
 His work; as a Father He is always mindful of His off- 
 springs; and caring for man is leading him on by a great 
 hope to a great inheritance; that His face is against evil 
 doing, that He smiles on all who strive to be just and good, 
 and that in sorrow and want and temptation He folds to 
 His great heart a righteous and even a repentant man; and
 
 62 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 as the shuttle goes back and forth, knitting into each other 
 the soiled and blood-stained threads, He is weaving there- 
 from a garment of light for mankind; that superstition, 
 despotism, slavery and war are only other names for His 
 patience, while man is learning the great lesson. This is 
 the Bible interpretation of the incomprehensible Cause and 
 Spirit of the universe, that He is alive, and the Father and 
 Friend of man now, and will have some more for him after 
 the years have rolled by. 
 
 Suppose, now, it be all untrue, is there not something in 
 this dream or conceit that should bring a sigh rather than 
 a sneer from the heart of the unbeliever? The god of 
 Brahmanism is an abstraction without attributes, the great 
 
 O 
 
 nothing of the universe. Much the same is true of Budd- 
 hism, only in another way. It has law and virtue, but no 
 V God of love, and asks no trust or faith. The same is true 
 in the unchanging round which knows no spirit above and 
 no hope below, taught by Confucius to his disciples. The 
 religion of the Persians presented a god who had a devil- 
 god for a yokefellow, keeping up the eternal and never- to- 
 be-ended quarrel of good and evil. Our Bible begins with 
 the idea that God is one God, the only and the Supreme, 
 and ends with this one God sending angels down to say to 
 the weary world, " Peace on earth good will to men." 
 Away beyond all the faiths and all the Bibles held sacred 
 by mankind, ours alone declares that man is not an orphan, 
 that good and evil are not eternal antagonisms, in other 
 words, that the Great Supreme is our Father in Heaven. 
 True or false, wisdom has taught nothing more inspiriting or 
 helpful to man. Neither imagination nor credulity has else- 
 where painted a vision so attractive, or out of the " silences " 
 and " eternities," and mysteries, whispered so good a word 
 in the ears of mortals. This idea of lordship and father- 
 hood is not incidental. It runs through every narration,
 
 DR. SWAZEY'S REPLY. 63 
 
 is implied in every precept, and re-affirmed in every prom- 
 ise. And even if it be beyond proof it makes the whole 
 Bible at least a golden dream. 
 
 Suppose now one does not take as absolutely and histor- 
 ically true the story of Adam's rib and the woman, or of 
 the fish swallowing a man and throwing him unhurt on the 
 shore, does not the high moral tone of every command 
 and every precept everywhere illumined by [this pure and 
 golden dream, entitle this book to the reverence of man- 
 kind ? And especially since by the common consent the idea 
 of virtue in our Bible goes beyond the many excellent 
 things of Confucius, Zoroaster and the other sacred writers 
 of other religions, and its idea of the " living God " sur- 
 passes in purity and attractiveness, and in consolation and 
 hope, all other religions, is not this purest blossom of the 
 instinct, if you please to call it so, of duty and faith, of 
 inestimable value as the guide and hope of man, even 
 though it were overlaid with ten-fold more difficulties than 
 the most ingenious scoffer can present? Or, if it is not 
 reliable as a guide, is it not worthy of reverence as the 
 proudest achievement of the hungry mind of man ? 
 
 The Great Central Figure Absolute Unity of the Bible System. 
 
 Still further, this Bible has for its central, or rather ter- 
 minal, figure a name so remarkable that none but the 
 obscene and profane use it lightly, a man so remarkable 
 that whatever the skeptic may say of Moses or Paul, his 
 tongue would refuse its office should he attempt to catalogue 
 the mistakes of Jesus of Nazareth. Voltaire, Diderot, 
 Bolingbroke, Strauss, Eenan, all speak reverently of this 
 One Man of history. And yet the whole New Testament 
 is built up on the sayings and doings of this Man. And 
 not the New Testament only. The Jewish scriptures, full 
 of errors or not, were full of the ideas of a Messiah, from
 
 64 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. 
 
 Moses to Malachi. And this marvelous man claimed that 
 He was that Messiah. So that the Old Testament, as well, 
 is a record of various forms pointing to this Man. I raise 
 here no question of the truth of prophecy; I simply affirm. 
 that this Man, whose purity and wisdom are so singularly 
 impressive, claimed to be the fulfillment of those old 
 writings, identified Himself with Moses and David and 
 Isaiah, and sanctified the great current of thought which 
 from the mouths of these men flowed along the shores of 
 that elder world. So that to revile the old Bible of the 
 Jews is to revile Him. There is no scholar, orthodox or 
 liberal, believing or skeptical, who docs not identify the 
 phenomenon of Christianity with the phenomenon of 
 Judaism. Out of the soil of Judaic history sprung this 
 purer growth Jesus and the things He taught. 
 
 I suggest, therefore, that before one joins in the laugh 
 against a religion which was founded long anterior to any 
 other historical records than its own, he pause a little, 
 remembering that this remarkable Man, who has not yet 
 become antiquated, quoted those old books as His Bible, 
 and doubtless had a tolerable understanding of their mean- 
 ing and worth. And, perhaps, if He whose sermon on the 
 mount is yet as fresh in the nineteenth century as though 
 it were uttered to-day, found a vein of precious ore in 
 those books, those same veins may be yet visible in our 
 time. 
 
 v 
 
 The Bible Law of Development vs. Infidel Philosophy. 
 
 I have given, you will perceive, room for a large amount 
 of the unaccountable and incredible in a Bible worthy of 
 reverence. In fact, there is no occasion, except in the 
 peculiarity of some men's minds, to allow so much. There 
 is a passage in the Bible that is descriptive of the kingdom 
 of Heaven, and reads thus: " First the blade and then the
 
 DR. SWAZEY'S REPLY. 65 
 
 ear, and after that -the full corn in the car." The Bible 
 here gives the key to itself. It is a statement of the law of 
 development, intellectual and moral. An observation of 
 the Bible from the standpoint of this law discovers an 
 answer to the objections that arc just now brought against 
 our sacred Book. Col. Ingersoll and men of his style ofN. 
 criticism (and, I am sorry to say, some preachers, also,) \ 
 quote a verse from Genesis precisely as though the same 
 words, or the same event, were found in the Gospels. 7 
 They judge an act or a usage recorded in the Pentateuch 
 precisely as though it were found in the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles. They make no allowance for the stage of human 
 progress. They would teach a child surveying before he 
 had learned the multiplication table. They talk about 
 *' skulls " as indicating progress, but God must needs put 
 the same ideas into a skull of the Laurentian period that 
 He does into a skull of to-day. Otherwise, God is worthy 
 of hate. They would preach the doctrine of equality on ] 
 the deck of a man-of-war. They utterly ignore the drill 
 that men and nations need in coming up to their majority. 
 They would suffer the rabble in a court-room to vote down 
 the decision of a judge on the bench. The men who are 
 historically connected with God's order of things must dis- 
 pense with the great schoolmaster experience. Ideas 
 muft spring forth complete, like Minerva. Hafters and j 
 dome must touch the skies the same day the foundation 
 stones were laid. Thosc v aro the ideas with which a certain 
 class of critics approach the Old Testament. If a people 
 are not ripe for a commonwealth, and God gives them a _._ 
 king, God is all wrong. If a people are become a great 
 military camp and Moses proclaims martial law, Moses and - 
 his God are monsters of cruelty. If there are no jails, no 
 way of disposing of prisoners of war, and a gentle servi- 
 tude is the substitute, God is a great slave-driver. If men's
 
 56 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 lusts are so greedy that even the best of them want more 
 wives than one, the patience of God with the slow growth 
 of moral ideas is translated as the establishment of polyg- 
 ,, amy. If a people are so vile and filthy that the beasts are 
 clean and modest in comparison, and God sends an army 
 to wipe them out of being, we are pointed to the white 
 faces of women and children lifted on the crests of the 
 divine wrath! 
 
 Common Sense View of the Subject How it Eliminates Poly- 
 gamy, Slavery, etc. 
 
 Common sense, in asking whether the Bible is worthy of 
 confidence would ask whether, as matter of fact, the moral 
 instruction of any period of Bible record was not fully up 
 to the capacity of that period to receive it? It would ask 
 another question namely, whether a divine tuition is dif- 
 ferent from any other, except that it is more skillful? 
 whether, in fact, the critics who compare an old order of 
 things with the highest state of moral development are not 
 demanding that the people under God's training shall be a 
 miraculous people, throwing off prejudices as they do a 
 Winter garment, bearing fruit without any intermediate 
 period of growth and blossom, and, in general terms, upset- 
 ting the every day laws of progress. It is this idealism 
 than which nothing is more irrational which creates a 
 large share of the moral difficulties of the Old Testa- 
 ment. It is the insane or reckless, the idiotic or perverse 
 tenacity with which men demand that the divine teaching 
 must not suit itself to the time in which it was given, but 
 must always be up to the ripest periods of progress, that 
 gives any opportunity for the objugations of men who 
 " can write a better Bible " themselves than ours. 
 
 The two great charges brought against the Bible are 
 polygamy and slavery. Now, admit that in all stages,
 
 DR. SWAZEY'S JWPLT. 57 
 
 from the chimpanzee up to Darwin, they are wrong (which \ 
 is by no means clear), are these charges true? The fact 
 that polygamy and slavery existed among the people who I 
 were under drill does not prove it. The fact that there / 
 were laws regulating either of these practices does not 
 prove it. A law regulating the social evil does not prove 
 that the sovereign people who make the laws approve the 
 social evil, but only that, if men and women will go wrong, 
 society must put up some defenses against corruption.\ 
 Common sense inquires whether statutory allowance is an \ 
 indorsement. And if that Remarkable Man, commenting 
 on the divorce laws of Moses, said that Moses gave those 
 laws because the people could not bear any better laws, 
 common sense inquires if the same may not be true of 
 other recognized usages which are below the ideal of an 
 advanced age. 
 
 And when one rails at the Bible for its ill-treatment of 
 women, the railing is simply gratuitous. I have read the 
 Old Testament more or less carefully for many years, but I 
 do not, at this writing, remember a single word that dis- / 
 honors woman as woman. I have read only a little of 
 Brahminical writings, but I remember a sentence or two 
 about women. "A woman is never fit for independence ;'* 
 " Women have no business with the text of the Veda. _ _ 
 
 * * * Sinful women must be as foul as falsehood itself. 
 
 This is fixed law." Whether in the last quotation it ia 
 meant that there is no purification for a bad woman, or 
 what else, I do not know; but I do not recall anything like 
 it in the Old Testament. Educated common sense knows 
 that women among the Hebrews occupied a vastly higher 
 level than the women of all other nations. It is simply \ 
 notorious, that with all the lapses from virtue, the Hebrew 
 women were as white as snow compared with the women 
 of the Gentile world, and honor goes always hand in hand 
 with virtue.
 
 -58 MISTAKES OF INGER80LL. 
 
 More Common Sense The Great Ingersoll Orb Approaching 
 the Nihilistic Belt Nebulae. 
 
 Common sense demands that in judgment of the moral 
 worth of the Bible, it be taken as a whole. The theory of 
 .all who receive the Old and New Testaments is that they 
 belong together, are so to be interpreted; that one is the 
 beginning, and the other the conclusion, of the one Bible. 
 The one begins in the " Laurentian period," so to speak, and 
 follows man up from a wild nomad to wealth and empire, 
 and the decay of empire; the moral and the civil law blend- 
 ing and running along together for hundreds of years, then 
 separating by the simple explosion of the civil powers. 
 The other takes him after the wounds caused by the explo- 
 sion have partly healed, and puts forth mo/al ideas unen- 
 cumbered by any considerations of the state. The former 
 gave moral laws to the Jew; the latter moral laws to 
 the man; everything from first to last going on as nat- 
 urally as the building of a city, or the growth of a tree. 
 And common sense should inquire how it happens, that, 
 while the great army of scholars who have studied these 
 systems, believers and skeptics alike, have been filled with 
 admiration, a man rises up now and then to vituperate the 
 logic of events and malign the great God because He has 
 not chosen to plant a tree with the branches in the ground 
 and the roots in the air. 
 
 Common sense naturally asks what the meaning of this 
 bitter outbreak may be. We have no right to men's 
 motives. But this is a phenomenon, the cause of which 
 we have a right to ask, as we would ask the cause of a fall- 
 ing meteor. The Bible is a law and order book. It teaches 
 that one must look out how he pulls up even the tares. 
 j Are we in our historic orbit passing a belt of niliilism, a 
 I time when assassination is reform, and a bad shot at a poor 
 
 ^
 
 DR. SWAZEY'S 11EPLT. 59 
 
 czar, inheriting semi-barbarism and striving with all his 
 might to get rid of the inheritance, is to be lamented? 
 
 You may bo told that it is the horrid theology of the \ 
 Bible which provokes assault. Common sense remarks \ 
 that, horrid as its theology may be, its sterner features are \ 
 jnst like the thco! -v of nature, namely, a demand for 
 obedience to law a:.ii " the survival of the fittest." It is J 
 nature put into language, the operation of moral causes 
 foretold that is all. If you want a government more just "\ 
 than one which judges a man according to his deeds, good 
 or bad, and takes into account his knowledge and oppor- 
 tunities, why, the thing to do is to rail at nature, at cause 
 and effect, at seed-time and harvest. For while on the 
 better side the Bible theology is more beneficent than 
 nature, on the hard side it is simply unmitigated natural' 
 law. Do the theologians preach that good men will be 
 damned ? Then rail at the theologians, and not at the 
 Bible. 
 
 In closing this short article, as an addendum, let me ask 
 a question or two for the benefit of all who have a bad 
 opinion of the Bible, as a woman's book or a slave's book. 
 
 1. Forget the harem of Solomon, and say why Judaism 
 was a house of refuge for thousands of .Roman and Greek 
 women, many of them of noble birth, for a century pre- 
 ceding the Christian era ? 
 
 2. In the same line, squarely, has, or has not, the mod- 
 ern estate of woman been the fruit of Christian (including 
 Judaic) teaching? 
 
 3. Did not the Bible first mitigate and finally destroy 
 slavery in the Roman empire ? 
 
 4. Did not the Bible destroy slavery in England and 
 America? Charge all the slave-driving you will to Chris- 
 tian men, and give any unbeliever all he claims, and then 
 go down to a last analysis.
 
 60 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 5. Are not republican institutions, including (as the old 
 republics did not) democratic ideas, directly and palpably 
 the fruit of the teachings of that remarkable jVIan (whom 
 the French infidels called the Great Democrat); whose 
 Bible was the Old Testament, and who told His followers 
 how to amend and finish it by a book called the New Test- 
 ament ? 
 
 In whatever way these questions may be answered, the 
 man who essays to answer them will find that it is not so 
 easy to eliminate the genius of Moses and Jesus from the 
 genius of the world's movement toward virtue, equality and 
 liberty. 
 
 TELL the Prince that this (a costly copy of the Bible) is 
 the secret of England's greatness. Queen Victoria. 
 
 I HAVE always said and always will say, that the studious 
 perusal of the Sacred Volume will make better citizens, 
 better fathers and better husbands. Thomas Jefferson. 
 
 THE Bible is equally adapted to the wants and infirmi- 
 ties of every human being. No other book ever addressed 
 itself so authoritatively and so pathetically to the judgment 
 and moral sense of mankind. Chancellor James Kent. 
 
 CHRIST proved that He was the Son of the Eternal by 
 His disregard of time. All His doctrines signify only, 
 and the same tiling, eternity. Napoleon Bonaparte. 
 
 I HAVE read the Bible morning, noon and night, and 
 have ever since been the happier and better man for such 
 reading. Edward Burke. 
 
 I DO not believe human society, including not merely a 
 few persons in any state, but whole masses of men, ever 
 has attained, or ever can attain, a high state of intelli- 
 gence, virtue, security, liberty, or happiness without the 
 Holy Scriptures. William H. Seward.
 
 [ Photographed by Mekmder. )
 
 DR. COLLYE&a REPLY. 
 
 DR. COLLYER'S REPLY. 
 
 Dr. Collyer Relates a Little Story A Book that cost Mr. Ingersoll 
 
 the Governorship cf Illinois The Volume Philosophically 
 
 Considered Heavy Blows. 
 
 I HAVE been told a gentleman went to see Mr. Ingersoll 
 once, when he lived in Peoria, and finding a fine copy of 
 Voltaire in his library, said, " Pray, Sir, what did this cost 
 you?" " I believe it cost me the governorship of the State 
 of Illinois," was the swift and pregnant answer. 1 can not 
 but recall the incident as he stands in the light of his lec- 
 ture. He seems to be saying, '* It is my turn now, and I 
 will do what I can to square the account. I will dethrone / 
 your God to-day amid peals of laughter; blow His being 
 down the wind on the wings of my epigrams. I have those/ 
 about me who will send ray words flying all over the state. 
 I will start a crusade which will shut up your churches 
 some day, silence your immemorial prayers, slay all the 
 hopes that would strive after something more than this 
 momentary gleam between the eternities, make of no 
 account the grand deep truth that ' life struck sharp on 
 death makes awful lightning,' and so dwarf our human 
 kind that when we get man where we want him he shall 
 never again be able to look over the low billows of his green 
 graves, and end the fight by making my own creed good 
 once, for all that 
 
 Man, God's last work, who seemed so fair, 
 Such splendid purpose in his eyes, 
 Who rolled the psalms in wintry skies, 
 
 Who built him fanes for fruitless prayer,
 
 64 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 Who trusted God was love indeed, 
 
 And love, creation's final law ; 
 
 Though nature red, in tooth and claw, 
 With raven, shrieked against liis creed ; 
 Who loved, who suffered countless ills, 
 
 Who biu l led for the true and just, 
 
 Is blown about the desert dust, 
 And sealed within the iron hills." 
 
 Now, since we first knew Mr. Ingersoll by report, there 
 has been a time when those who can only believe in God as 
 a rather helpless little brother, by no means able to take 
 care of Himself, and in themselves as big brothers, who 
 are bound to stand up for Him, might have felt there was 
 grave danger in such a sight as we have witnessed of a 
 vast array of men and women, some of them it is fair to 
 believe of a thoughtful turn, assembled to hear the last and 
 best word which can be said why God should be dethroned, 
 and His presence and providence numbered among the 
 things that seemed true enough once, but pass away inevit- 
 ably in the process through which we arise from " our dead 
 selves to higher things." 
 
 Sparks Flying in all Directions Singular Mental Phenomenon 
 Occasioned by $25.000 a Year. 
 
 He was clothed once in a fine austerity 5 went on his 
 lonely way quite content, to give grave and serious reasons 
 for rejecting what so many of us hold dearer than our life, 
 and was faithful to his instinct and insight, though such 
 ovations as were ever given him as Dr. Dyer used to say of 
 the old abolitionists might take the form mainly of rotten 
 eggs. I know of more than one man, who, in those days, 
 nourished a deep and most tender regard for him, and 
 found something noble in the stand he made for the best a 
 man can do and be, who has to abide so utterly alone. But 
 Mr. Ingersoll, roystering around as the popular advocate of
 
 DR. COLLYE&S REPLY. 65 
 
 atheism, at $25,000 a year, as the common report goes, 
 is quite another sort of a man. No doubt the laborer is 
 worthy of his hire. Those who run the thing may be 
 trusted to see to that, and a good many of us who stand 
 on the other side may not be much better, according to 
 the old proverb that it is "money makes the mare go." 
 Still, as this always turns the fine edge of our endeavor, 
 and makes us weak for good when we make it at all a 
 matter of barter and sale, so it must be with Mr. Inger- 
 soll, making him weak for what I can not but believe to 
 be evil. lie is no more in such a case than the second 
 batch of reformers in the old times, who argued lustily 
 for a reformation, while still they grew rich on the Church 
 lands. No more than your Archbishop, in the Church of 
 England, arguing on the godliness of tythes and priestly 
 authority. So Mr. Ingersoll, in motley, trying to laugh 
 the deepest and most sacred convictions v of men down the 
 wind under the guise of girding at the Pentateuch (for 
 we must thank him, I say again, for the frankness with 
 which he tells us this is his ultimate aim), is a very differ- 
 ent man to the quiet, manful fellow we used to hear of in 
 Peoria long ago, who won such regard from those who could 
 at all understand him. The man in the ring, whose sole 
 business it is to make you laugh, makes no converts even to 
 rough riding. And so there is ground for neither hope nor 
 fear, as we stand on that side or this, about the advance of 
 atheism, so long as this remains as the best method of its 
 choicest champions. It may make headway with such men 
 as Yoltaire had to handle, and in such times; but this 
 eerious and deep hearted race of ours never did take to this 
 kind of thing, and never will. It is only as the crackling 
 of the thorns under a pot. 
 
 Nor can this bitter and relentless spirit toward those who 
 differ help the advocates of atheism any more than it doea 
 5
 
 66 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 the advocates of the faith. Robert Southey says, in a letter 
 to Sharon Turner, touching the contentions of his time 
 between the sects, k ' When I hear the dissenters talk about 
 Churchmen, I feel like a very high Churchman myself; but 
 when I hear Churchmen talk about dissenters, I feel that I 
 am a dissenter, too." It was but the bias of a nature, in 
 which the balances were still true, in favor of the side which 
 was dealt with most unfairly. The plea in the mind of one 
 who could look on botli sides with a calm concern, that the 
 result of fighting over the lamp should not be to put out the 
 light, or of contending over the nature and properties of the 
 spring to soil the water so that no one could drink at it, be he 
 ever so athirst. Lord Bacon says, " there is a superstition 
 in avoiding superstition, when those think they do best who 
 go farthest; but care should be taken that the good should 
 not be purged away with the bad, which commonly happens 
 when this is the method. 5 ' So I think it must be with such 
 violent and utter denunciation as this, which lies within 
 the spirit of Mr. Ingersoll's address. It has pleased a very 
 bright and able man in our ranks to fall into accord with 
 him in many things he has to say, and to show how we 
 also hold this ground. I may be old-fashioned, and unfit 
 for a fair judgment, but I am very much of Southey 5 s mind, 
 and when I hear orthodoxy denounced in such a spirit, I 
 say I agree with Mr. Ingersoll nowhere. Here is bigotry 
 of a new shape, denouncing bigots: and I sway to the other 
 side for very charity, and the desire that the most good pos- 
 sible should be found in any evil, and especially that one 
 should think as well as possible of those who can not see as 
 we do, but are still of as fine and clear a grain, and show 
 as noble a soul of self-sacrifice that uttermost and inner- 
 most proof a man can give that he believes he is right.
 
 DR. COLLY ER 8 REPLY. 67 
 
 The Clear Ring of Truth vs. the Dull Thud of the Baser Metal 
 
 Potency of Simple Statement The Doctor's Objections 
 
 to Ingersoll's Talk. 
 
 Now, a man who seeks and loves the truth, must be 
 esteemed in every human society; but so far as my own 
 observation goes, the most of our fights and contentions 
 carried on in such a spirit as this I am trying to touch, 
 end in vast clouds of dust and smoke, in which the clear, 
 shining sun of the truth turns blood-red to our human 
 vision. And those who, even with the best intentions, are 
 forever going about, as we say, with a chip on their shoul- 
 der, are likely in the end to be voted a common nuisance. 
 The truth must be told, no matter who gets hurt; the 
 truth, or even semblance of the truth, which smites the 
 man who tells it, and moves his heart so that he has to cry 
 " Woe is me if I preach not this Gospel !" But the truth 
 etill comes to us through clear and simple statements which 
 tell their own story, rather than through denial, denuncia- 
 tion, satire, slang, and appeals to the top-gallery. So 
 Channing thought, and the result is, that his best sermons 
 are simply statements of the truth as it had come home to 
 his own heart and mind. So Parker thought, and reading 
 his life again, just now, I find there is nothing the man 
 longed for so much as that he might be quiet, and just let 
 the truth dome itself in his great fine heart and brain, while 
 he regrets bitterly the evil times that compelled him to 
 take to other methods; and the best work he ever did for 
 the deep, still truth, are statements. So John Wesley 
 thought, when once he struck his shining path from earth 
 to heaven, and his sermons from 1740 to 1780, are simply 
 statements of the ever-growing and ever-brightening truth 
 God is revealing to man. And so even Calvin thought, 
 and his earliest and best utterances are still statements, 
 
 grim, hard, iron-clinched, but all the same the stern and 
 
 ices 
 tTie
 
 68 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 inexorable affirmation, made good for all time, that neither 
 priest nor Pope can play fast and loose with the Most High 
 God. Always you find the greatest and best men when 
 they themselves are at their best making statements, exactly 
 as Jesus does in the sermon on the mount. Saying what 
 is in them simply and sincerely, feeling sure, as Coleridge 
 says, that " no authority can ever prevail in opposition to 
 the truth." So Columbus holds himself before the Council 
 of Salamanca, when a new world is in debate. So Stephen- 
 son holds himself before the House of Lords, when he has 
 to answer for his locomotive. So Newton affirms his dis- 
 covery of the law of gravitation ; and Harvey, that of the 
 circulation of the blood. That is the law of all truth-tell- 
 ing in its noblest and best shape, and then the contention, 
 if there is one, is simply the hiss, as Stebbins, of California, 
 said once, when he was speaking in defence of the Chinese, 
 " is simply the hiss the white-hot truth makes when it 
 strikes the black waters of hell." 
 
 Here, then, is my radical objection to Mr. Ingersoll's 
 talk, apart from his final aim. It is conceived and done in 
 a narrow and most bigoted spirit, by one who claims, above 
 all things in the world, to be free from bigotry. The men 
 of whom he speaks so unworthily are, take them by and 
 large, worthy men. The things in the five books of Moses, 
 so called, on which the fathers based their creeds, are 
 rapidly passing into worthier meanings; and the day is not 
 far distant when the old belief will have rotted down, and 
 be as when an old tree rots, to become the nursing mother 
 of a bed of violets. No man believes in such things any 
 more, who has read and thought to any purpose; and the 
 man who has not done this, had far better believe in the 
 six days' work and one day's rest, rib, serpent, fall, flood, 
 ark, manna, and all the, rest of those wonders, than in Mr. 
 Ingersoll's enormous and most fatal negation of God.
 
 DR. COLL YE R 8 REPLY. 69 
 
 Putting the Fine Edge on Orthodoxy Taking a Weld with 
 Prof. Swing and Dr. Thomas Borax and Bigotry. 
 
 Nor is that bad and bitter spirit in orthodoxy now which 
 once found utterance in fire and the axe, as it did in far 
 more ruthless ways in atheism when the goddess of Rea- 
 son was the divinity of France. Orthodoxy, in a free-spoken 
 land like ours, is very civil, indeed, and timid, as I think, 
 almost to a fault, showing just the spirit which is no f sure 
 the ground may not slip from under it any moment; and 
 so far as its finest leaders go edging away from the rocking 
 base, as fast and as far the people for whom those men h:i ve 
 to care will follow. Nothing could be more gentle than 
 the way orthodoxy used Brother Swing. He was no more 
 orthodox than you are. He might not think so, but that's 
 the truth, patent to the whole world. Yet the church to 
 which he was preaching, and the old standbys, as we call 
 them, said, " This is what we are here for, and have laid 
 out our money and time for, and, if you go back far 
 enough, it. is what our fathers shed their blood for. Dr. 
 Swing must be true to his ancient vows, or leave." If Mr. 
 Ingersoll should ever lay out his money, and those of his 
 mind put theirs to it, to build a great hall in "Washington 
 or Chicago for the propagation of atheism, and employ a 
 man to preach to them, and then if this man should depart 
 as far backward from their way of thinking as Brother 
 Swing departed forward from that of the Presbyterians, 
 they will be much more catholic and inclusive than I think 
 they are if they use that man as gently. 
 
 I do not mention this for proof of my word that ortho- 
 doxy is getting to be very civil indeed, gentle, timid, and 
 even wanting in a proper courage to take care of its own 
 household, if we are to judge from the half-and-half meas- 
 ures they are taking with Mr. Talmadge, in Brooklyn, and 
 the way in which they let him smite them on the mouth.
 
 70 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 Orthodoxy has exchanged the old fetters of iron for silken 
 bands with an elastic base. Brother Thomas, my dear and 
 good friend, has no right to preach in a Methodist pulpit, 
 and in the days I remember, would not have preached in 
 one to this time. There must be a certain concert of opin- 
 ion, capable of being brought within fair lines, or nobody 
 would organize or hold anything. This is the secret of our 
 most happy relation through all these years in this church. 
 We hold together through a large, free, common opinion 
 about certain grand verities. I should injure my own 
 nature if I went over those lines. Yet mm are continually 
 going over them in the orthodox churches. But they bear 
 and forbear, scold a little, fret a good deal, and trust the 
 brother may see things different presently or depart in 
 peace, and then, when there is no help for it, they lift him 
 very gently out of the fold. 
 
 Nor is the scorn Mr. Ingersoll pours out on these ancient 
 books befitting any man who could feel his way to their 
 heart, apart from any theory of inspiration or the use made 
 of them to hinder human progress. It is the spirit of the 
 Caliph he shows, who, when the question came up what 
 should be done with a superb library, said, "Burn it; what- 
 ever is against the Koran ought to be burnt, and whatever 
 agrees with the Koran is not needed." "With some such 
 narrow vision he would judge these venerable monuments 
 of the most ancient time; make an end of them to human 
 credence; get them branded for worthless in the interests 
 of human reason; and order himself toward them as if an 
 iconoclast, looking over the treasures of the Louvre, should 
 note only what is grotesque or painful, while ho missed 
 what is most beautiful and entrancing, tumble the whole 
 into a heap, and burn it into ashes and lime. Men have 
 misused these books, there can be no doubt of that, and 
 turned some parts of them into bane, which, well used,
 
 DR. COLL7ERS REPLY. 71 
 
 might bring blessing. So they tell me, there is no place 
 that can match Peoria in its power to tnrn good grain into 
 whisky; therefore, shovel Peoria into the river, and leave 
 the smiling prairies where the grain grows, a waste. 
 
 Nothing in the world shows a man s limitations so fatally 
 as the play of this power which can not or will not distin- 
 guish between the use and the abuse of things, or will over- 
 look the abiding good because of the transient evil. We 
 tolerate it easily in the child who turns in wrath on the 
 chair against which he has bruised himself; we look twice 
 at the man w r ho does this, and then draw our own conclu- 
 sion. I have been told, on good authority, that Mr. Inger- 
 soll, in his childhood and his early youth, did get badly 
 bruised against these books. Well, the books have to take 
 it now; but is this the sign of a large and a gracious mind? 
 One would think he might have gotten over it before this, 
 and come to understand them better than mere instruments 
 of hurt. I can agree in nothing touching the Bible and 
 the soul's life with- the man who tells me his aim is to 
 damage or destroy the faith of man in God, to the best of 
 his ability; but if this was out of the way, one might not 
 object to his antagonism to the misuse of Moses by those 
 who think they do God service. Still, in any case, I find 
 too much beauty in the books to allow me to touch them 
 with irreverent hands. They arc simply above all stand- 
 ards of value, with which I measure other books outside the 
 Scriptures, in the revelation they make to me of the way 
 men felt their way toward a sure faith in God in those old 
 times, and so grew, in many instances, to be very noble and 
 good at last, and, as I have said, of the way in which they 
 tried to account for this wonderful and mysterious universe 
 in which they found themselves when they had "learned 
 the use of I and me, and said ' I am not what I see, and 
 other than the things I touch.' " Nor would I lose one of
 
 72 MISTAKES OF 1XGERSOLL. 
 
 the wonders. They all tell us something we want to know 
 about the working of the human mind. 
 
 That is a very poor and rude matter I treasure in my 
 study; a broken vase of gray clay, with a few fishbone 
 marks on it; but if there was not .another of them in the 
 world I would not exchange it for the Portland vase, for 
 this reason: That on a day, so remote I can not strike it, 
 some poor savage made that vase in my little town, to hold 
 the dust of some one dear to him, put those marks on it for 
 a token of what was in his mind, and then made a little 
 vault and hid it away until the sun of this century should 
 shine on it, and when I hold that vase, I find a trace of the 
 man who had else been lost. There is the faint beat of a 
 human heart lingering in the clay, and a dim remembrance 
 of tears, and the marks, and as if they should open my grave 
 two thousand years from now, and find the white cross still 
 fresh on my coffin, and say, "Tender, loving hands laid 
 that there, let us deal with it tenderly." These rude and 
 half-shapen things in the old books are the clue to the man 
 who made them, and how he felt, and what he thought. 
 I would not spare the least letter out of them, but would 
 scan them in all reverence, let who will scorn them. They 
 all belong to our human history, and it is only their mis- 
 fortune they have ever been misused. They are included 
 in the saying of the great and wise German, that the Bible 
 begins nobly with Paradise, the symbol of Faith, and con- 
 cludes with the eternal kingdom ; and with the grand, sweet 
 word of Thomas Carlyle: "in the poorest cottage there i& 
 one book wherein, for thousands of years, the spirit of man 
 has found light and nourishment, and an interpreting 
 response to whatever is deepest in him. The Book 
 wherein to this day the eye that will look well, the mystery 
 of existence reflects itself, and if not to the satisfying of 
 
 \ the outward sense, yet to the opening of the inward sense, 
 
 \jwrhich is the far grander result."
 
 DR. COLLYE&S REPLY. 73 
 
 A Touching Illustration Eloquence and Truth Havelock's 
 
 Saints. 
 
 Of the doctrine advanced by Mr. Ingeraoll, and his pur- 
 pose to have done with the God Jesus believed in, and 
 show reason why we should have done with Him, there is 
 nothing to say if I have not said it steadily these many 
 years. A remark of Charles Hare strikes me forcibly as I 
 read the few words that are said on this matter, in the 
 address, "There is no being eloquent for atheism. In that 
 exhausted receiver the mind can not use its wings the 
 clearest proof that it is out of its element." For when I 
 consider how eloquent Mr. lugersoll has been at times, and 
 the moving cause of it, I can see that he also must answer 
 to this law. He never said grander words than those about 
 our boys, their mighty heart, and utter self-sacrifice, for the 
 noblest ends. But there never was anything done since 
 the world stood, in which the presence of God could be 
 traced, and his power felt more clearly, nor did ever men 
 make such sacrifice with a devouter sense that God wa& 
 within it all, than those most worthy his grand and touch- 
 ing eulogium. " Call out Havelock's saints," Sir Archi- 
 bald Campbell shouted, when hope was almost dead in the 
 great Sepoy rebellion in India. Something must be done,, 
 and done on the swift instant, or there would be more woful 
 (work among the women and children. Call out Havelock's 
 saints, they are sure to be ready, and they are never drunk. 
 They were of the sort that carry a Bible in their knapsack,, 
 and turn to chapter and verse, and sing psalms from old 
 Rouse's version to Dundee and Elgin, and the Martyrs, 
 and nourish their hearts on stories of the way stout battles 
 were fought and grand martyrdoms endured for God among 
 the moors. Call out Havelock's saints, they are always 
 ready, and never get drunk, and they do fight like the very 
 angels. They were but the brothers of the great, simple
 
 74 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 eouls who fought at Ball's Bluff, and in scores of battles 
 beside, while mothers and sisters did the praying for the 
 moment, for they had no time except just to look up and 
 liear that voice in the heart say, " Steady, my boy, steady, 
 jou are of a grand stock, you must tell a grand story. 
 And they told it, and at the heart of it all was God, and a 
 new life for the nation, and in time a new civilization that 
 shall shed its blessing on the whole waiting world. 
 
 Ltheism Not an Institution but a " Destitution !" The True Life. 
 
 I have no stones to throw at atheism any more than I 
 have stones to throw at blindness. It can never be more 
 than a very sore and sad limitation, not an institution, but 
 
 destitution. This Anglo-Saxon nature is not good soil 
 for it: no arguments can make it take hold and grow in us 
 any more than arguments can make roses take hold and 
 grow on Aberdeen granite. !N T or have I any exhortation 
 save this: That as we stand as pioneers of the noblest and 
 fairest faith we can reach, a faith which throws no strands 
 to stay itself on the fall, or the flood, or the manna, or the 
 .sun, standing still, or any of these old wonders, but just 
 fronts the light and drinks it in, we shall grow ever more 
 worthy to prove God's presence in the world, by revealing 
 it in our life, and in the work he has given us to do. There 
 is no argument like that which lies within a sweet and true 
 life which looks to God forever for its inspiration and its 
 joy. Let us be right worthy of our faith. 
 
 /Then shall this Western Goth, 
 / Bo fiercely practical, so kecu of eye, 
 Find out some day that nothing pays but God. 
 Served whether in the smoke of battle field, 
 In work obscure done honestly or vote 
 For truth unpopular or faith maintained, 
 To ruinous convictions or good deeds, 
 Wrought for good's sake, heedless of heaven or helL
 
 FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. 75 
 
 FRED. PERKY POWERS' REPLY. 
 
 The Sinaitic Code Solvent Powers of the Historic Method 
 Graphic Illustration of the Two Schools. 
 
 CHRISTIANITY, like a fortress on an open plain, is liable to 
 attack from opposite directions. But it is well for the at- 
 tacking parties to remember that columns of argument do 
 not, like columns of soldiers, co-operate when moving in 
 opposite directions. Christianity is not to be disposed of 
 by proving that at the same time it is and is not a certain 
 thing. 
 
 The " historic method," like every new journal, seems 
 "to meet a long-felt want." It has been clutched greed- 
 ily and employed in every conceivable shape. It proves not 
 only that whatever is is right, but that whatever was was 
 right, and whatever will be will be right. It has been car- 
 ried to a point where it undermines personal responsibility, 
 and with it Mr. Herbert Spencer, in the conclusion of his 
 Sociology, enjoins the reformer and the philanthropist from 
 activity. It eliminates ethical considerations from the 
 mind of the historian. It closes the eyes of society to the 
 vices of its members, and it lays its hand upon the mouth of 
 the judge be fore whom stands a man who, as the result of 
 antecedents, and in the natural effort to harmonize himself 
 with his environment, has committed murder. 
 
 Now, it is a little singular that this invaluable historic 
 method should be a legitimate weapon against the church, 
 but an illegitimate weapon for the church. If the church 
 is to be allowed to use this weapon freely it will have no
 
 76 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 /difficulty in making a perfect defense for itself, its predeces- 
 I sor and all of its members, no matter how wild or wicked. 
 \The historic method is a solvent in which the inqui- 
 sition disappears, and which at once removes those spots on 
 the robe of religions history, the wars and massacres of the 
 Israelites. I have no disposition to make any such exten- 
 sive use of the historic method as this. But all matters of 
 history are to be studied as historical, not as contempora- 
 neous. And it is in the last degree uncandid for the oppo- 
 nents of Christianity to make the extremest use of the his- 
 toric method when it suits their purpose, and then, in 
 dealing with religions history, eliminate ordinary historic 
 perspective. In this latter particular the enemies of the 
 church are not alone. The Reformation brought in a re- 
 vival of Judaism, and a large section of Protestant Chris- 
 tianity resolutely closes its eyes to the fact that the Mosaic 
 dispensation was given several thousand years ago, and to a 
 nace wholly different in its position from any now existing. 
 The Mosaic dispensation is not the only thing treated in 
 /this way. The directions given by St. Paul to a particular 
 /church at a particular date are constantly appealed to in 
 / the churches as universal law, applicable to all churches 
 and throughout all ages. If a picture with a man in the 
 foreground and an elephant in the background were shown 
 to two savages, one of whom knew something about ele- 
 phants, and the other of whom did not, the former would 
 insist upon it that the artist was a ignoramus for painting 
 an elephant smaller than a man, and the other would con- 
 clude that man was a larger animal than an elephant, bc~ 
 cause lie appeared so in the picture. The former repre- 
 sents a school of atheists who attack the ethics of the Sina- 
 itic code, and the latter represents a school of devout be- 
 lievers who, receiving the Sinaitic code as a matter of rev- 
 elation, feel compelled to defend it as the truth and noth-
 
 FRED. PERRT POWERS' REPLY. 77 
 
 ing but the truth, and the truth for all times and all places. 
 It is worth while to remember at the very outset what both 
 parties to the war waged over the ethics of the Pentateuch 
 seem disposed to ignore, that what are now denounced as 
 the errors of the Sinaitic code were pointed out more than 
 eighteen hundred years ago by the highest authority rec- 
 ognized by the Christian world. 
 
 In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus Christ used the fol- 
 lowing language: 
 
 Te have heard that it hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for 
 a toelh. But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil ; but whosoever 
 shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other, also. Matt 
 y., 33, 89. 
 
 The lex talionis, here repudiated, was not a rabbinical 
 interpolation; it was an integral maxim of the Sinaitic code, 
 as the following words, coming shortly after the Deca- 
 logue, show: 
 
 And if any mischief follows, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for 
 \jsye, tooth for tootli, hand for han 1, foot for foot, burning for burning, 
 wound for wound, stripe for stripe. Exodus xxi., 23-25. 
 
 Free divorce was another Sinaitic error, so called, and in 
 pointing it out Christ gave us the key to the whole "Mosaic 
 dispensation, as the following passage shows: 
 
 The Pharisees also came unto Him, tempting Him, and saying unto 
 Him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause ? 
 And He answered and said unto them, Have ye not read that lie which 
 made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, for 
 this cause shall a man leave father and mother and shall cleave to his 
 wife, and they twain shall be one flesh ? Wherefore they are no more 
 twain, but one flesh. What, therefore, God hath joined together, let no 
 man put asunder. They say unto Him, Why did Moses then command 
 Ao give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away ? He saith unto 
 / them, Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to put 
 / away your wives ; but from the beginning it was not so. And I say 
 I unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornica- 
 tion, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and whoso marri- 
 eth her which he put away doth commit adultery. Matt, xix., 8-9.
 
 78 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL 
 
 Divine Adjustment of the Moral Law Progressive Elimination. 
 of Polygamy, Slavery, Etc. Mount Sinai and Mount Calvary. 
 
 The "hardness of heart" referred to is evidently the 
 dullness of the intellectual and moral sense that character- 
 ized the almost savage slaves of the Egyptians when they 
 came up out of Egypt. Instead of imposing on them an 
 ethical system perfectly complete and perfectly unintelligi- 
 ble to them in their degraded condition, Moses, under di- 
 rection of divine wisdom, gave them a moral law which 
 they could understand, and which would develop in them a 
 capacity for something purer and higher. 
 
 Polygamy was tolerated, not because it was the ideal 
 system; not because the deity of the Hebrews could devise 
 /no other, but because polygamy is the natural intermedi- 
 ate station between promiscuity and monogamy. God 
 ' chose to make a civilized people out of ,the Jews, not by 
 His creative fiat, but by operating .through natural laws of 
 sociology. Indue time, when" "men were prepared for it, 
 the law of permanent and monogamous marriage was pro- 
 mulgated, but it was in advance of public sentiment, as is 
 shown by the fact that when Christ, in the passage above 
 quoted, forbade free divorce, and proclaimed the sanctity of 
 the marital relation, the disciples suggested that if that 
 was the law it was better not to marry. 
 
 So slavery was tolerated under the Mosaic law. But ser- 
 vitude for a short term of years was substituted for per- 
 manent and hereditary servitude, and the law threw some 
 protection about the person of the slave. The Mosaic dis- 
 pensation is not responsible for a defense of slavery. It 
 tolerated an intermediate state between barbarism and civ- 
 ilization. 
 
 A fact of vast importance to notice is that this Mosaic 
 system contained within itself the seeds which, when
 
 FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. 79> 
 
 humanity had outgrown the old dispensation, would mature- 
 into a new dispensation so far in advance of human attain- 
 ments, that after nearly nineteen centuries the human race 
 has not begun to catch upon it. Christ expounded the Old 
 Testament references to Himself, beginning with Moses 
 "When Sinai had reduced society to order, and stamped 
 paganism, then Calvary came and appealed to all that was 
 highest and purest in man. Even at this late day there, 
 are not many souls that really comprehend the full meaning 
 of Calvary and whose lives give evidence of that factX 
 When any considerable portion of the human race has- ] 
 received all that Calvary can confer, a new dispensatiojoy 
 may be expected. 
 
 In this sense the Mosaic dispensation was perfect and 
 complete. As promulgated on Mount Sinai, it was adapted 
 only to a certain low condition of mankind. But it contained 
 a vital principle, which enabled it to expand as fast as 
 civilization advanced. Starting with the Decalogue, it 
 developed the penitential psalms and the noble exhorta r 
 tions of the prophets, and finally the Beatitudes. Begin-\ 
 ning with a catalogue of penalties, it in course of time\ 
 developed sorrow for sin, and at last that love to God which* \ 
 withholds from sin. This system of religion has developed./ 
 faster than civilization has advanced. The Israelites at the 
 foot of Mount Sinai probably knew something of the wrong- 
 fulness of murder, theft and adultery. But, to-day, in 
 spite of great moral advances to-day, nineteen centuries 
 after Christ how much does the human race really know 
 about " hungering and thirsting after righteousness? " Let 
 the foolish declaration that we have outgrown Christianity 
 come from those who have been filled, and who still want 
 something more. 
 
 The Decalogue is by no means the complete moral code 
 that it is often represented to be, and it would be singularly
 
 SO MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 Out of place in a Christian church were it not that, even 
 to-day, and in the United States, there are many persons 
 / incapable of comprehending the Beatitudes which compre- 
 hend all there is in the Decalogue, and vastly more. The 
 seventh command meat does not apply to crimes, both 
 participants in which are unmarried, and the Mosaic law 
 treated the seduction of an unbetrothed bondmaid as a 
 trivial offense, sufficiently atoned for by the sacrifice of a 
 /ram. The seduction of a free maid, if she was not be- 
 / trothed, was atoned for by marriage. It was on account 
 \ of the " hardness of their hearts," their infancy in ethics, 
 that this easy-going statute regarding the sexes was enacted. 
 But Christ said : 
 
 Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, " Thou shalt not 
 commit adultery;" but I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a 
 woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in* 
 Ms heart. Matt, v., 27, 28. 
 
 The Decalogue said, " Thou shalt not kill," but Jesus 
 Christ added to this as follows : 
 
 Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in dan 
 ger of the judgment. Matt, v., 22. 
 
 The Decalogue forbade the bearing of false witness; it 
 was silent as to ordinary mendacity. In the New Testa- 
 ment this law is extended to cover all untruthfulness. 
 
 Purpose and Potency of the Mosaic Law. 
 
 The purpose of the Mosaic law was to start the Israelites 
 on the path of spiritual enlightenment. It was a provi- 
 
 (sional system, superseded at the right time by Christianity. 
 The sacrifices were fines imposed on the guilty. They were 
 also daily reminded of the existence of God, and the blood 
 pouring from the altar taught the serious nature and fatal 
 consequences of sin as nothing else would. Of course, to 
 a set of modern sophists, who deny the existence of sin,
 
 FRED. PERRY POWERS 1 REPLY. 81 
 
 the sacrifices are simply meaningless, revolving spectacles; 
 but the man who hasn't studied the subject enough to 
 understand the meaning of the Hebrew sacrifices is estopped 
 from discussing them in public. 
 
 The barbarities of the Mosaic system form a pet subject 
 of denunciation by gentlemen who have a repugnance to 
 study, coupled with a mania for delivering lectures, when 
 the latter can be done at a pecuniary profit. If a man 
 thinks it just as well to worship the sun or a bull as to 
 worship Jehovah, of course he will regard the penalties 
 denounced against idolatry as tyrannical and barbarous. 
 But no man, unless he has a purpose to accomplish thereby, 
 can shut his eyes to the barrier that idolatry places in the / 
 way of mental or moral progress, or both. The interests of 
 the human race demanded that paganism should be roofed 
 out somewhere, if not everywhere. The promise to Abra- ~ 
 ham, that in his seed should all the nations of the earth be 
 blessed, has been fulfilled, but that has been accomplished 
 only by the most rigorous hostility to paganism among th6 
 Jews. In spite of all the stern laws of Moses, Israel again 
 and again relapsed into paganism; yet it was an absolute 
 necessity that if what we now know as civilization was even 
 to come, paganism must in some corner of tho world be 
 stamped out, and the way prepared for Christianity. To 
 teach the Israelites what a moral contagion was idolatry, 
 they had to be taught that it was a physical contagion, 
 contaminating everything connected with the idolater. Had 
 not this been done, the Israelites would have remained, \ 
 like all the rest of the world, immersed in the unspeakably 
 unclean worship of Baal and Astarte and Moloch. Cost J 
 what it might, the ravages of the pestilence had to be 
 checked somewhere. 
 6
 
 83 MISTAKES OF INOEBSOLL. 
 
 Excessive Wickedness and Proportionate Punishment The Court 
 of Heaven vs. the Court of Earth. 
 
 Of course, the wars of the Israelites and the annihilation 
 of certain tribes are held to be horrible cruelties bj the 
 sophists of the present day. But we are distinctly told 
 that it was for their extraordinary wickedness that these 
 tribes were exterminated. We are again and again told 
 that it was for the wickedness of the Amalekites that their 
 destruction was commanded. "We get some glimpses of 
 the unmentionable vileness of some of these Canaanitish 
 tribes. The fact was that they were ulcers on the body of 
 the human race which had to be cut out. Possibly the 
 , innocent suffered with the guilty, and possibly there were 
 u no innocent except the infants, whom it would have 
 been no mercy to save after their unclean parents were 
 destroyed. It is probable that the moral taint had so rooted 
 itself in the physical system that, had the children been 
 spared, they would have inevitably developed into adults as 
 unclean as their parents. The passages sometimes quoted 
 to show that Jehovah was vindicative, are passages aimed 
 at sin. The most ample amnesty to the repentant is prom- 
 ised from one end of Genesis to the other end of Revelation. 
 The people who denounce the divine government, as mani- 
 fest in the Old Testament, either deny that there is any 
 such thing as sin, or, which is often the case, they have 
 admirable reasons for being angry because sin is punished. 
 
 ( The gentlemen who denounce the destruction of Sodom are 
 ^ecessarily apologists for the Sodomists. 
 
 When malignancy is charged against Jehovah it is im- 
 portant to remember that the presence of five righteous 1 
 
 i persons would have saved Sodom. There was only ono 
 righteous person, and not only was he enabled to escape 
 but he secured immunity for his family. Nineveh was
 
 FRED. PERRY POWB&& REPLY. 83 
 
 spared because the people repented. The Israelites were 
 delivered from their enemies when they forsook their sins. 
 On the other hand Nathan's rebuke to David is a matter of 
 record, and Solomon's licentiousness was punished by the 
 revolt of Jeroboam and the ten tribes, lue statement that 
 Jehovah disregarded distinctions of ricrlit and wrong, or 
 
 O O O' 
 
 treated the innocent and guilty alike, or took pleasure in 
 the death even of the wicked is false, and known to be so ' 
 by the persons who make it. The very sentiment of hu- 
 manity which prompts certain persons to denounce the di- 
 vine government of the Jews is found only where Chrie 
 tianity, the legitimate successor of Judaism, prevails. 
 
 What are denounced as massacres committed by the 
 Israelites were judicial executions performed under the or- 
 ders of the only court in the universe which has perfect in- 
 formation of the cases tried before it, and which is per- 
 fectly free from weaknesses. To object to the judgment 
 one must either show that the condemned were innocent, 
 which at this late day can not be shown, or one must show 
 that the crimes were less heinous than the court held them 
 to be, which is to become an apologist for crimes of every 
 character, some of which are not even to be named. It is 
 also to be remembered that the divine government is the 
 creator of society, instead of the creature of society, as is 
 human government. The former is, therefore, not to be 
 judged precisely as the latter is, even though abstract 
 justice is the same in Heaven that it is on earth. The 
 charge of vindictiveness is absolutely without foundation ; 
 and, by the way, of all the nations known to the Jews the 
 one we might suppose them most hostile to is the Egypt- 
 ian, for it was in Egypt that the Israelites were enslaved 
 and maltreated. Yet the divine command, coming from 
 Moses, was that the Israelites should in no case oppress 
 the Egyptians, and the reason was that they were once so-
 
 84 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 journors in the land of Egypt, the very reason we might 
 suppose v/hy they should .be especially bitter toward the 
 Egyptians. 
 
 Able Bodied Mendacity and Civilization Love and Obedience. 
 
 There is a good deal of dense ignorance or able-bodied 
 mendacity in circulation regarding the ethics of the New 
 Testament. Jesus Christ and His apostles upheld neither 
 political nor domestic despotism. But it is a fact which 
 lecturers should understand that civil order is the first 
 stop toward civilization. Despotism is more conducive 
 to civilization than anarchy is. Furthermore, when Paul 
 wrote his epistles the Roman officials suspected all Chris- 
 tians of being hostile to the government, and it was espe- 
 cially necessary that the Homan power should understand 
 by the loyalty of the Christians that He whom they called 
 their king was a spiritual sovereign, and not a rival of the 
 emperor. 
 
 What Paul at a particular time wrote to a particular 
 church is by no means necessarily a universal law. What 
 / is particularly to be noted is that the exhortations to obe- 
 dience on the part of the citizen, the wife, the child and 
 the servant are coupled with and conditioned on exhorta- 
 tions to the ruler, the husband, the parent and the master, 
 which certain uncandid and irrational persons, some of 
 whom are inside the church and some of whom are outside 
 of it, are careful to ignore. In Ephesians v. 22, Paul com- 
 mands wives to submit themselves to their husbands, but 
 in the twenty-fifth verse husbands are commanded to lovo 
 their wives as Christ loves His church. Now, if the hus- 
 band fulfills his part of the mutual obligation, the wife's 
 submission will not bo of a very mental character. In 
 Ephesians vi. 1, children are commanded to obey their par- 
 ento, but in the fourth verse fathers are commanded not
 
 FRED. PERRY POWERS' REPLY. 85 
 
 to provoke their children to wrath, bnt to bring them up 
 in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. In the next 
 verso servants are commanded to obey their masters, but 
 in the ninth verse we read, "And, je masters, do the same 
 things unto them, forbearing threatening, knowing that 
 your Master also is in Heaven; neither is there respect of 
 person with Him." In Hebrews xiii. 17, we read, "Obey 
 them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves; 
 for they watch for your souls as they that must give account." 
 The command to obey rules is conditioned on the dis- 
 charge of their duties by the rulers. 
 
 ;ls~ow, in omitting one half of each double command, and 
 i the strength of the other half arraigning Christianity 
 i the ally of domestic and political tyranny, modern "free 
 inought" is accomplishing a great work, is it not? The 
 distinguishing characteristic of " free thought " seems to 
 
 o o o 
 
 be that it is thought freed from all subservience to facts. 
 
 Mr. Powers' Pungent Peroration. 
 
 Theology has made many, shipwrecks by an excess of a 
 priori reasoning, and by reasoning deductively when the 
 means of reasoning inductively exist. But what is termed 
 materialism is habitually doing the same thing, if it can 
 make a point against Christianity by so doing. The ene- 
 mies of Calvinism have denounced it because it promoted 
 immorality. Yet a severer code of morals would be diffi- 
 cult to find than that maintained by the English Puritans, 
 the Scotch Covenanters, and the French Huguenots, all Cal- 
 /vinists. Would it not be just as rational to judge Calvinism 
 / by its fruits as to judge its fruits by Calvinism? 
 
 When man has argued from the New Testament that 
 Christianity must be the ally of despotism, and then looks 
 about him and sees that civil liberty is not known outside 
 of Christian lands, and has its fullest development in Eng-
 
 86 MISTAKES OF INGEESOLL. 
 
 land and America, where Christianity in its simplest forms 
 prevail, and where there are tlie fewest barriers between 
 the human soul and the New Testament itself; when he 
 has argued from the New Testament to show that Chris- 
 tianity is inimical to the best interests of womanhood, and 
 then looks around and sees womanhood honored only in 
 Christian countries, constantly employed by and honored 
 in the church, must it not occur to him with painful force 
 that he is a good deal off the track? 
 
 x- It would not be necessary to remind philosophers of the 
 fact, but it is necessary to remind sophists that the Jews did 
 a good many things that the Mosaic dispensation is not 
 responsible for, and that it is mere idiocy to hold Chris- 
 tianity responsible for everything done by individuals or 
 associations in its name. The man who can not discrim- 
 inate between the legitimate results of a system, and the 
 abuses grafted on to it by its professed adherents, is plainly 
 unfit to debate philosophical questions. 
 
 If people made half the effort to understand the Bible 
 that they make to discard it, they wouldn't be so funny as 
 they are now, but they would know more. 
 
 f THERE are over two hundred passages in the Old Testa- 
 ment which prophesied about Christ, and every one of them 
 has come true. D. L. Moody. 
 
 IN regard to the Great Book, I have only to say it is the 
 best gift which God has given to man. All the good from 
 the Saviour of the World is communicated through this 
 Book. But for this Book we could not know right from 
 wrong. All those things desirable to man are contained 
 in it. I return you my sincere thanks for this very elegant 
 copy of the Great Book of God which you present. Abra- 
 ham Lincoln, on receiving a present of a Bible.
 
 ITEMS. 87 
 
 I DEFY you all, as many as are here, to prepare a tale so \ 
 simple and so touching, as the tale of the passion and death / 
 of Jesus Christ, whose influence will be the same after so 
 many centuries. Denis Diderot. 
 
 THE Bible is the best book in the world. It contains ~> 
 more of my little philosophy than all the libraries I have ' 
 seen. John Adams. (Second President of United States.) 
 
 AND, finally, I may state, as the conclusion of the whole \ 
 matter, that the Bible contains within itself all that, under 
 God, is required to account for and dispose of all forms of / 
 infidelity, and to turn to the best and highest uses all that 
 man can learn of nature. Chancellor Dawson. 
 
 THE Bible is the only cement of nations, and the only 
 cement that can bind religious hearts together. Chevalier 
 Eunsen. 
 
 THE Bible is the Word of God with all the peculiarities \ 
 of man, and all the authority of God. Prof. Murphy. 
 
 FKOM the time that, at my mother's feet, or on my fa- 
 ther's knee, I first learned to lisp verses from the sacred 
 writings, they have been my daily study and vigilant con- 
 templation. If there be anything in my style or thoughts 
 to be commended, the credit is due to my kind parents in 
 instilling into my mind an early love of the Scriptures. 
 Daniel Webster. 
 
 THE same divine hand which lifted up before the eyes 
 of Daniel and of Isaiah the veil which covered the tableau 
 of the time to come, unveiled before the eyes of the author 
 of Genesis the earliest asres of the creation. And Moses 
 
 o 
 
 was the prophet of the past, as Daniel and Isaiah and many 
 others were the prophets of the future. Prof. Guyot. 
 
 WE are persuaded that there is no book by the perusal 
 of which the mind is so much strengthened and so much 
 enlarged as it is by the perusal of the Bible. Dr. Melville.
 
 1 1'hotogrnpheJ by Mo>>it-i- ]
 
 BISHOP CHENET8 REPLY. 
 
 BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 
 
 How the Question of Forgery Applies to the Five Books of Moses. 
 
 IN looking at almost any object in the world of nature ; 
 round about, it becomes remarkable only from certain points / 
 of view. The cathedral rocks that form one of the glories 
 of tho Fosemite Yalley differ not much from any other great 
 pile of jagged cliffs, except in a certain position, where the 
 great mass of Gothic spires and arches appear clothed with 
 evergreen ivy. Only as you reach a certain point where 
 Profile Notch penetrates the "White Mountains, do you see far 
 up, up on the topmost cliff, the formation of a face cut in the 
 solid gran ite by nature's own chisel. But the case of alleged 
 forgery before us is extraordinary from every point of view, 
 for forgery is generally something which concerns some 
 brief document, something that requires only a signature 
 in order to secure its currency. The longer and more elab- 
 orate the document which forgery produces, the more danger 
 there must inevitably be of its final and ultimate detection. 
 Bat here are five long historic books. They are full of 
 details. They cover vast periods of time. Tiny enter into 
 a variety of topics. Incidentally they discuss not only ques- 
 tions of religion, but of law, of politics, of commerce, even 
 of hygiene medical laws of health. "Was ever forgery com- 
 mitted before or since on such a gigantic scale as this? 
 Moreover, there is no crime that is liable to be so speedily 
 detected as forgery. The man who signs some document 
 with another's name rarely goes down to the grave without 
 meeting his punishment here on earth. Why, only a few 
 weeks ago, the doors of our penitentiary, in the State of
 
 90 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL 
 
 Illinois, closed upon a prisoner who had affixed the name of 
 another, whose name was better than his own, to a check 
 upon which he had received the money; but only one month 
 intervened as a gap between that crime and the punishment 
 it merited and received. 
 
 It was a hundred years ago, that Thomas Chatterton, one 
 of the most wonderful men, or boys, I might rather say, 
 that England has ever produced, forged a huge mass of 
 papers, professedly historical, that were dated away back 
 in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The style was 
 that of the monks and chroniclers, which he had imitated 
 with the greatest possible perfection. The references to 
 the customs of tjjat ancient period were such as to avoid 
 detection, and Chatterton, in the precocity of his intellect, 
 and in the versatility of his talent, was without a peer in 
 English literary history. The English literary world re- 
 ceived it as a revelation out of lost centuries. The great 
 scholars of England were deceived. But it only took 
 three years to expose to every eye the fraud that had been 
 committed, and Chatterton, whom Wordsworth called the 
 "marvelous bov." ended his career in a suicide's crave. O, 
 
 v ' O 
 
 brethren! who can count the years, who can enumerate the 
 centuries which have rolled over this world of ours since the 
 allege 1 forgery of this man Moses! And yet to-day, after 
 the lapse of centuries, there are more people who believe in 
 that forgery as the genuine work of the man whom God 
 appointed the great law-giver and leader of Israel, there are 
 more people who hang their hopes for time and eternity on 
 this alleged i'raud, and that which has grown out of this 
 alleged fraud the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ than 
 ever before in two thousand years. Am I not then justified 
 in saying that if this be a forgery, which is contained in 
 the five books of Moses, it is the most extraordinary forgery 
 that has ever been committed in the world sinco words
 
 BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 91 
 
 expressed human thought, or human beings learned to wield 
 a pen? 
 
 The " Common Ground " of the Contending Parties Logical 
 Position of Ezra. 
 
 Now, in the first place, I desire to call your attention to 
 certain facts concerning the Mosaic record. In all contro- 
 versies in every department of human thought there are 
 certain points which are regarded as neutral ground. "When 
 our great civil war shook this land from centre to circum- 
 ference and two mighty armies were face to face in the 
 Valley of the Tennessee, the stars and stripes floated in the 
 same breeze that wafted the stars and the bars ; the strains 
 of "'Dixie" and "My Maryland" commingled with 
 41 Hail Columbia " and the " Star-Spangled Banner :" the 
 ;oldiers of the different armies exchanged such commodi- 
 ties as they possessed, as if they had been neighbors in 
 peace at home. No wonder that finally it came to pass 
 that between these armies there was what is known as 
 neutral ground, on which it was agreed th-.it the soldiers of 
 one side should not lire on those of the other. Now, is 
 there any such ground as that between those who defend 
 what are known as the five books cf Moses, and those who 
 declare they were never written by Moses at all ? Is there 
 any point, I say, in this controversy where the skeptic and 
 the believer can come to stand upon one common ground ? 
 If we can find such a neutral ground as that, it will save 
 us a long, tiresome, profitless debate. 
 
 Now, such a ground I think we have in the life and his- 
 tory of Ezra, the writer of the book of the Old Testament, 
 which bears his name. It is conceded on all hands that 
 this man was a scribe of the Jewish law after the close of 
 the Babylonian captivity. After the people had returned 
 from the land of their exile into the land of their fathers,
 
 93 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 he gathered into one great collection all these sacred writ- 
 ings that were held by the Jews to be the inspired word 
 of God. No infidel that I am aware of has ever questioned 
 the fact that in this collection of Ezra was contained the 
 five books of Moses. It has been claimed by some of the 
 least scholarly of infidels that Ezra wrote those five books. 
 But that idea was found visionary and was long ago given 
 up by those who opposed the truth of Christianity. But 
 the fact remains that no one, Christian or unbeliever, to-day 
 questions the historic fact that the five books of Moses, as 
 we now accept them, were received as the writings of the 
 lawgiver of the Jewish people when Ezra was at the acmo 
 of his influence after the Baylonian captivity: But they 
 state that it was universally conceded that it was four hun- 
 dred and fifty years before the birth of Christ. In other 
 words, it was admitted that every Jew who returned out of 
 the Babylonian captivity, held these five books to be tho 
 works of Moses, the man of God, twenty-three hundred 
 years ago. 
 
 The Bishop Planting Signals on the Mountain Tops of History 
 Survey of the New Moses Air Line. 
 
 We stand, then, without dispute, without any controversy, 
 at this point of time four hundred and fifty years bcforo 
 the birth of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Chriot. Now, fix 
 that point in your memory while I attempt, like a civil en- 
 ineer penetrating some wilderness, to plant the signal 
 on some more remote mountain top of history. Now, all 
 the ancient writings, whether Egyptian or Chaldean, cor- 
 roborate the testimony of the Bible that these Hebrews 
 were slaves in the land of Egypt. They also agree that 
 they migrated into Southern Syria, under the leadership of 
 a man who was called Moses a word which meant ' one 
 drawn out of the water." It is also universally allowed 
 
 at they settled in this new land, which had long before 
 
 ai 
 
 dr 
 th
 
 BISHOP CHE NET' 8 REPLY. 93 
 
 i 
 been promised to their fathers, about the year 1450 before 
 
 Christ. "We have established then our second date a date 
 which no skeptic has ever called in question. When our 
 great tunnel that brings the pure water of Lake Michigan 
 into every home and household in this city was in process 
 of construction, the workmen began at either end. There 
 was a shaft out in yonder crib, and there was another on 
 the shore, and underneath the waves the two parties of 
 toilers worked toward each other. And so it is with us. 
 We tunnel between our two shafts. The date 450 B. C. and 
 the date 1450 B. C. only one thousand years are to be ac- 
 counted for. Does that seem along period of timeto you? 
 I admit that it does, but not in the history of nations. It 
 is only a trifle more than the time in which you and I are 
 living is removed from the time of William of Normandy, 
 who conquered Harold and the English barons. 
 
 Now we will cross the sea to the old tower that still 
 recalls the memory of William the Conqueror. We will 
 enter the office of public records, and in that fire-proof vault, 
 guarded as they guard the specie that is gathered into the 
 treasury of the nation, is a book in two huge volumes of 
 vellum. It is known as the " Doomsday Book." In tha / 
 year 108G, eight hundred years ago, remember, William the\ \. 
 Conqueror caused that record to be prepared. It is nearly 
 as old as the five books of Moses, the Pentateuch, was in 
 the days of Ezra the scribe. But not a page of the / 
 "Doomsday Book 5 ' has been lost; not a line has beenV J 
 altered; not a letter erased. Its pages read to-day as they 
 did in this old time when the Norman heel was on the 
 Saxon neck eight centuries ago. The ink is as fresh 
 on the parchment as though that parchment were unstained 
 by age. Do you ask how it is that the record has remained 
 uncorrupted? Do you ask how it is that after all the revo- 
 lutions that have swept over England, after all the changes 
 
 V
 
 94 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 of royal houses, and the dissolutions of powerful parties,, 
 that that has remained perfectly unaltered? The answer is- 
 a perfectly easy one to give. It is because " Doomsday 
 Book " contains the name of every man, who, in the days 
 of William the Conqueror, owned one rood of English soiL 
 It contains a description of the lands throughout the realm. 
 It gives the boundaries of every great estate, and every old 
 English family must, therefore, find the roots of Us gene- 
 alogy in that old book of the early times of the Norman 
 conquest. It gives the title to every acre of land in Eng- 
 land. Thus, two of the strongest motives that can influence 
 the human mind and the human will, have conspired to 
 guard this " Doomsday Book " with a jealous and tireless- 
 care. 
 
 The possession of a great name, and the possession of 
 landed property are wrapped up in England in the safety of 
 that one book. Now, exactly the same motives conspired 
 for the preservation, from all corruption, of the five books 
 
 f Moses. They contain the list of those who came out of 
 Egypt with Moses and entered into Palestine; they gave a 
 description of the land that was apportioned to each and 
 every name. To lose these books, which the Jews ever 
 regarded as a precious treasure, the genealogy of their 
 household to suffer them to be tampered with, was to 
 
 nsettle the title to every man's field from Dan to Beersheba. 
 If the " Doomsday Book " has survived, uncorrupted> 
 what reason on earth is there to doubt that the Penta- 
 teuch was preserved intact during the thousand years that 
 intervened between the time of Moses and the time of Ezra? 
 But I need not stop here. Ezra, as I have said, was one of! 
 the captives who returned out of exile. But Daniel, long 
 before the time of Ezra, speaks of this law of Moses. He 
 bases his own conduct and his own private character upon 
 it. Daniel brings us a hundred years nearer to the days
 
 BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 95 
 
 when Moses gave that law to the world. When King Josiah 
 mounted the throne of Judah he found that throno pol- 
 luted by the wickedness that characterized the reign of his 
 father, King Manasseh, and then there came an overwhelm' 
 ing and powerful revival of religion throughout the king- 
 dom. Monarch and subject united in humiliation before 
 God. Numbers of people bowed down before the Jehovah 
 whom they had offended. But, we all distinctly know that 
 the root and the seed out of which this revival sprung was 
 the finding of the copy of the five books of Moses, and / 
 learning there what Moses had commanded against the sin 
 of idolatry. I have reached a point nearer yet to the time 
 of Moses himself. I will hasten on. 
 
 Termination of the Great Air Line. 
 
 One thousand and four years before Christ, Solomon 
 regulated the temple service and worship, but he regulated it,, 
 we are distinctly told, according to the law that was 
 contained in the Pentateuch. And we are within four hun- 
 dred and fifty years of the death of Moses. But David 
 refers constantly to the five books of Moses in the psalms. 
 The law of Moses was the foundation on which all the relig- 
 ious character of the psalms of David rest. Before David 
 was Samuel. His entire career pre-supposes the exist- 
 ence of the Mosaic books. But only three hundred 
 and fifty years intervened between Samuel and Moses. 
 Joshua succeeded Moses as the leader of the chosen people. 
 Again and again in his addresses to the people, did he 
 reprove, exhort and encourage Israel, but everywhere on 
 the basis of the books of the law of Moses. Thus, we have 
 link by link carried back this chain of testimony to the very 
 days in which Moses lived. Now we want no better proof 
 than that in the secular history. Suppose the farewell 
 address of George Washington had been made the object of
 
 96 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 / skeptical criticism; suppose that it had been denied that it 
 had been written by Washington, and if I find it alluded to 
 in Mr. Lincoln's address at the monument-raising in Gettys- 
 burg; if I find in ore of his f speeches that President Polk 
 also spoke of it; if t'.iis is true of Mr. Van Burcn, and Mr. 
 Madison before him, and if even John Adams, the suc- 
 
 I cessor of George Washington in the presidential chair, 
 refers to that address why then, every sensible man will 
 eay that it is the nearest equivalent of mathematical demon- 
 stration that can possibly be given of the genuineness of 
 the document to which I have referred. 
 
 Genealogical Reflections. 
 
 Now, I want you to notice again that if these writings 
 were forged, they were forged by men, who even in so 
 doing, blackened the character of their own lineage and an- 
 cestry. It has been well said that a man whose chief glory 
 is in his ancestors, is very like a potato the best part of 
 him is underground. But after all there is no good man 
 who does not rejoice and thank God for the fact when 
 he is able to trace back a long line of God-fearing, pure- 
 living, honest men and women as the seed from whence ho 
 sprang. If I go to work and forge a genealogy for my- 
 self, I certainly will not manufacture one that describes 
 my forefathers as the blackest set of criminals that ever 
 escaped from a penitentiary. No one pretends for a mo- 
 ment that any one but the Jews were those who could 
 have been responsible for the Testament records ; but it 
 they forged it they must have had some motive. Forgers 
 always have a motive. There is something before their 
 minds that is to be gained. But what did these forgers 
 do ? Why they compiled a record of their own family tree, 
 that overwhelmed their fathers with everlasting shame and 
 contempt. They described the ancient Hebrews as besotted
 
 BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 97 
 
 idolaters in the land of Egypt. When God promised them 
 a land, all their own, flowing with milk and honey when, 
 all that was set before them they were willing to give up 
 all hope of prosperity, all hope of deliverance from slavery, 
 if they might only have that which they sighed for tho 
 fish and the leeks and garlic of Egypt. They arc repre- 
 sented as bowing down to the worship of a calf, which 
 their own hands had made out of their golden ear-rings, 
 and doing that in the very presence of God, displayed 
 upon Mount Sinai, and arc described when they reached 
 the borders of the promised land, when all ifs glory was 
 before them, and its liberty was almost theirs, as being 
 too cowardly to fight the battles that were necessary to 
 gain the possession of their inheritance, till at last God 
 refused to let one of tho miserable, cowardly generation 
 enter the land He had promised to tlieir fathers. Yet 
 all this is forgery, not of the Assyrians, not of tho 
 Egyptians, who were their hereditary enemies ; not of tho 
 Philistines, but themselves the forgery of the Jews them- 
 selves. As though in the dead of night a man should steal 
 out under cover of the darkness to the tombstone of his 
 dead father, and with chisel and mallet in hand try to erase 
 the honorable record of his life, and forge a lying epitaph 
 that made him the vilest scoundrel that ever polluted the 
 earth. Nay, if I commit a forgery on my family record, if 
 ever I try to impose a fabulous family tree on those who 
 know me, I don't think I shall ever trace my line to CaBsar 
 Borgia. 
 
 Cutting the Oordian Knot. 
 
 Now again I would like to notice very briefly some of 
 the objections to the credibility of the Mosaic writers. 
 Now, there is nothing easier than to start difficulties 
 on any subject which the human mind can give atten- 
 tion to. Let a child in its tiny fingers grasp a pin and 
 7
 
 98 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 get at the silvered side of a mirror, and in five minutes it 
 will do more damage than the most skillful laborer can 
 remedy with the work of many hours. 
 
 Is it wonderful that the Bible has been made the subject 
 
 (of repeated attacks ? I no more hope to answer all the 
 objections that can be put against a book such as the book 
 in question, or even the books of Moses I say I can no 
 more hope to answer all these attacks than in this spring- 
 time 1 can hope to pick off every green leaf that starts out 
 upon every spreading tree. It were an easier and more 
 effective way to girdle the tree itself. God girdles the tree 
 of infidelity by revival. 
 
 , If the record of experience tells any fact in the world, 
 /it is this, that a thousand objections which the head can 
 
 / see, vanish into thin air when the spirit of God gets 
 hold of a man's heart. Why, there are men here to-night 
 who remember the hour when they found difficulties 
 upon every page of the word of God, when they objected 
 to every principle it propounded, and now look back to the 
 difficulties they used to find there, and wonder how it was 
 possible that they could ever have been troubled by difficul- 
 ties so palpably absurd. They did not study out one by 
 one the replies that might have been made to these objec- 
 tions. When, in June, huge swarms of flies make our city 
 /like the land of Egypt in the days of old, we never under- 
 
 / take to kill them one by one : half a million of people 
 would not be sufficient for that. But God's west wind 
 blows, and they are scattered. So it is that the winds of 
 God's spirit sweep away the swarms of difficulties that men 
 V find in the Bible. And yet I am prepared to-night to take 
 up two or three of the objections which have been I'.rged 
 against the credibility of the Pentateuch. These objections 
 resolve themselves into two different parts the one to the 
 facts of the history of Moses, the other to the morality of
 
 BISHOP CHE NETS REPLY. 99 
 
 the acts that are there recorded, or the precepts that are 
 there laid down. I won't have time to go over both 
 branches of the subject The limits of such a sermon as 
 this absolutely forbid it. I speak now of the facts. At 
 some future time I hope to take up the moral portion of it. 
 
 Now, every time you visit the South Park, you find a 
 place of rest under the grateful shade of an ancient willow. 
 The vast expanse of its gigantic branches, the immense 
 girth of its trunk are the witnesses of its venerable age. 
 If I should take up to-morrow the report of the park com- 
 missioners and find there the statement that they, a-t vast 
 expense, had transplanted that willow tree from the native 
 soil in which it grew to adorn Chicago's pleasure-ground, 
 I should know beforehand that it was false; the very appear- 
 ance of the tree gives the lie to the statement, and if there 
 were any way in,. which I could examine the rings that 
 made up the trunk, I need only count them to have a posi- 
 tive proof of the fact that the statement contained in the 
 report was false. 
 
 Now, precisely akin to that is the accusation that is often 
 brought against the Book of Genesis. It is said that Moses 
 
 O O 
 
 declares that six thousand years ago God created this world 
 in which we are living now. But we only need to count 
 the geologic strata we only need to number the rings of 
 the huge trunk of this earth in order to disprove the 
 statement. 
 
 The Bishop's Challenge Moses and Ingersoll as Chronologists. 
 
 Now, in reply to this difficulty, which is so often urged 
 against the Book of Genesis, I want to say one word, and 
 that is, I challenge any man in this congregation I chal- 
 lenge any man in the wide world that has ever read the 
 Bible, to find in any book of the Bible, much less in the 
 Book of Genesis, the statement that the creation of this.
 
 100 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 earth took place six thousand years ago. This Moses, 
 whom Col. Ingersoll thinks was such a blunderer; whose 
 mistakes have been the subject of his jeers and blasphem- 
 ous ridicule, was a more careful man than our Peoria skep- 
 tic thinks. lie certainly was careful not to fix the time at 
 which God created this earth. "Whether that creation took 
 place six thousand or six million years ago, he does not 
 state. lie does say that "In the beginning God created 
 the heavens and the earth." But that is all. All that he 
 asserts is, that matter the substance out of which the 
 earth was made is not eternal; it had a beginning; He 
 did create it. 
 
 "Well, then, again, the creation of man, equally with that 
 of the world, is made the object of attack. "We are told 
 that the Bible claims that between live and six thousand 
 years ago God placed the first pair of the human family in 
 Eden. But when geologists have dag down into the forma- 
 tions that make up this globe formations which upon 
 mathematical calculation have taken ages and ages to pro- 
 duce they find there the remains of ancient tools, weap- 
 ons, ornaments and utensils that prove that man must have 
 lived in a time far ante-distant to that of Adam. 
 
 For example, the skeleton of an Indian was exhumed 
 some years ago, while digging for the foundation of the 
 gas-works in the City of New Orleans, and it was alleged 
 by one geologist of that day that it could not have been 
 less than fifty thousand years ago that that man lived. It 
 has been flaunted in our faces that science and religion aro 
 opposed to each other; that the Bible is against progress, 
 and that we all must concede that the Pentateuch is but a 
 tissue of falsehood. 
 
 Now the first answer I have to give is, that there is not 
 one syllable in the Bible that fixes the length of time 01 
 man's existence upon this earth. Not one syllable. Moses
 
 BISHOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 101 
 
 docs not tell us anything about the date that God created 
 Adam .and put him in the garden of Eden. True, we have 
 in the New Testament, in the fjcncalojjv of Christ, a state- 
 
 O O"' 
 
 ment of the number of generations from Abraham down 
 to the Saviour; but who knows precisely what is the mean- 
 ing of the term " generations?" The word is used in a variety 
 of senses in the Bible, and it baffles all calculation to deter- 
 mine how many ages intervened between Adam and Abra- 
 ham. The wisest scholars have been perplexed to fix the 
 number of centuries that rolled over the world in that 
 period of time. To say that God placed man upon this 
 earth six thousand years ago, is not quoting the Bible. I 
 want you to remember that. I want you to tell it to the 
 skeptic that picks out genealogical difficulties in the Scrip- 
 ture. It is only repeating the result of calculations in 
 chronology of certain fallible men who, as fallible, were 
 liable to be mistaken. All infi lels do it in trying to fasten 
 upon the Scripture tho blunders of mistaken men. But, 
 as is well known, the tendency of the best geologists in 
 our day is rapidly going away from the old ideas of the 
 vast periods of time in the construction of this earth. 
 
 Mud Calendars vs. Facts Some Sad and Sorrowful Scientific 
 Figuring in the Sand. 
 
 It was not very long ago that Sir Charles Lyell, the distin- 
 guished English geologist, calculated from his own stand- \ 
 point the rate at which the mud is deposited in the great \ 
 delta of the Mississippi. By actual figures he reached the 
 astounding calculation that the formation of the delta of 
 
 O 
 
 the Mississippi must have occupied not less than one 
 hundred thousand years. And, when down underneath 
 that deposit a skeleton was exhumed, it proved beyond all 
 question that not less than fifty thousand years ago human 
 feet had trod the soft soil of the delta of the Mississippi.
 
 102 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL, 
 
 But unfortunately for Sir Charles Lyell, American geolo- 
 gists were on his track, and the United States coast survey 
 followed in the pathway where he had been investigating. 
 Gen. Humphrey, of the American army, measured accu- 
 rately the amount of the deposit. He reviewed the figures 
 of the English geologist, and he showed unanswerably that 
 the whole delta of the Mississippi could not have been in 
 process of formation longer than four thousand four hundred 
 years. For many years geologists held that a quantity of 
 pottery that was found some sixty feet below the surface of 
 the soil, in the delta of the Nile, was at least twelve thousand 
 years old. But later investigations deeper down in the same 
 soil came upon some more patterns, which were undoubtedly 
 of Roman origin, and under these, a brick that bore inefface- 
 ably the stamp of Mehemet Ali, a modern pasha. 
 
 If you have visited Minneapolis, you certainly musthavo 
 been struck by the formation of the banks where the Mis- 
 sissippi has cut its way through the rocks. Above there is 
 layer upon layer, stratum upon stratum of limestone, and 
 beneath them the saccharoid sandstone, white as the sugar 
 from which it derives its name, and soft enough to be cut 
 with a knife, lies in hujje masses. On the bluff overlooking 
 
 o o 
 
 the river, there lives, in an immense house, which many 
 years ago was a popular hotel of the ancient city of St. 
 Anthony's Falls, a friend of mine. One day there came to 
 him startling news. Just outside of his premises, in exca- 
 vating for the foundation of a new building, the workmen 
 had struck upon a wooden coffin, and in it they found what 
 was recognized to be, beyond all doubt, human bones. A 
 local geologist, a physician of the state, with some skeptical 
 tendencies, seized upon this new foundation of the an- 
 tiquity of man, and the next day the columns of an even- 
 ing paper of St. Paul contained an article from this gen* 
 tleman's.pen about what countless ages must have elapsed
 
 B1SIIOP CHENEY'S REPLY. 103 
 
 to perfect that saccharoid sandstone over the coffin, and 
 over that to have put these layers upon layers of rock. 
 
 The conclusion was, that the chronology of the Bible 
 was utterly a mistake, and that we had, before the days ol 
 Mr. Ingersoll, one of the mistakes of Moses. On reading 
 the article my friend felt at once it was his duty to investi- 
 gate the event. lie found the coffin still unremoved, for 
 it was solidly wedged into the saccharoid sandstone, and 
 small pieces of the bones were scattered carelessly about 
 My friend, whose Christian feeling is only equaled by his 
 profound ability and scholarship, began carefully to examine 
 these relics of pre-Adamite man. Imagine his surprise to 
 find that the coffin which had been made so many ages be- 
 fore Adam was placed upon this earth, was the plank sewer 
 of the old hotel in which he lived, and the bones were those 
 of some innocent lamb, that a careless cook had some time 
 ago flung into that receptacle. I honor geology, but I claim 
 it is yet a very imperfect science, and even with all its im- 
 perfections I liavq yet to find a solitary principle or fact 
 hat geology has laid down that contradicts one word of 
 the five books of Moses. 
 
 A Mistake of Ingersoll, Tom Paine & Co. Corrected Conclusion. 
 
 I allude to one more of the Mosaic facts that is assailed 
 by the opponents of the Gospel. It is a difficulty which 
 Mr. Ingersoll recently brought forward in that remarkable 
 production of his, as something which he had discovered; 
 but Bishop Colenso, whom the Church of England some 
 thirty years ago sent out among the Zulus, dwelt upon it 
 long ago, and even before his time, Tom Paine had made 
 it his weapon against the truthfulness of the Pentateuch. 
 It is simply this: \Ve are told that the children of Israel, 
 according to the Bible, were in the land of Egypt, in cap- 
 tivity, two hundred and fifteen years. There went down
 
 104 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 with Jacob and his sons, their wives and children, seventy 
 souls in all. But the Exodus finds in the army of Israel 
 six hundred thousand fighting men, involving a total of 
 men, women and children which could not have been less 
 than two or three millions, and it is declared that such an 
 increase is utterly unparalleled in the annals of history. 
 
 ur mathematicians have figured it all out to their satis- 
 faction. Now, I want you to observe what a tissue of 
 blunders make up this opposition to this Great Book. First 
 of all turn back to the life of Abraham, the ancestor of 
 Jacob, and you there discover that a Hebrew family did 
 not consist merely of the parents and children. The ser- 
 vants were a part of the Hebrew household, and God dis- 
 tinctly made His commands imperative and unavoidable 
 upon Abraham, that every male youth born in his house 
 should receive the seal of circumcision. He therefore 
 became a participator in the Abrahamic covenant. Nay, 
 more, if he bought a servant he had to be brought into the 
 covenant of circumcision. God insists'upon this, and thus 
 every servant of every Hebrew household became a He- 
 brew, and was reckoned in the family into which he was 
 adopted. Away back in the time of Abraham, if you take 
 up the Book of Genesis you will iind he had so many of 
 these servants born in his own household, that three hundred 
 and eighteen of them, able-bodied men, soldiers, followed 
 him to battle, and when Jacob, in the one hundred and 
 thirtieth year of his age, went down into the land of Egypt 
 the three hundred and eighteen of Abraham's day surely 
 must have multiplied into thousands. 
 
 The Pentateuch, it is true, gives only the formal list of 
 Jacob's sons, their wives and their children. There is no 
 formal mention of this vast crowd of attendants, who, not- 
 withstanding ns part of the family, must have entered into 
 the land of Egypt with them. Thus, at the very rate of
 
 BISHOP CHENEY'S HE PLY. 10> 
 
 increase that the tables of the census of the United States 
 to-day display, these thousands might have easily amounted 
 to three millions in two hundred and fifteen years. 
 
 I am not through with this stronghold of the enemies of 
 the Pentateuch v As I study it seems to me that I never 
 knew a ghost to vanish into thinner air. I v/ould like to- 
 know where or how the critics learned that Israel was in 
 bondage in the land of Egypt two hundred and fifteen years. 
 Why, they learned in precisely the way that they learned 
 that Moses said this earth was made just dx thousand years, 
 ago. They have taken up certain genealogies and specula- 
 tions of commentators. They have taken up the calcula- 
 tions of Hales and others, and they have regarded them as 
 infallible. They have never turned to the twelfth chapter 
 of Exodus, and I find there the statement given with pre- 
 cision that admits of no question that the sojourn of the 
 children of Israel in Egypt was four hundred and thirty 
 years: " And it came to pass, at the end of four hundred 
 and thirty years, within the self-same day it carne to pass 
 that all the hosts of the Lord came out of the land of 
 Egypt." Long before that, God had told Abraham that his 
 seed should be strangers in a land that was not theirs, and 
 that they should afflict them four hundred years. And tho 
 Jews so understood it, as shown by the fact that in the New 
 Testament Stephen declares that God told the father of tho 
 faithful that his seed should sojourn in a strange land, and 
 they should bring them into bondage and evil entreat thorn, 
 four hundred years. Now, if but seventy had gone down 
 with Jacob into Egypt, an increase to two or three or even 
 four millions in four and a half centuries would have been 
 no more than what is paralleled by the history of every 
 race on the surface of the globe. 
 
 In Italy, three hundred years ago, when men were wild 
 over the discovery of Galileo's telescope, there was one 
 philosopher who refused to look through the tube that 
 pierced the vail of the starry worlds, and when he was asked 
 the reason, "I am afraid," he said, ''that I should beli.eve 
 Galileo's theory of the planetary motion." My brethren, 
 look into the telescope of revelation. To know it, to study 
 it, is to find tho very truth of God.
 
 INGERSOLL'S LECTURE 
 
 ON 
 
 SKULLS, 
 
 AND HIS 
 
 REPLIES TO PROF. SAVING, DR. RYDER, DR. HERFORD, 
 DR. COLLIER, AND OTHER CRITICS. 
 
 REPRINTED PROM "THE CHICAGO TIMES.' 
 
 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: Man advances just in the proportion that 
 he mingles his thoughts with his labor just in the proportion that he 
 takes advantage of the forces of nature; just in proportion as he loses 
 uperstition and gains confidence i:i himself. Man advances as he 
 ceases to fear the gods and learns to love his fellow-men. It is all, in 
 my judgment, a question of intellectual development. Tell mo "the 
 religion of any man and I will tell you the degree he marki on the 
 intellectual thermometer of the world. It is a simple question of brain. 
 Those among us who are the nearest barbarism have a barbarian religion. 
 Those who are nearest civilization have the least superstition. It is, I 
 say, a simple question of brain, and I want, in the first place, to lay the 
 foundation to prove that assertion. 
 
 / A little while ago I saw models of nearly everything that man has 
 made. I saw models of all the water craft, from the rude dug-out in 
 which floated a naked savage one of our ancestors a naked savage, 
 with teeth twice as long as his forehead was high, with a spoonful of 
 brains in the back of his orthodox head I saw models of all the water 
 craft of the world, from that dug-out up to a man-of-war that carries a 
 hundred guns and miles of canvas ; from that dug-out to the steamship 
 
 107
 
 , 
 
 108 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 that turns its brave prow from the port of New York, with a compass 
 like a conscience, crossing three thousand miles of billows without miss- 
 ing a tlirob or beat of its mighty iron heart from shore to shore. And I 
 saw at llic sumo lime the paintings of the world, from the rude daub of 
 yellow mud to the landscapes that enrich palaces and adorn houses of 
 what were once called t!ie common people. I saw also their sculpture, 
 from the rude god wi;h four legs, a half dozen arms, several noses, and 
 two or three rows of cars, and one 1 tile, contemptible, brainless head, 
 up t > the figures of to-day, to the marbles that genius has clad in such 
 a personality that it seems almost impudent to touch them without an 
 introduction. I saw their books books written upon the skins of wild 
 beasts upon shoulder-blades of sheep books written upon leaves, upon 
 bark, up to the splendid volumes that enrich, the libraries of our day. 
 When I speak of libraries I think of the remark of Plato: "A house that 
 has a library in it has a soul." 
 
 I saw at the same time the offensive weapons that man has made, from 
 a club, such as was grapcd by that same savage when he crawled from 
 his den in the ground and hunted a snake for his dinner: from that club 
 to the boomerang, to the sword, to the cross-bow, to the blunderbuss, to 
 the flint-lock, to the cap-lock, to the needle-gun, up to a cannon cast by 
 Krupp, capable of hurling aball weighing two thousand pounds through 
 eighteen inches of solid steel. I saw, too, the armor from the shell of a 
 turtle that one of our brave ancestors lashed upon his breast when ho 
 went to fight for his country; the skin of a porcupine, dried with the 
 quills on, which this same savage pulled over his orthodox head, up to 
 the shirts of mail that were worn in the middle ages, that laughed at tho 
 
 SO of the sword and defied the point of the spear; up to a monitor 
 lad ia complete steel. And I say orthodox not only in the matter of 
 religion, but in everything. Whoever has quit growing he is orthodox, 
 wh'ethcr in art, politics, religion, philosophy no matter what. Whoever 
 thinks ho has f mnd it all out he is orthodox. Orthodoxy is that which 
 rots, and heresy ii that which grows forever. Orthodoxy is the night 
 of tlic past, full oflhc darkness of superstition, and heresy is the eternal 
 coming day, the light of which strikes the grand foreheads of the intel- 
 lectual pioneers of tho world. I saw their implements of agriculture, 
 from the p!ow made of a crooked slick, ntttached to the horn of an ox 
 by some twisted straw, with which our ancestors scraped the earth, and 
 fro::i tliv.t to tho agricul:ural implements of this generation, that mako 
 it possible for a man to cultivate tho soil without being an ignoramus. 
 ( la the old time there was but one crop; and when the rain did not 
 come in answer to the pmycr of hypocrites a famine came and people 
 fell upon their knees. At that time tliey were full of superstition. They 
 were frightened all the lime for four that some god would be enraged at
 
 8KULL8 AND REPLIES. 109 
 
 his poor, hapless, feeble and starving children. J?ut now, instead of 
 depending upon one crop they have several, and if there is nut rain 
 enough for one there may be enough for another. And if the frosts kill 
 all, we have railroads and steamships enough to bring what we need 
 from some other part of the world. Since man has found out some-\ 
 thing about agriculture, the gods have retired from the business of pro-) 
 ducing famines. 
 
 I saw at the same time their musical instruments, from the tom-tom 
 that is, a hoop with a couple of strings of raw-hide drawn across it 
 /from that tom-tom, up to the instruments we have to-day, that make 
 I the common air blossom with melody, and I said to myself there is a 
 vregular advancement. I saw at the same time a row of human skulls, 
 from the lowest skull that has been found, the Neanderthal skull 
 skulls from Central Africa, skulls from the bushuicn of Australia 
 skulls from the farthest isles of the Pacific Sea up to the best skulls of 
 the last generation and I noticed that there was the same difference 
 between those skulls that there was between the products of those skulls, *- 
 and I said to n:y -elf: "After all, it i.s a simple question of intellectual \ 
 development." There was the same difference between those skulls, the I 
 lowest and highest skulls, that there was between the dug-out and the / 
 man-of-war and the steamship, between the club and the Krupp gun, / 
 between the yellow daub and the landscape, between the tom-tom and/ 
 an opera by Verdi. The first and lowest skull in this row was the den 
 in which crawled the base and meaner instincts of mankind, and the 
 last was a temple in which dwelt joy, liberty and love. And I said to 
 myself, it is all a question of intellectual development. 
 
 Man has advanced just as he has mingled his thought with his labor. 
 As he has grown he has taken advantage of the forces of nature ; first of 
 the moving wind, then of falling water, and finally of steam. From 
 one step to another he has obtained better houses, better clothes, and 
 better books, and he h-.is done it by holding out every incentive to the 
 ingenious to produce them. The world has said, give us better clubs 
 and guns and cannons with which to kill our fellow Christians. And 
 whoever will give us better weapons and better music, and better houses 
 to live in, we will robe him in wealth, crown him in honor, and render 
 his name deathless. Every incentive was held out to every human being 
 to improve these things, and that is the reason we have advanced in all 
 mechanical arts. But that gentleman in the dug-out not only had his 
 ideas about politics, mechanics, and agriculture; he had his ideas also 
 about religion. His idea about politics was " right makes might." It 
 will be thousands of years, may be, before mankind will believe in the 
 saying that "right makes might." He had his religion. That low 
 skull was a devil factory. He believed in Hell, and the belief was aeon-
 
 110 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 /isolation to him. He could see the waves of God's wrath dashing against 
 the rocks of dark damnation. He could see tossing in the white-caps 
 
 'the f.ices of women, and stretching above the crests the dimpled hands 
 
 of children; and he regarded these things as the justice and mercy of 
 
 God. And all to-day who believe in this eternal punishment are the 
 
 barbarians of the nineteenth century. That man believed in a devil, 
 
 too, that had a long tail terminating with a fiery dart; that had wings 
 
 like a bat a devil that had a cheerful habit of breathing brimstone, 
 
 that had a cloven foot, such as some orthodox clergymen seem to think 
 
 I have. And there has not been a patentable improvement made upon 
 
 \ f\ /that devil in all the years since. The moment you drive the devil out 
 
 ( > / of theology, there is nothing left worth speaking of. The moment they 
 
 . * I drop the devil, away goes atonement. The moment they kill the devil, 
 
 \heir whole scheme of salvation has lost all of its interest for mankind. 
 You must keep the devil and you must keep Hell. You must keep the 
 devil, because with no devil no priest is necessary. Now, all I ask is 
 this the same privilege to improve upon his religion as upon his dug- 
 out, and that is what I am going to do, the best I can. No matter what 
 church you belong to, or what church belongs to us. Let us be honor 
 bright and fair. 
 
 / I want to ask you : Suppose the king, if there was one, and the priest 
 if there was one at that time, had told these gentlemen in the dug-out: 
 
 ( " That dug-out is the best boat that can ever be built by man ; the pattern 
 of that came from on high, from the great God of storm and flood, and 
 any man who says he can improve it by putting a stick in the middle 
 
 I of it and a rag on the stick, is an infidel, and shall be burned at tho 
 stake;" what, in your judgment honor bright would have been the 
 effect upon the circumnavigation of the globe? Suppose the king, if 
 there was one, and the priest, if there was one and I presume there 
 was a priest, because it was a very ignorant age suppose this king and 
 
 I priest had said: "The tom-toin is the most beautiful instrument of 
 music of which any man can conceive ; that is the kind of music they 
 have in Heaven; an angel sitting upon the edge of a glorified cloud, 
 golden in the setting sun, playing upon that tom-tom, became so enrap- 
 tured so entranced with her own music, that in a kind of ecstasy she 
 dropped it that is how we obtained it; and any man who says it can bo 
 improved by putting a back and front to it, and four strings, and a bridge, 
 and getting a bow of hair with rosin, is a blaspheming wretch, and shall 
 die the death," I ask you, what effect would that have had upon music r 
 If that course had been pursued, would the human ears, in your judg- 
 ment, ever have been enriched with the divine symphonies of Beethoven t 
 Suppose the king, if there was one, nnd the priest, had said: "That 
 crooked sticks is the best plow that can be invented ; the pattern of that
 
 SKULLS AJfD REPLIES. lit 
 
 plow was given to a pious farmer in an exceedingly holy dream, and 
 that twisted straw is the neplus ultra of all twisted things, and nny maa 
 who says ho can make Tin improvement upon that plow, is an atheist;" 
 what, in your judgment, would have been the effect upon the science of 
 agriculture ? 
 
 Now, all I ask is the same privilege to improve upon his religion as \ 
 upon his mechanical arts. Why don't we go back to that period to get ) 
 the telegraph ? Because they were barbarians. And shall we go to bar- /\ a 
 barians to get our religion? What is religion? Religion simplj^ \ C 
 embraces the duty of man to man. Religion is simply the science of 
 human duty and the duty of man to man that is what it is. It is the J 
 highest science of all. And all other sciences are as nothing, except as 
 they contribute to the happiness of man. The science of religion is the 
 highest of all, embracing all others. And shall we go to the barbarians 
 to learn the science of sciences ? The nineteenth century knows more 
 about religion than all the centuries dead. There is more real charity 
 hi the world to-day than ever before. There is more thought to-day than 
 ever before. Woman is glorified to-day as she never was before in the 
 history of the world. There are more happy families now than ever 
 before more children treated as though they were tender blossoms than 
 as though they were brutes than in any other time or nation. Religion 
 is simply the duty a man owes to man ; and when you fall upon j-our 
 knees and pray for something you know not of, you neither benefit the 
 one you pray for nor yourself. One ounce of restitution is worth a mil- 
 lion of repentances anywhere, and a man will get along faster by help- 
 ing himself a minute than by praying ten years for somebody to help 
 him. Suppose you were coming along the street, and found a party of 
 men and women on their knees praying to a bank, and you asked them, 
 " Have any of you borrowed any money of this bank ?" " No, but our 
 fathers, they, to, prayed to this bank." " Did they ever get any ?" " No, 
 not ttiat we ever heard of." I would tell them to get up. It is easier to 
 earn it, and it is far more manly. 
 
 Our fathers in the " good old times," and the best that I can say of 
 the " good old times " is that they are gone, and the best I can say of the 
 good old people that lived in them is that they are gone, too believed 
 that you made a man think your way by force. Well, you can't do it. 
 There is a splendid something in man that says: "I won't; I won't 
 be driven." But our fathers thought men could be driven. They tried 
 it in the " good old times." I used to read about the manner in which 
 the early Christians made converts how they impressed upon the world 
 the idea that God loved them. I have read it, but i t didn't burn into my 
 soul. I didn't think much about it I heard so much about being fried 
 forever in Hell that it didn't seem so bad to burn a few minutes. I love
 
 113 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 liberty and I hate all persecutions in the name of God. I never appre- 
 ciated the infamies that have been committed in the name of religion 
 
 ! until I saw the iron arguments that Christians used. I saw, for instance, 
 
 1 the thumb-screw, two little innocent looking pieces of iron, armed with 
 some little protuberances on the inner side to keep it from slipping 
 down, and through each end a screw, and when some man had made 
 some trifling remark, as, for instance, that he never believed that God 
 /made a fish swallow a man to keep him from drowning, or something 
 
 / like that, or, for instance, that he didn't believe in baptism. You know 
 ^ / that is very wrong. You can see for yourselves the justice of damning 
 a man if his parents had happened to baptize him in the wrong way 
 God can not afford to break a rule or two to save all the men in the 
 world. I happened to be in the company of some Baptist ministers 
 once you may wonder how I happened to be in such company as that 
 and one of them asked me what I thought about baptism. Well, I told 
 them I hadn't thought much about it that I had never sat up nights 
 on that question. I said : " Baptism with soap is a good institution." 
 Now, when some man had said some trifling thing like that, they put 
 this thumb-screw on him, and iii the name of universal benevolence and 
 for the love of God man has never persecuted man for the love of man ; 
 man hai never persecuted another for the love of charity it is always 
 for the love of something ho calls God, and every man's idea of God is 
 (\ / 1m own idea. If there is an infinite God, and there may be I don't 
 
 i know there may be a million for all I know I hope there is more 
 than one one seems so lonesome. They kept turning this down, and 
 when this was done, most men would say: " I will recant." I think I 
 would. There is not much of the martyr about me. I would have told 
 them: " Now you write it down, and I will sign it. You may have 
 one God or a million, one Hell or a million. You stop that I am 
 tried." 
 
 Do you know, sometimes I have thought that all the hypocrites in the 
 world are not worth one drop of honest blood. I am sorry that any 
 /good man ever died for religion. I would rather let them advance a 
 little easier. It is too bad to see a good man sacrificed for a lot of wild 
 beasts and cattle. But there is now and then a man who would not 
 swerve the breadth of a hair. There was now and then a sublime heart 
 willing to die for an intellectual conviction, and had it not been for these 
 men wo would liavo been wild beasts and savages to-day. There were 
 some incn who would not take it back, and had it not been for a few 
 such brave, heroic souls in every age we would have been cannibals, 
 with pictures of wild beasts tattooed upon our breasts, dancing around 
 some dried-snake fetish. And so they turned it down to the last thread 
 of agony, and threw the victim into some dungeon, where, in the throb-
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 113 
 
 bing silence and darkness, he might suffer the agonies of the fabled \ 9 
 damned. This was done in the name of love, in the name of mercy, in * 
 the name of the compassionate Christ. And the men that did it are the 
 men that made our Bible for us. 
 
 I saw, too, at the same time, the collar of torture. Imagine a circle of 
 iron, and on the inside a hundred points almost as sharp as needles. 
 This argument was fastened about the throat of the sufferer. Then he 
 could not walk nor sit down, nor stir without the neck being punctured 
 by these points. In a little while the throat would begin to swell, and 
 suffocation would end the agonies of that man. This man, it may be, 
 had committed the crime of saying, with tears upon his cheeks, " I do 
 not believe that God, the father of us all, will damn to eternal perdition 
 any of the children of men." And that was done to convince the world 
 that God so loved the world that He died for us. That was in order 
 that people might hear the glad tidings of great joy to all people. 
 
 I saw another instrument, called the scavenger's daughter. Imagine 
 a pair of shears with handles, not only where they now are, but at the 
 points as well and just above the pivot that unites the blades a circle of 
 iron. In the upper handles the hands would be placed ; in the lower, 
 the feet; and through the iron ring, at the centre, the head of the victim 
 would be forced, and in that position the man would be thrown upon 
 the earth, and the strain upon the muscle would produce such agony 
 that insanity took pity. And this was done to keep people from going \ 
 to Hell to convince that man that he had made a mistake in his logic I 
 and it was done, too, by Protestants Protestants that persecuted to the ' 
 extent of their power, and that is as much as Catholicism ever did. * 
 They would persecute now if they had the power. There is not a man 
 in this vast audience who will say that the church should have temporal 
 power. There is not one of you but what believes in the eternal divorce 
 of church and state. Is it possible that the ouly people who are fit to 
 go to heaven are the only people not fit to rule mankind ? 
 
 I saw at the same time the rack. This was a box like the bed of a 
 wagon, with a windlass at each end, and ratchets to prevent slipping. 
 Over each windlass went chains, and when some man had, for instance, 
 denied the doctrine of the trinity, a doctrine it is necessary to believe in 
 -order to get to Heaven but, thank the Lord, you don't have to under- 
 stand it. This man merely denied that three times one was one, or 
 maybe he denied that there was ever any Son in the world exactly as 
 :>ld as his father, or that there ever was a boy eternally older than his 
 mother then they put that man on the rack. Nobody had ever been 
 persecuted for calling God bad it has always been for calling him good. 
 When I stand here to say that, if there is a Hell, God is a fiend; they 
 say that is very bad. They say I am trying to tear down the institu-
 
 114 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 tions of public virtue. But let me tell you one thing ; there is no refor- 
 ! mation in fear you can scare a man so that he won't do it sometimes, 
 j but I will swear you can't scare him so bad that he won't want to do it. 
 \ Then they put this man on the rack and priests began turning these 
 levers, and kept turning until the ankles, the hips, the shoulders, the 
 elbows, the wrists, and all the joints of the victim were dislocated, and 
 he was wet with agony, and standing by was a physician to feel his- 
 pulse. What for ? To save his life ? Yes. In mercy ? No. But in 
 order that they might have the pleasure of racking him once more. 
 And this was the Christian spirit. This was done in the name of civili- 
 zation, in the name of religion, and all these wretches who did it died in 
 peace. There is not an orthodox preacher in the city that has not a. 
 respect for every one of them. As, for instance, for John Calvin, who- 
 was a murderer and nothing but a murderer, who would have disgraced 
 an ordinary gallows by being hanged upon it These men when they 
 came to die were not frightened. God did not send any devils into 
 their death-rooms to make mouths at them. He reserved them for 
 Voltaire, who brought religious liberty to Prance. He reserved them 
 for Thomas Paine, who did more for liberty than all the churches. But 
 all the inquisitors died with the white hands of pence folded over the 
 breast of piety. And when they died, the room was filled with the rustle 
 of the wings of angels, waiting to bear the wretches to Heaven. 
 
 When I read these frightful books it seems to me sometimes as though 
 I had suffered all these things myself. It seems sometimes as though I 
 had stood upon the shore of exile, and gazed with tearful eyes toward 
 home and native land; it seems to me as though I had been staked out 
 upon the sands of the sea, and drowned by the inexorable, advancing 
 tide ; as though my nails had been torn from my hands, and into the 
 bleeding quick needles had been thrust ; as though my feet had been 
 crushed in iron boots; as though I had been chained in the cell of the 
 Inquisition, and listened with dying ears for the coming footsteps of 
 release; as though I had stood upon the scaffold and saw the glittering 
 axe fall upon me; as though I had been upon the rack and had seen, 
 bending above me, the white faces of hypocrite priests; as though I 
 had been taken from my fireside, from my wife and children, taken to 
 the public square, chained; as though fagots had been piled about me; 
 as though the flames had climbed around my limbs and scorched my 
 eyes to blindness, and as though my ashes had been scattered to the four 
 winds by all the countless hands of hate. And, while I so feel, I swear 
 that while I live I will do what little I can to augment the liberties of 
 man, woman and child. I denounce slavery and superstition every- 
 where. I believe in liberty, and happiness, and love, nud joy in this 
 world. I am amazed that any man ever had the impudence to try and
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 115 
 
 do another man's thinking. I have just as good a right to talk about 
 theology as a minister. If they all agreed I might admit it was a 
 science, but as they all disagree, and the more they study the wider they 
 get apart, I may be permilted to suggest it is not a science. When no 
 two will tell you the road to Heaven that is, giving you the same route 
 ?nd if you would inquire of them all, you would just give up trying 
 to go there, and say: " I may as well stay where I am, and let the Lord 
 come to me." 
 
 Do you know that this world has not been fit for a lady and gentle- 
 man to live in for twenty-five years, just on account of slavery. It was 
 not until the year 1808 that Great Britain abolished the slave trade, and 
 up to that time her judges, her priests occupying her pulpits, the mem- 
 bers of the royal family, owned stock in the slave ships, and luxuriated 
 upon the profits of piracy and murder. It was not until the same year 
 that the United States of America abolished the slave trade between this 
 and other countries, but carefully preserved it as between the states. It 
 was not until the 28th day of August, 1833, that Great Britain abolished 
 human slavery in her colonies ; and it was not until the 1st day of Jan- 
 uary, 18C3, that Abraham Lincoln, sustained by the sublime and heroic 
 North, rendered our flag pure as the sky in which it floats. Abraham 
 Lincoln was, in my judgment, in many respects, the grandest man ever 
 president of the United States. Upon his monument these words should 
 be written : " Here sleeps the only man in the history of the world, who, 
 having been clothed with almost absolute power, never abused it, except 
 upon the side of mercy." 
 
 For two hundred years the Christians of the United States deliberately 
 turned the cross of Christ into a whipping-post. Christians bred hounds 
 to catch other Christians. Let me show you what the Bible has done 
 for mankind : " Servants, be obedient to your masters." The only word 
 coming from that sweet Heaven was, " Servants, obey your masters." 
 Frederick Douglas told me that he had lectured upon the subject of 
 freedom twenty years before he was permitted to set his foot in a church. 
 I tell you the world has not been fit to live in for twenty-five years. 
 Then all the people used to cringe and crawl to preachers. Mr. Buckle, 
 in his history of civilization, shows that men were even struck dead for 
 speaking impolitely to a priest. God would not stand it. See how they 
 used to crawl before cardinals, bishops and popes. It is not so now. 
 Before wealth they bowed to the very earth, and in the presence of titles 
 they became abject. All this is slowly, but surely changing. We no 
 longer bow to men simply because they are rich. Our fathers wor- 
 shipped the golden calf. The worst you can say of an American now 
 is, he worships the gold of the calf. Even the calf is beginning to see 
 this distinction.
 
 116 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 The time will come when no matter how much money a man has, he 
 will not be respected unless he is using it for the benefit of his fellow. 
 men. It will soon be here. It no longer satisfies the ambition of a great 
 man to be king or emperor. The last Napoleon was not satisfied with 
 being the emperor of the French. lie was not satisfied with having a 
 circlet of gold about his head. He wanted some evidence that he had 
 something of value within his head. So he wrote the life of Julius 
 Caesar, that he might become a member of the French academy. The 
 emperors, the kings, the popes, no longer tower above their fellows. 
 Compare, for instance, King William and Helmholtz. The king is one 
 of the anointed by the Most High, as they claim one upon whose head 
 has been poured the divine petroleum of authority. Compare this king 
 with Helmholtz, who towers an intellectual Colossus above the crowned 
 mediocrity. Compare George Eliot with Queen Victoria. The queen 
 is clothed in garments given her by blind fortune and unreasoning 
 chance, while George Eliot wears robes of glory woven in the loom of 
 her own genius. And so it is the world over. The time is comingwhen 
 a man will be rated at his real worth, and that by his brain and heart. 
 We care nothing now about an officer unless he fills his place. No mat- 
 ter if he is president, if he rattles in the place nobody cares anything 
 about him. I might give you an instance in point, but I won't. The 
 world is getting better and grander and nobler every day. 
 
 Now, if men have been slaves, if they have crawled in]the dust before 
 one another, what shall I say of women ? They have been the slaves of 
 men. It took thousands of ages to bring women from abject slavery up 
 to the divine height of marriage. I believe in marriage. If there is 
 any Heaven upon earth it is in the family by the fireside, and the famuy 
 is a unit of government. Without the family relation is tender, pure 
 and true, civilization is impossible. Ladies, the ornaments you wear 
 upon your persons to-night are but the souvenirs of your mother's bond- 
 age. The chains around your necks, and the bracelets clasped upon 
 your white arms by the thrilled hand of love, have been changed by the 
 wand of civilization from iron to shining, glittering gold. Nearly every 
 civilization in this world accounts for the devilment in it by the crimes 
 of woman. They say woman brought all the trouble into the world. 1 
 don't care if she did. I would rather live in a world full of trouble with 
 the women I love, than to live in Heaven with nobody but men. I read 
 in a book an account of the creation of the world. The book I have 
 taken pains to say was not written by any God. And why do I say so ? 
 Because I can write a far better book myself. Because it is full of bar- 
 barisms. Several ministers in this city have undertaken to answer me 
 notably thoge who don't believe the Bible themselves. I want to ask 
 toeae m&L sot ui*u&. - -vJu.' totn *: ot '.sur.
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 117 
 
 Every minister in the City of Chicago that answers me, and those 
 Vho have answered me had better answer me again I want them to 
 say, and without any sort of evasion without resorting to any pious 
 tricks I want them to say whether they believe that the Eternal God 
 of this universe ever upheld the crime of polygamy. Say it square and 
 fair. Don't begin to talk about that being a peculiar time, and that God 
 was easy on the prejudices of those old fellows. I want them to answer 
 that question and to answer it squarely, which they haven't done. Did 
 this God, which you pretend to worship, ever sanction the institution of 
 human slavery? Now, answer fair? Don't slide around it. Don't 
 begin and answer what a bad man I am, nor what a good man Moses 
 was. Stick to the text. Do you believe in a God that allowed a man to 
 be sold from his children ? Do you worship such an infinite monster? 
 And if you do, tell your congregation whether you are not ashamed to 
 admit it. Let every minister who answers me again tell whether he 
 believes God commanded his general to kill the little dimpled babe in 
 the cradle. Let him answer it. Don't say that those were very bad 
 times. Tell whether He did it or not, and then your people will know 
 wheiher to hate that God or not. Be honest. Tell them whether that 
 God in war captured young maidens and turned them over to the soldiers ; 
 and then ask the wives and sweet girls of your congregation to get down 
 on their knees and worship the infinite fiend that did that thing. 
 Answer! It is your God I am talking about, and if that is what God 
 did, please tell your congregation what, under the same circumstances, 
 the devil would have done. Don't tell your people that is a poem. 
 Don't tell your people that is pictorial. That won't do. Tell your 
 people whether it is true or false. That is what I want you to do. 
 
 In this book I have read about God's making the world and one man. 
 That is all he intended to make. The making of woman was a second 
 thought, though I am willing to admit that as a rule second thoughts 
 are best. This God made a man and put him in a public park. In a 
 little while He noticed that the man got lonesome ; then He found He 
 had made a mistake, and that He would have to make somebody to keep 
 him company. But having used up all the nothing He originally used 
 in making the world and one man, He had to take a part of a man to 
 start a woman with. So He causes sleep to fall on this man now under- 
 stand me, I do not say this story is true. After the sleep had fallen on 
 this man the Supreme Being took a rib, or, as the French would call 
 it, a cutlett, out of him, and from that He made a woman ; and I am 
 willing to swear, taking into account the amount and quality of the raw 
 material used, this was the most magnificent job ever accomplished in 
 this world. Well, after He got the woman done she was brought to the 
 man, not to see how she liked him, but to see how he liked her. He
 
 f 
 
 118 MISTAKES OF 1NGER80LL. 
 
 liked her and they started housekeeping, and they were told of certain 
 things they might do and of one thing they could not do and of course 
 they did it I would have done it in fifteen minutes, I know it. There 
 wouldn't have been an apple on that tree half an hour from date, and 
 the limbs would have been full of clubs. And then they were turned 
 out of the park and extra policemen were put on to keep them from 
 getting back. And then trouble commenced and we have been at it ever 
 since. Nearly all of the religions of this world account for the exist- 
 ence of evil by such a story as that. 
 
 Well, I read in another book what appeared to be an account of the 
 same transaction. It was written about four thousand years before the 
 other. All commentators agree that the one that was written last was 
 the original, and the one that was written first was copied from the one 
 that was written last. But I would advise you all not to allow your 
 
 (creed to be disturbed by a little matter of four or five thousand years. 
 It is a great deal better to be mistaken in dates than to go to the devil. 
 In this other account the Supreme Brahma made up his mind to make 
 the world and a man and woman. He made the world, and he made 
 the man and then the woman, and put them on the Island of Ceylon. 
 According to the account it was the most beautiful island of which man 
 can conceive. Such birds, such songs, such flowers, and such verdure! 
 And the branches of the trees were so arranged that when the wind 
 swept through them every tree was a thousand ^lolian harps. Brahma, 
 when he put them there, s^aid : " Let them have a period of courtship, 
 for it is my desire and will that true love should torcver precede mar- 
 riage." When I read that, it was so much more beautiful and lofiy than 
 the other, that I said to myself: " If either one of these stories ever 
 turns out to be true, I hope it will be this one." 
 
 Then they had their courtship, with the nightingale singing and the 
 stars shining and the flowers blooming, and they fell in love. lma<riue 
 that courtship! No prospective fathers or mothers-in-law ; no prying 
 and gossiping neighbors; nobody to say, "Young ifian, how do you 
 expect to support her?" Nothing of tliat kind nothing but the night- 
 ingale singing its song of joy and pain, as though the thorn already 
 touched its heart. They were married bv the Supreme Brahma, and he 
 said to them, " Remain here; you must never leave this island." Well, 
 after a little while the man and his name was Adanii. and the woman's 
 name was Heva said to Ilcva: "I believe I'll look about a little." 
 He wanted to go West. He went to the western extremity of the island 
 where there was a liitle narrow neek of land connecting it with the 
 mainland, and the Devi!, who is always playing pranks with us, pro- 
 duced a mirapc, and when he looked over to the mainland, such hills 
 and vales, such dells and dales, such mountains crowned with snow,
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 119 
 
 such cataracts clad in bows of glory did he see there, that he went back 
 and told Heva : " The country over there is a thousand times better 
 than this; let us migrate." bhe, like every other woman that ever 
 lived, said : " Let well enough alone ; we have all we want ; let us stay 
 here." But he said : " No, let us go;" so she followed him, and when ; 
 they came to this narrow neck of land, he took her on his back like a 
 gentleman, and carried her over. But the moment they got over they , 
 heard a crash, and, looking back, discovered that this narrow neck of 
 land had fallen into the sea. The mirage had disappeared, and there 
 was naught but rocks and sand, and then the Supreme Brahma curse4 
 them both to the lowest Hell. 
 
 Then it was that the man spoke and I have liked him ever since for 
 it "Curse me, but curse not her ; it was not her fault, it was mine." 
 That's the kind of a man to start a world with. The Supreme Brahma 
 said : " I will save her but not thee." And then spoke out of her full- 
 ness of love, out of a heart in which there was love enough to make 
 all her daughters rich in holy affection, and said: "If thou wilt not 
 spare him, spare neither me; I do not wish to live without him, I 
 love him." Then the Supreme Brahma said and I have liked him 
 ever since I read it " I will spare you both, and watch over you and 
 your children forever." Honor bright, is that not the better and 
 grander story ? 
 
 And iu that same book I find this: " Man is strength, woman is\ 
 beauty; man is courage, woman is love. When the one man loves the j 
 one woman, and the one woman loves the one man, the very angels / 
 leave Heaven, and come and sit in that house, and sing for joy." In the \ 
 same book this : " Blessed is that man, and beloved of all the gods, who 
 is afraid of no man, and of whom no man is afraid." Magnificent char- , 
 acter! A missionary certainly ought to talk to that man. And I find 
 this: " Never will I accept private, individual salvation, but rather will 
 I stay and work, strive and suffer, until every soul from every star has 
 bc.n brought home to God." Compare that with the Christian that 
 expects to go to Heaven while the world is rolling over Niagara to an 
 eternal and unending Hell. So I say that religion lays all the crime and 
 troubles of this world at the beautiful feet of woman. And then the 
 church has the impudence to say that it has exalted women. I believe 
 that marriage is a perfect partnership ; that woman has every right that 
 man has and one more the right to be protected. Above all men in 
 the world I hate a stingy man a man that will make his wife beg for 
 money. "What did you do with the dollar I gave you last week?" 
 "And what are you going to do with this ? " It is vile. No gentleman 
 will ever be satisfied with the love of a beggar and a slave no gentle- 
 man will ever be satisfied except with the love of an equal. What kind
 
 120 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 of children does a man expect to have with a beggar for their mother? 
 A man can not be so poor but that he can be generous, and if you 
 only have one dollar in the world and you have got to spend it, spend 
 it like a lord spend it as though it were a dry leaf, and you the owner 
 of unbounded forests spend it as though you had a wilderness of your 
 own. That's the way to spend it. 
 
 C I had rather be a beggar and spend my last dollar like a king, than 
 be a king and spend my money like a beggar. If it has got to go let it 
 go. And this is my advice to the poor. For you can never be so poor 
 that whatever you do you can't do in a grand and manly way. I hate a 
 cross man. What right has a man to assassinate the joy of life ? When 
 you go home you ought to go like a ray of light so that it will, even 
 in the night, burst out of the doors and windows and illuminate the 
 darkness. Some men think their mighty brains have been in a turmoil ; 
 they have been thinking about who will be Alderman from the Fifth 
 Ward ; they have been thinking about politics, great and mighty ques- 
 tions have been engaging their minds, they have bought calico at five 
 cents or six, and want to sell it for seven. Think of the intellectual 
 strain that must have been upon that man, and when he gets home 
 everybody else in the house must look out for his comfort. A woman 
 who has only taken care of five or six children, and one or two of them 
 sick, has been nursing them and singing to them, and trying to make 
 one yard of cloth do the work of two, she, of course, is fresh and fine 
 and ready to wait upon this gentleman the head of the family the 
 boss! , 
 
 I was reading thb other day of an apparatus invented for the eject, 
 ment of gentlemen who subsist upon free lunches. It is so arranged 
 that when the fellow gets both hands into the victuals, a large hand 
 descends upon him, jams his hat over his eyes he is seized, turned 
 toward the door, and just in the nick of time an immense boot comes 
 from the other side, kicks him in italics, sends him out over the side- 
 walk and lands him rolling in the gutter. I never hear of such a 
 man a boss that I don't feel as though that machine ought to be 
 brought into requisition for his benefit. 
 
 Love is the only thing that will pay ten percent of interest on the out- 
 lay. Love is the only thing in which the height of extravagance is the 
 last degree of economy. It is the only thing, I tell you. Joy is wealth. 
 Love is the legal tender of the soul and you need not be rich to be 
 happy. We have all been raised on success in this country. Always 
 been talked with about being successful, and have never thought our- 
 selves very rich unless we were the possessors of some magnificent man- 
 sion, and unless our names have been between the putrid lips of rumor 
 we could not be happy. Every little boy is striving to be this and be
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 121 
 
 that. I tell you the happy man is the successful man. T^e man that 
 has won the love of one good woman is a successful man. The man 
 that has been the emperor of one good heart, and that heart embraced all 
 his, has been a success. If another has been the emperor of the round 
 world and has never loved and been loved, his life is a failure. It won't 
 do. Let us teach our children the other way, that the happy man is the 
 successful man, and he who is a happy man is the one who always tries 
 to make some one else happy. 
 
 The man who marries a woman to make her happy ; that marries her 
 as much for her own sake as for his own ; not the man that thinks his 
 wife is his property, who thinks that the title to her belongs to him 
 that the woman is the property of the man ; wretches who get mad at 
 their wives and then shoot them down in the street because they think 
 the woman is their property. I tell you it is not necessary to be rich 
 and great and powerful to be happy. 
 
 A little while ago I stood by the grave of the old Napoleon a mag- 1 
 nificent tomb of gilt and gold, fit almost for a dead deity and gazed 
 upon the sarcophagus of black Egyptian marble, where rest at last the 
 ashes of the restless man. I leaned over the balustrade and thought 
 about the career of the greatest soldier of the modern world. I saw him 
 walking upon the banks of the Seine, contemplating suicide I saw 
 him at Toulon I saw him putting down the mob in the streets of Paris 
 I saw him at the head of the army of Italy I saw him crossing the 
 bridge ot Lodi with the tri-color in his hand I saw him in Egypt in 
 the shadows of the pyramids I saw him conquer the Alps and mingle 
 the eagles of France with the eagles of the crags. I saw him at Marengo 
 at Ulm and Asterlitz. I saw him in Russia, where the infantry of the 
 snow and the cavalry of the wild blast scattered his legions like Winter'* 
 withered leaves. I saw him at Leipsic in defeat and disaster driven by 
 a million bayonets back upon Paris clutched like a wild beast ban- 
 ished to Elba. I saw him escape and retake an empire by the force of 
 his genius. I saw him upon the frightful field of Waterloo, where 
 chance and fate combined to wreck the fortunes of their former king. 
 And I saw him at St. Helena, with his hands crossed behind him, gazing 
 out upon the sad and solemn sea. I thought of the orphans and widows 
 he had made of the tears that had been shed for his glory, and of the 
 only woman who ever loved him, pushed from his heart by the cold 
 hand of ambition. And I said I would rather have been a French peas- 
 ant and worn wooden shoes. I would rather have lived in a hut with a 
 vine growing over the door, and the grapes growing purple in the kisses 
 of the Autumn sun. I would rather have been that poor peasant with 
 my loving wife by my side, knitting as the day died out of the sky 
 with my children upon my knees and their arms about me. I would
 
 122 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 r~ 
 
 rather have been that man and gone down to the tongueless silence of 
 the dreamless dust, than to have been that imperial impersonation of 
 force and murder known as Napoleon the Great. It is not necessary tc 
 be rich in order to be happy. It is only necessary to be in love. Thou- 
 sands of men go to college and get a certificate that they have an edu- 
 cation, and that certificate is in Latin and they stop studying, and in twc 
 years to save their life taey couldn't read tlie certificate they got. 
 
 It is mostly so in marrying. They stop courting when they get mar- 
 ried. They think, we have won her and that is enough. Ah! the differ- 
 nce before and after! How well they look! How bright their eyes! 
 How light their steps, and how full they were of generosity and laughter/ 
 I tell you a man should consider himself in good luck if a woman loves 
 him when he is doing his level best ! Good luck! Good luck! And 
 another thing that is the cause of much trouble is that people don't count 
 fairly. They do what they call putting their best foot forward. That 
 means lying a little. I say put your worst foot forward. If you have 
 got any faults admit them. If you drink, say so and quit it. If you 
 chew and smoke and swear, say so. If some of your kindred are not 
 very good people, say so. If you have had two or thrtethat died on the 
 gallows, or that ought to have died there, say so. Tell all your faults, 
 and if after she knows your faults she says she will have you, you have 
 got the dead wood on that woman forever. I claim that there should be 
 perfect equality in the home, and I can not think of anything nearer 
 Heaven than a home where there is true republicanism and true democ- 
 racy at the fireside. All are equal. 
 
 And then, do you know, I like to thiuk that love is eternal; that li 
 you really love the woman, for her sake, j'ou will love her no mattef 
 what she may do; that if she really loves you, for your sake, the same; 
 that love does not look at alterations, through the wrinkles of time, 
 through the mask of years if you really love her you will always see 
 the face you loved and won. And I like t > think of it. If a man loves 
 a woman she does not ever grow.old to him, and the woman who really 
 loves a man doc-s not see that he grows old. He is not decrepit to her. 
 He is not tremulous. He is not old. He is not bowed. Slic always 
 sees the same gallant fellow that won her hand and heart. I like to 
 think of it in that way, and as Shakspearc says: " Let Tune reach with 
 his sickle as far us ever he cau ; although he can reach ruddy cheeks and 
 ripe lips, and flushing eyes, he can not quite reach love." I like to think 
 of it. We will go down the hill of life together, and enter the shadow 
 one with the other, and as we go down we may hear the ripple of the 
 laughter of our grandchildren, and the birds, and spring, and youth, and 
 lovo will sing once more upo*n the leafless brunches of the tree of age.
 
 BKULLX AND REPLIES. 123 
 
 I love to think of it in that way absolute equals, happy, happy, and 
 free, ah our own. 
 
 But some people say : "Would you allow a woman to vote?" Yes, 
 if she wants to; that is her business, not mine. If a woman wants to 
 vote, I am too much of a gentleman to say she shall not. But they say 
 woman has not sense enough to vote. It don't take much. But it seems 
 to me there are some questions r as for instance, the question of peace and 
 war, that a woman should be allowed to vote upon. A woman that has 
 sons to be offered on the altar of that Moloch, it seems to me that such a 
 grand woman should have as much right to vote upon the question of 
 peace and war as some thrice-besotted sot that reels to the ballot box and 
 deposits his vote for war. But if women have been slaves, what shall 
 we say of the little children born in the sub-cellars; children of poverty, 
 children of crime, children of wealth, children that are afraid when 
 they hear their nuines pronounced by the lips of the mother, children 
 that cower in fear when they hear the footsteps of their brutal father, 
 the flotsam and jetsam upon the rude sea of life, my heart goes out to 
 them one and all. 
 
 Children have all the rights that we have and one more, and that is to 
 be protected. Treat your children in that way. Suppose yourchild tells 
 a lie. Don't pretend that the whole world is going into bankruptcy. 
 Don't pretend that that is the first lie ever told. Tell them, like an hon- 
 est man, that you have told hundreds of lies yourself, and tell the dear 
 little darling that it is not the best way ; that it soils the soul. Think of 
 the man that deals in stocks whipping his children for putting false 
 Tumors afloat! Think of an orthodox minister whipping his own flesh 
 and blood, for not telling all it thinks! Think of that! Think of a 
 lawyer beating his child for avoiding the truth! when the old man 
 makes about half his living that way. A lie is born of weakness on one 
 ide and tyranny on the other. That is what it is. Think of a great big 
 man coming at a little bit of a child with a club in his hand! What is 
 the little darling to do? Lie, of course. I think that mother Nature 
 put that ingenuity into the mind of the child, when attacked by a parent, 
 to throw up a little breastwork in the shape of a lie to defend itself. 
 When a great general wins a battle by what they call strategy, we build 
 monuments to him. What is strategy ? Lies. Suppose a man as much 
 larger than we are as we are larger than a child five years of age, should 
 come at us with a liberty pole in his hand, and in tones of thunder want 
 to know " who broke that plate," there isn't one of us, not excepting 
 myself, that wouldn't swear that we never had seen that plate in our 
 lives, or that it was cracked when we got it. 
 
 Another good way to make children tell the truth is to tell it yourself. 
 Keep your word with your child the same as you would with your
 
 124 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 banker. If you tell a child you will do anything, either do it or give 
 the child the reason why. Truth is born of confidence. It comes from 
 the lips of love and liberty. I was over in Michigan the other day. 
 There was a boy over there at Grand Rapids about five or six years old, 
 a nice, smart boy, as you will see from the remark he made what you 
 might call a nineteenth century boy. His father and mother had prom- 
 ised to take him out riding. They had promised to take him out riding 
 for about three weeks, and they would slip off" and go without him. 
 Well, after a while, that got kind of played out with the little boy, and 
 the day before I was there they played the trick on him again. They 
 went out and got the carriage, and went away, and as they rode away 
 from the front of the house, he happened to be standing there with hi 
 nurse, and he saw them. The whole thing flashed on him in a moment. 
 He took in the situation, and turned to his nurse and said, pointing to 
 
 his father and mother: "There goes the two d 1 liars in the State of 
 
 Michigan ! " When you go home fill the house with joy, so that the 
 light of it will stream out the windows and doors, and illuminate even 
 the darkness. It is just as easy that way as any in the world. 
 
 I want to tell you to-night that you can not get the robe of hypocrisy 
 on you so thick that the sharp eye of childhood will not see through 
 every veil, and if you pretend to your children that you are the best man 
 that ever lived the bravest man that ever lived they will find you out 
 every time. They will not have the same opinion of father when they 
 grow up that they used to have. They will have to be in mighty bad 
 luck if they ever do meaner things than you have done. When your 
 child confesses to you that it has committed a fault, take that child in 
 your arms, and let it leel your heartbeat against its heart, and raise your 
 children in the sunlight of love, and they will be sunbeams to you 
 along the pathway of life. Abolish the club and the whip from the 
 house, because, if the civilized use a whip, the ignorant and the brutal 
 will use a club, and they will use it because you use the whip. 
 
 Every little while some door is thrown open in some orphan asylum 
 and there we see the bleeding back of a child whipped beneath the roof 
 / that was raised by love. It is infamous, and the man that can't raise a 
 child without the whip ought not to have a child. If there is one of 
 you here that ever expect to whip your child again, let me ask you some- 
 thing. Have your photograph taken at the time and let it show your 
 face red with vulgar anger, and the face of the little one with eyes- 
 swimming in tears, and the little chin dimpled with fear, looking like a 
 piece of water struck by a sudden cold wind. If that little child should 
 die, I can not think of a sweeter way to spend an Autumn afternoon 
 than to take that photograph and go to the cemetery, when the maples 
 are clad in tender gold, and when little scarlet runners are coming from
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 135 
 
 the sad heart of the earth, and sit down upon that mound, and look upon 
 that photograph, and think of the flesh, now dust, that you beat. Just 
 think of it. I could not bear to die in the arms of a child that I had 
 whipped. I could not bear to feel upon my lips, when they were 
 withered beneath the touch of death, the kiss of one that I had struck. 
 Some Christians act as though they really thought that when Christ 
 said, "Suffer little children to come unto me," He had a rawhide under 
 His coat. They act as though they really thought that He made that 
 remark simply to get the children within striking distance. 
 
 I have known Christians to turn their children from their doors, 
 especially a daughter, and then get down on their knees and pray to God 
 to watch over them and help them. I will never ask God to help my 
 children unless I am doing my level best in that same wretched line. 
 i will U-ll you what I say to my girls^ " Go where you will ; do what 
 crime you may; fall to what depth of degradation you may; in all the 
 storms and winds and earthquakes of life, no matter what you do, you 
 never can commit any crime that will shut my door, my arms or my 
 heart to you. As long as I live you shall have one sincere friend." Call 
 me an antheist; call me an infidel because I hate the God of the Jew 
 which I do. I intend so to live that when 1 die my children can come 
 to my grave and truthfully say : " He who sleeps here never gave us one 
 moment of pain." 
 
 When I was a boy there was one day in each week too good for a 
 child to be happy in. In these good old times Sunday commenced when 
 the sun went down on Saturday night, and closed when the sun went 
 down on Sunday night. We commenced Saturday to get a good ready. 
 And when the sun went down Saturday night there was a gloom deeper 
 than midnight that fell upon the house. You could not crack hickory 
 nuts then. And if you were caught chewing gum, it was only another 
 evidence of the total depravity of the human heart. Well, after a while 
 we got to bed sadly and sorrowfully after having heard Heaven thanked 
 that we were not all in Hell. And I sometimes used to wonder how the 
 mercy of God lasted as long as it did. because I recollected that on sev- 
 eral occasions I had not been at school, when I was supposed to be there. 
 Why I was not burned to a crisp was a mystery to me. The next morn- 
 ing we got up and we got ready for church all solemn, and when we got 
 there the minister was up in the pulpit, about twenty feet high, and he 
 commenced at Genesis about " The fall of man," and he went on to about 
 twenty thirdly; then he struck the second application, and when he 
 struck the application I knew he was about half way through. And 
 then he went on to show the scheme how the Lord was satisfied by pun- 
 ishing the wrong man. Nobody but a God would have thought of that 
 ingenious way. Well, when he got through that, then came the catechism
 
 126 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 the chief end of man. Then my turn came, and we sat along on a little 
 bench where our feet came wit hm about fifteen inches of the 1 floor, and the 
 dear old minister used to ask us: 
 
 "Boys, do you know that yon ought to be in Hell ?" 
 
 And we answered up as cheerfully as could be expected under the cir- 
 cumstances : 
 
 " Yes, sir." 
 
 " Well, boys, do you know that you would go to Hell if you died in 
 your sins?" 
 
 And we said : " Yes, air." 
 
 And theu came the great test : 
 
 "Boys" I can't get the tone, you know. And do you know that i 
 how the preachers get the bronchitis. You never heard of an auctioneer 
 getting the bronchitis, nor the wecond mate on a steamboat never. 
 What gives it to the minister is talking solemnly when they don't feel 
 that way, and it has the same influence upon the organs of speech that 
 it would have upon the curds of the calves of your legs to walk on your 
 tip-toes, and so I call bronchitis " parsonitis." And if the ministers- 
 would all tell exactly what they think they would all get well, but keep- 
 ing back ii part of the truth is what gives them bronchitis. 
 
 Well the old man the dear old minister used to try and show u 
 how long we would be in Hell if we would only locate there. But to 
 finish the .other. The grand test question was : 
 
 " Boys, if it was God's will that you should go to Hell, would you be 
 willing to go?" 
 
 And every little liar said : 
 
 " Yes, sir." 
 
 Then, in ort'er to tell how long we would stay there, he used to eay: 
 
 "Suppose once in a billion ages a bird should come fr*m a far distant 
 clime and carry off in its bill one little grain of aand, the time would 
 finally come when the last grain of sand would be carried away. Do 
 you understand? 
 
 " Yes, sir." 
 
 " Boys, by that time it would not be sun-up in Hell." 
 
 Where did that doctrine of II ell come from ? I will tell you ; from that 
 fellow m the dug-out. Where did he get it? It was a souvenir from 
 the wild beasts. Yes, I tell you he got it from the wild beasts, from the 
 glittering eye of the serpent, from the coiling, twisting snakes with their 
 fangs mouths ; and it came from the bark, growl and howl of wild beasts ; 
 it was born of a laugh of the hyena and got it from the depraved chatter 
 of malicious apes. And I despise it with every drop of my blood and 
 defy it. If there is any God in this universe who will damn his children 
 for an expression of an honest thought I wish to go to Hell. I would
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 127 
 
 Bather go there than go to Heaven and keep the company of a God that 
 would thus damn his children. Oh ! it is an infamous doctrine to teach 
 chattolittlechildren, toput a shadow in the heartof a child to fill the in- 
 sane asylums with that miserable, infamous lie. I see now and then a 
 little girl a dear little darling, with a face like the light, and eyes of 
 joy, a human blossom, and I think, " is it possible that little girl will 
 ever grow up to be a Presbyterian ?*' Is it possible, my goodness, that 
 that flower will finally believe in the five points of Calvinism or in the 
 eternal damnation of man?" Is it possible that that little fairy will 
 finally believe that she could be happy in Heaven with her baby in Hell ? 
 Think of it ! Think of it ! And that is the Christian religion ! 
 
 We cry out against the Indian mother that throws her child into the 
 Ganges to be devoured by the alligator or crocodile, but that is joy in 
 comparison with the Christian mother's hope, that she may be in salva- 
 tion while her brave boy is in Hell. 
 
 I tell you I want to kick the doctrine about Hell I want to kick it out 
 every time I go by it. I want to get Americans in this country placed 
 so they will be ashamed to preach it. I want to get the congregations so 
 that they won't listen to it. We can not divide the world off into 
 saints and sinners in that way. There is a little girl, fair as a flower*, 
 and she grows up until she is twelve, thirteen, or fourteen years old. 
 Are you going to damn her in the fifteenth, sixteenth or seventeenth year, 
 when the arrow from Cupid's bow touches her heart and she is glorified 
 are you going to damn her now ? She marries and loves, and holds in 
 her arms a beautiful child. Are you going to damn her now ? When are 
 you going to damn her? Because she has listened to some Methodist 
 minister and after all that flood of light failed to believe ? Are you 
 going to damn her then ? I tell you God can not afford to damn such a 
 woman. 
 
 A woman in the State of Indiana forty or filty years ago who carded 
 the wool and made rolls and spun them, and made the cloth and cut out 
 the clothes for the children, and nursed them, and sat up with them 
 nights and gave them medicine, and held th<-m in her arms and wept 
 over them cried for joy and wept for fear, and finally raised ten or 
 eleven good men and women with the ruddy glow of health upon their 
 cheeks, and she would have died for any one of them any moment of 
 her life, and finally she, bowed with age and bent with care and labor, 
 dies, and at the moment the magical touch of death is upon her face, 
 she looks as though she never had had a care, and her children burying her 
 cover her face with tears. Do you tell me God can afford to damn that 
 kind of a woman? One such act of injustice would turn Heaven itself 
 into Hell. If there is any God, sitting above him in infinite serenity we 
 have the figure of justice. Even a God must do justice; even a God
 
 128 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. 
 
 must worship justice; and any form of superstition that destroys justice 
 is infamous ! Just think of teaching that doctrine to little children ! A 
 little child would go out into the garden, and there would be a little tree 
 laden with blossoms, and the little fellow would lean against it, and 
 there would be a bird on one of the bows, singing and swinging, and 
 thinking about four liiue speckled eyes warmed by the breast of its 
 mate, singing and swinging, and the music in happy waves rippling 
 out of the tiny throat, and the flowers blossoming, the air filled with 
 perfume, and the great white clouds floating in the sky, and the little boy 
 would lean up against the tree and think about Hell and the worm that 
 never dies. Oh ! the idea there can be any day too good for a child to 
 be happy in ! 
 
 Well, after we got over the catechism, then came the sermon in the 
 afternoon, and it was exactly like the one in the fore-noon, except the 
 other end.lQt, Then we started for home a solemn march " not a soldier 
 discharged his farewell shot" and when we got home if we had been 
 real good boys we used to be taken up to the cemetery to cheer us up, 
 and it always did cheer me, those sunken graves, those leaning stones, 
 those gloomy epitaphs covered with the moss of years always cheered 
 me. When I looked at them I said : "Well, this kind of thing can't 
 last always." Then we came back home, and we hud books to read 
 which were very eloquent and amusing. We had Josephus, and the 
 " History of the Waldenses," and "Fox's Book of Martyrs," Baxter's 
 "Saint's Rest," and "Jenkyu on the Atonement." I used to read 
 Jenkyu with a good deal of pleasure, and I often thought that the atone- 
 ment would have to be very broad in its provisions to cover the case of 
 & man that would write such a book for the boys. Then I would look 
 to see how the sun was getting on, and sometimes I thougt it had stuck 
 from pure cussedness. Then I would go back and try Jenkyn's again. 
 Well, but it had to go down, and when the last rim of light sank below 
 the horizon, off would go our hats and we would give three cheers for 
 liberty once again. 
 
 I tell you, don't make slaves of your children on Sunday. 
 
 The idea that there is any God that hates to hear a child laugh ! Lot 
 your children play games on Sunday. Here is a poor man that hasn't 
 money enough to go to a big church and he has too much independence 
 to go to a little church that the big church built for charity. He don't 
 want to slide into Heaven that way. I tell you don't come to church, 
 but go to the woods and take your family and a lunch with you, and sit 
 down upon the old log and let the children gather flowers and hear the 
 leaves whispering poems like memories of long ago, and when the sun is 
 about going down, kissing the summits of far hills, go home with your 
 hearts filled with throbs of joy. There is more recreation and joy in that
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 139 
 
 than fir?n<r to a dry goods box with a steeple on top of it and hearing a 
 man tell you that your chances are about ninety-nine to one for being 
 eternally damned. Let us make this Sunday a day of splendid pleasure, 
 not to excess, but to everything that makes man purer and grander and 
 nobler. I would like to see now something like this: Instead of so 
 mauy churches, a vast cathedral that would hold twenty or thirty thou- 
 sand of people, and I would like tosee an opera produced in it that would 
 make the souls of men have higher and grander and nobler aims. I 
 would like to see the walls covered with pictures and the niches rich 
 with statuary; I would like to see something put there that you could 
 use iu this world now, and I do not believe in sacrificing the present to 
 the future ; I do not believe in drinking skimmed milk here with the 
 promise of butler beyond the clouds. Space or time can not be holy any 
 more than a vacuum can be pious. Not a bit, not a bit ; and no day can 
 be so holy but what the laugh of a child will make it holier still. 
 
 Strike with hand of fire, on, weird musician, thy harp, strung with 
 Apollo's golden hair! Fill the vast cathedral aisles with symphonies 
 sweet and dim, deft toucher of the organ's keys; blow, bugler, blow 
 until thy silver notes do touch and kiss the moonlit waves, and charm 
 the lovers wandering 'mid the vine-clad hills. But know your sweetest 
 strains are discords all compared with childhood's happy laugh the 
 laugh that fills the eyes with light and every heart with joy ! O, rippling 
 river of laughter, thou art the blessed boundary line between the beasts 
 and men, and every wayward wave of thine doth drown some fretful 
 fiend of care. O Laughter, rose lipped daughter of Joy, there are dim- 
 pies enough in thy cheeks to catch and hold and glorify all the tears of 
 grief. 
 
 Don't plant your children in long, straight rows, like posts. Let them 
 have light and air and let them grow beautiful as palms. When I was 
 a little boy children went to bed when they were not sleepy, and always 
 got up when they were. I would like to see that changed, but they say 
 we are too poor, some of us, to do it. Well, all right. It is as easy to ^ 
 wake a child with a kiss as with a blow; with kindness as with a curse, ( 
 And, another thing; let the children eat what they want to. Let them j 
 commence at whichever end of the dinner they desire. That is ray doc- 
 trine. They know what they want much better than you do. Nature 
 is a great deal smarter than you ever were. 
 
 All the advance that has been made in the science of medicine, has 
 been made by the recklessness of patients. I can recollect when they 
 wouldn't give a man water in a fever not a drop. Now and then some 
 fellow would get so thirsty he would say : " Well, I'll die any way, so 
 I'll drink it," and thereupon he would drink a gallon of water, and 
 thereupon he would burst into a generous perspiration, and get well
 
 130 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 and the next morning when the doctor would come to see him they 
 would tell him about the man drinking the water, and he would say; 
 "How much?" 
 
 "Well, he swallowed two pitchers full." 
 
 "Is he alive?" 
 
 " Yes." 
 
 So they would go into the room and the doctor would feel his pulse 
 and ask him : 
 
 " Did you drink two pitchers of water?" 
 
 " Yes." 
 
 " My God ! what a constitution you have got." 
 
 I tell you there is something splendid in man that will not always 
 mind. Why, if we had done as the kings told us five hundred years 
 ago, we would all have been slaves. If we had done as the priests told 
 us we would all have been idiots. If we had done as the doctors told 
 us we would all have been dead. We have been saved by disobedience. 
 We have been saved by that splendid thing called independence, and I 
 want to see more of it, day after day, and I want to see children raised 
 so they will have it. That is my doctrine. Give the children a chance. 
 Be perfectly honor bright with them, and they will be your friends when 
 you are old. Don't try to teach them something they can never learn. 
 Don't insist upon their pursuing some calling they have no sort of fac- 
 ulty for. Don't make that poor girl play ten years on a piano when she 
 has no ear for music, and when she has practiced until she can play 
 " Bonaparte crossing the Alps," and you can't tell after she has played 
 it whether Bonaparte ever got across or not. Men are oaks, women are 
 vines, children are flowers, and if there is any Heaven in this world, it ia 
 in the family. It is where the wife loves the husband, and the husband 
 loves the wife, and where the dimpled arms of children are about the 
 necks of both. That is Heaven, if there is any and I do not want any 
 better Heaven in another world than that, and if in another world I can 
 not live with the ones I loved here, then I would rather not be there. 
 I would rather resign. 
 
 Well, my friends, I have some excuses to make for the race to which 
 I belong. In the first place, this world is not very well adapted to rais- 
 ing good men and good women. It is three times better adapted to the 
 cultivation of fish than of people. There is one little narrow beltrunning 
 zigag around the world, in which men and women of genius can be 
 raised, and that is all. It is with man as it is with vegetation. In the 
 valley you find the oak and elm tossing their branches defiantly to the 
 storm, and as you advance up the mountain side the hemlock, the pine, 
 the birch, the spruce, the fir, and finally you come to little dwarfed trees, 
 that look like other trees seen through a telescope reversed every limb
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 131 
 
 twisted as through pain getting a scanty substance from the miserly 
 crevices of the rocks. You go on and on, until at last the highest crag is 
 freckled with, a kind of moss, and vegetation ends. You might as well 
 try to raise oaks and elins where the mosses grow, as to raise great mea 
 and great women where their surroundings are unfavorable. You must 
 have the proper climate and soil. 
 
 There never has been a mm or woman of genius from thepouihern 
 hemisphere, because the Lord didn't allow tlie right climate to fall upon 
 the land. It falls upon the water. There never was much civilization 
 except where there has been snow, and ordinarily decent Winter. You 
 can't have civilization without it. Where man needs no bedclothes but 
 clouds, revolution is the normal condition of such a people. It is tlie 
 Winter that gives us the home; it is the Winter that gives us the fireside 
 and the family relation and all the beautiful flowers of love that adorn 
 that relation. Civilization, liberty, justice, charity and intellectual 
 advancement are all flowers that bloom in the drilled snow. You can't 
 have them anywhere else, and that is the reason we of the north are 
 civilized, and thai is the reason that civilization has always been with 
 Winter. That is the reason that philosophy has been here, and, in spite 
 of all our superstitions, we have advanced beyond some of the other 
 races, because we have had this assistance of nature, that drove us into 
 the family relation, that made us prudent; that made us lay up at one 
 time ior another season of the year. So there is one excuse I have for 
 my race. 
 
 I have got another. I think we came from the lower animals. I am 
 not dead sure of it, but think so. When I flist read about it I didn't 
 like it. My heart was filled with sympathy for those people leave noth- 
 ing to be proud of except ancestors. I thought how terrible this will be 
 upon tlie nobility of the old world. Think of t'.ieir being forced to trace 
 their ancestry back to the Duke Orang Outan.^ or to the Princess Chim- 
 panzee. After thinking U all over I came to the conclusion that I liked 
 that doctrine. I became convinced in spile of myself. I read about 
 rudimentary bones and muscles. I was toKI that everybody had rudi- 
 mentary muscles extending from the ear into the cheek. I asked: 
 " What are they ?" I was told : " They are the remains of muscles ; that 
 they became rudimentary from the lack of use." They went into bank- 
 ruptcy. They are the muscles with which your ancestors used to flap 
 their cars. Well, at first, I was greatly astonished, nod afterward I was 
 more astonished to find they had become rudimentary. How can you 
 Account for John Calv:n unless we came u;> from the lower animals? 
 How could you account for a man that would use the extremes of torture 
 unless 3'ou admit that there is in man the elements of n snake, cf .1 vul- 
 ture, a hyena, and a jackal? How can you account for the religious
 
 133 MISTAKES OF INQERSOLL. 
 
 creeds of to-day ? How can you account for that infamous doctrine of 
 Hell, except with an animal origin ? How can you account for your 
 conception of a God that would sell women and babes into slavery ? 
 
 Well, I thought that thing over and I began to like it after a while, 
 and I said : " It is not so much difference who my father was as who his- 
 son is." And I finally said I would rather belong to a race that com- 
 menced with the skulless vertebrates in the dim Laurentian seas, that 
 wriggled without knowing why they wriggled, swimming without know- 
 ing where they were going, that come along up by degrees through, 
 millions of ages, through all that crawls, and swims, and floats, and runs, 
 and growls, and barks, and howls, until it struck this fellow in the dug- 
 out. And then that fellow in the dug-out getting a little grander, and 
 each one below calling every one above him a heretic, calling every one 
 who had made a little advance an infidel or an atheist, and finally the 
 heads getting a little higher and donning up a little grander and more 
 splendidly, and finally produced Shakspeare, who harvested all the field 
 of dramatic thought and from whose day until now there have been none 
 but gleaners of chaff and straw. Shakspeare was an intellectual ocean 
 whose waves touched all the shores of human thought, within which 
 were all the tides and currents and pulses upon which lay all the lights 
 and shadows, and over which brooded all the calms, and swept all the 
 storms and tempests of which the soul is capable. I would rather belong 
 to that race that commenced with that skulless vertebrate ; that produced 
 Shakspeare, a race that has before it an infinite future, with the angel 
 of progress leaning from the far horizon, beckoning men forward and 
 upward forever. I would rather belong to that race than to have de- 
 scended from a perfect pair upon which the Lord has lost money every 
 moment from that day to this. 
 
 Now, my crime lias been this: I have insisted that the Bible is not 
 the word of God. I have insisted that we should not whip oui children. 
 I have insisted that we should treat our wives as loving equals. I have 
 denied that God if there is any God ever upheld polygamy and slav- 
 ery. I have denied that that God ever told his generals to kill innocent 
 babes and tear and rip open women with the sword of war. I have 
 denied that, and for that I have been assailed by the clergy of the United 
 States. They tell me I have misquoted ; and I owe it to you, and maybe 
 I owe it to myself, to read one or two words to you upon this subject 
 In order to do that I shall have to put on my glasses; and that brings 
 me back to where I started that man has advanced just in proportion 
 as his thought has mingled with his labor. If man's eyes hadn't failed 
 he would never have made nny spectacles, he would never have had the 
 telescope, and he never would have been able to read the leaves of 
 Heaven.
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 133 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll's Reply to Dr. Collyer. 
 
 Now, they tell me and there are several gentlemen who have spoken 
 on this subject the Rev. Mr. Collyer, a gentleman standing as high as 
 anybody, and I have nothing to say against him, because I denounce a 
 God who upheld murder, and slavery and polygamy, he says that what 
 I said was slang. I would like to have it compared with any sermon 
 that ever issued from the lips of that gentleman. And before he gets 
 through he admits that the Old Testament is a rotten tree that will soon 
 fall into the earth and act as a fertilizer for his doctrine. 
 
 Is it honest in that man to assail my motive? Let him answer my 
 argument! Is it honest and fair in him to say I am doing a certain 
 thing because it is popular? Has it got to this, that, in this Christian 
 country, where they have preached every day hundreds and thousands 
 of sermons has it got to this that infidelity is so popular in the United 
 Slates ? 
 
 If it has, I take courage. And I not only see the dawn of a brighter 
 <3ay, but the day is here. Think of it ! A minister tells me in this year 
 of grace, 1879, that a man is an infidel simply that he may be popular. 
 I am glad of it. Simply that he may make money. Is it possible 
 that we can make more money tearing up churches than in building 
 them up? Is it possible that we can make more money denouncing the 
 God of slavery than we can praising the God that took liberty from man ? 
 tf so, I am glad. 
 
 I call publicly upon Robert Collyer a man for whom I have great 
 r espect I call publicly upon Robert Collyer to state to the people of 
 this city whether he believes the Old Testament was inspired. I call 
 upon him to state whether he believes that God ever upheld these 
 institutions; whether he believes that God was a polygamist; whether 
 he believes that God commanded Moses or Joshua or any one else to 
 slay little children iu the cradle. Do you believe that Robert Collyer 
 would obey such an order? Do you believe that he would rush to the 
 cradle and drive the knife of theological hatred to the tender heart of a 
 dimpled child ? And yet when I denounce a God that will give such a 
 hellish order, he says it is slang. 
 
 I want him to answer; and when he answers he will say he does not 
 believe the Bible is inspired. That is what he will say, and he holds 
 these old worthies iu the same contempt that I do. Suppose he should 
 act like Abraham. Suppose he should send some woman out into the 
 -wilderness with his child in her arms to starve, would be think that 
 mankind ought to hold his name up forever, for reverence? 
 
 Robert Collyer says that we should read and scan every word of the 
 Old Testament with reverence; that we should take this book up with
 
 134 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 reverential hands. I deny it. We should read it as we do every other 
 book, and everything good in it, keep it; and everything that shocks 
 the brain and shocks the heart, throw it away. Let U3 be honest. 
 
 Mr. Ingersoll'a Reply to Prof. Swing. 
 
 Prof. Swing has made a few remarks on this subject, and I say the 
 spirit he has exhibited has been as gentle and as sweet as the perfume of a 
 flower. He was too good a man to stay in the Presbyterian church. 
 lie was a rose among thistles. He was a dove among vultures and they 
 hunted him out, and I am glad he came out. I tell all the churches to 
 drive all such men out, and when he comes I want him to state just 
 what lie thinks. I want him to tell the people of Ctiicago whether he 
 believes the Bible is inspired in any sense except that in which Shaks- 
 peare was inspired. H >nor bright I tell you that all the sweet and 
 beautiful things in the Bible would not make one play of Shakspcure, all 
 the philosophy in the world would not make one scene iti Hamlet, all 
 the beauties of the Bible would net make one scene in the Midsummer 
 Night's Dream; all the beautiful things about woman in the Bible 
 would not begin to create such a character as Perdita or Imogene or 
 Miranda. Not one. 
 
 I want him to tell whether he believes the Bible was inspired in any 
 other way than Shakspcare was inspired. I want him to pick out 
 something as beautiful and tender as Burns' poem to Mary in Heaven. 
 I want him to tell whether he believes the story about the bears eating 
 up children; whether that is inspired. I want him to tell whether he 
 considers that a poem or not. I want to know if the same God made 
 those bears that devoured the children because they laughed at an old 
 man out of hair. I want to know if the same God that did that is the 
 same God who said, " Suffer little children to come unto me, for such is 
 the kingdom of Heaven." I want him to answer it, and answer it 
 fairly. Th:it is all I ask. I want just the fair thing. 
 
 Now, sometimes Mr. Swing talks us though he believed the Bible, 
 and then ho talks to me as though he didn't believe the Bible. The day 
 he made this sermon I think he di I, just a little, believe it. He is like 
 the man that passed a ten dollar counterfeit bill. He was arrested, and: 
 his father went to see him and said, "John, how could you commit such 
 a crime? How could you bring my gray hairs in sorrow to the grave?" 
 "Well," he says, "father, I'll tell you. I got this bill and some days I 
 thought it was bad and some days I thought it was good, and one day 
 when I thought if. was good I passed it." 
 
 I want it distinctly understood that I have the greatest respect for 
 Prof. Swing, but I want him to tell whether the 109lh psalm is inspired.
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 135 
 
 I want nim to tell whether the passages I shall afterward read in this 
 book are inspired. That is what I want. 
 
 Ingersoll's Reply to Brooke Herford, D.D. 
 
 Then there is another gentleman here. His name is Herford. He 
 says it is not fair to apply the test of truth to the Bible I don't think 
 it is myself. He says although Moses upheld slavery, that he improved 
 it. They were not quite as bad as they, were before, and Heaven justified 
 slavery at that time. Do you believe that God ever turned the arms of 
 children into chains of slavery ? Do you believe that God ever suid to a 
 man: "You can't have your wife ualess you will be a slave! You 
 cannot have your children unless you will lose your liberty; and un- 
 less you are willing to throw them from your heart forever, you 
 cannot be free?" I want Mr. Hcrford to state whether he loves 
 such a God. Be honor bright about it. Don't begin to talk about 
 civilization, or what the church has done or will do. Just walk right 
 up to the ruck and say whether you love and worship a God that estab- 
 lished slavery. Honest! And love and worship a God that would 
 allow a little babe to be torn from the breast of its mother and sold into 
 slavery. Now tell it fair, Mr. Herford, I want you to tell the ladies in 
 your congregation that you believe in a God that allowed women to be 
 given to the soldiers. Tell them that, and then if you say it was not the 
 God of Moses, then don't praise Moses any more. Don't do it. * Answer 
 these questions. 
 
 The Ingersoll Gattling Gun Turned on Dr. Ryder. 
 
 Then here is another gentleman, Mr. Ryder, the Rev. Mr. Ryder, and 
 he says that Calvinism is rejected by a majority of Christendom. He is 
 mistaken. There is what they call the Evangelical Alliance. They met 
 in this country in 1875 or 1876, and there were present representatives of 
 all the evangelical churches in the world, and they adopted a creed, and 
 that creed is that man is totally depraved. That creed is that there is an 
 eternal, universal Hell, and that every man that docs not believe in a cer- 
 tain way is bound to be damned forever, and that there is only one way 
 to be saved, and that is by fuith, and by faith, alone ; and they would not 
 allow anybody to be represented there that did not believe that, and they 
 would not allow a Uuitariau there, and would not have allowed Dr. 
 Ryder there, because he takes away from the Christian world the conso- 
 lation naturally arising from the belief in Hell. 
 
 Dr. Ryder is mistaken. All the orthodox religion of the day is Cal- 
 vinism. It believes in the fall of man. It believes in the atonement. 
 It believes in the eternity of Hell, and it believes in salvation by faith; 
 that is to say, by credulity.
 
 130 MISTAKES OF 1NGERSOLL. 
 
 That is what they believe, and he is mistaken ; and I want to tell Dr. 
 R}'der to-day, if there is a God, and lie wrote the Old Testament, there 
 is a Hell. The God that wrote the Old Testament will have a flell. 
 And I want to tell Dr. Ryder another thing, that the Bible k-aches an 
 eternity of punishment. want t> tell him that the Bible upholds the 
 doctrine ot Hell. I want to tell him that if there is no lleil, somebody 
 ought to have said so, and Jesus Christ himself should not have said: 
 " I will at the lust day say : ' Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting 
 fire prepared for the devil and his angels.'" It* there \vas not such a 
 place, Christ would not have said: ''Depart from me, ye cursed, and 
 these shall go hence into everlasting fire." And if you, Dr. Ryder, are 
 depending for salvation on the God that wrote the Old Testament, you 
 will inevitably be et-Tnally damned. 
 
 There is no hope for you. It is just as bad to deny Hell as it is to 
 deny Heaven. It is just as much blasphemy to deny the devil as to 
 deny God, according to the orthodox creed. Ho admits that the Jews 
 were polygamists, but, he says, h.>w was it they finally quit ii ? lean 
 tell 3 T ou the soil was so poor they couldn't afford it. Prof. Swing says 
 the Bible is a poem. Dr. Ryder says it is a picture. The Garden of 
 Eden is pictorial; a pictorial snake and a pictorial woman, I suppose, 
 and a pictorial man, and maybe it was a pictorial sin. And only a 
 pictorial atonement. 
 
 Ingeraoll's Reply to Rabbi Bien. 
 
 Then there is another gentleman, and ho a rabbi, a Rabbi Bien, or 
 Bean, or whatever his name i*, and lie comes to the defense of the Great 
 Law-giver. There was another rabbi who attacked me in Cincinnati, 
 and I couldn't help but think of the old saying, that a man got off when 
 he said the tallest man he ever knew, his name was Short. And the 
 fattest man he ever saw, his name was Lean. And it is only necessary 
 for me to add that this rabbi in Cincinnati was Wise. 
 
 The rabbi here, I will not answer him, and I will tell you why. Be- 
 cause he has taken himself outside of all tire limits of a gentleman; 
 because he has taken it upon himself to traduce American womeu in 
 language the beastliest I ever read; and any man who says that the 
 American women are not just as good women as nny God can make, 
 and pick his mud to-day, is an unapprcciative b.irbarian. 
 
 I will let him alone because he denounced all the men in this country, 
 all the members of Congress, all the members of the Senate, and nil the 
 judges upon the Bench; in his lecture ho denounced them as thieves 
 and robbers. That won't do. I want to remind him t'.iat in this country 
 the Jews were first admitted to tae privileges of citizens; that in this 
 country they were first given all their rights, and I am as much iu lavor
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 137 
 
 of their having their rights as I am in favor of having my own. But 
 when )i rabbi so far forgets himself as to traduce the women and men of 
 this country, I pronounce him a vulgar falsifier, and let him alone. 
 
 Strange, that nearly every man that lias answered me, has answered 
 me mostly on the same side. Strange, that nearly every man that thought 
 himself called upon to defend the Bible was one who did not believe in 
 it himself. Isn't it strange? They are like some suspected people, 
 always anxious to show their marriage certificate. They want at least 
 to convince the world that they are not as had as I am. 
 
 Now, I want to read you just one or two things, and then I am going 
 to let you go. I want to see if I have said such awful things, and 
 whether I have got any scripture to stand by me. I will only read two 
 or three verses. Does the Bible teach man to enslave his brother? If 
 it does, it is not the word of God, unless God is a slaveholder. 
 
 Moreover, all the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them 
 *hall yc buy of their families which are wilh you, which they beset in your land, and 
 they shall be your possession. Yo shall take them as an inheritance for your children 
 After you to inherit them. They shall be your bondsmen forever. (Old Testament.) 
 
 Upon the limbs of unborn babes this fiendish God put the chains of 
 filavery. I hale him. 
 
 Both thy bondmen and bondwomen shall be of the heathen round about thcc, and 
 them shall ye buy, bondmen and bondwomen. 
 
 Now let us read what the New Testament has. I could read a great 
 <Jeal more, but that is enough. 
 
 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters, according to the flesh in fear 
 and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ. 
 
 This is putting the dirty thief that steals your labor on an equality 
 with Goil. 
 
 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle 
 but alsj 10 tho froward. 
 
 For ih i. is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering 
 wrongfully. 
 
 The idea of a man on account of conscience toward God stealing 
 anoti er man, or allowing him nothing but lashes on his back as legal- 
 tender for labor performed. 
 
 Let as miny servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all 
 honor, that the name of God aud Ills doctrine bo not blasphemed. 
 
 How can you blaspheme the name of God by asserting your independ- 
 ence? How can you blaspheme the name of a God by striking fetters 
 from the limbs of men? I wish some of your answers would tell you 
 that. ' And they that have believing masters let them not despise them." 
 That is to say, a good Christian could own another believer in Jesus 
 Clirisl ; could own a woman and her children, and could sell the child 
 *way from its mother. That is a sweet belief. O, hypocrisy!
 
 133 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 Let them not despise them because they are brethren, but rather do them service 
 because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. 
 
 Oh, what slush! Here is what they loll the poor slave, so that he 
 will serve the man that stole his wife and children from him : 
 
 For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. 
 Having food and raiment let us be therewith content. 
 
 Don't you think that it would do just as well to preach that to the 
 thieving man as to the suffering slave? I think so. Then this same 
 Bible teaches witchcraft, that spirits go into the bodies of the man, and 
 pigs; and that God himself made a trade with the devil, and the devil 
 traded him off a man for a certain number of swine, and the devil lost 
 money because the hogs ran right down into the sea. He got a corner 
 on that deal. 
 
 Now let us see how they believed in the rights of children : 
 
 If a man havo a stubb >rn and a rebellions son which will not obey the voice of his 
 father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not 
 barken unto them, then shall his father nnd his mother lay hold on him, and bring 
 him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place. And they s-hall say 
 nnto the elders of his city. This, our son, is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey 
 our voice, he is a glutton and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him 
 with stones, that he die, so slialt thou put evil away. 
 
 That is a very good way to raise children. Here is the story of Jeph- 
 thah. He went oft and he asked the Lord to let him whip some people, 
 and he told the Lord if He would let him whip them, he would sacrifice 
 to the Lord the first thin? that met him on his return ; and the first thing 
 that met him was his own beautiful daughter, and he sacrified her. Is 
 there a sadder story in all the history of tlie world than that? What 
 do j'ou think of a man that would sacrifice his own daughter ? What do 
 you think of a God that would receive that sacrifice? Now, then, they 
 come to women in this blessed gospel, and let us see what the gospel 
 says about women. Then you ought all to go to church, girls, next 
 Sunday and hear it. " Let the woman learn in silence with all subjec- 
 tion ; suffer not woman to think nor usurp authority over man, for Adam, 
 was formed first, not Eve." 
 
 Don't you see? 
 
 "Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the 
 transgession. Notwithstanding all this she shall be saved in child- 
 bearing if she continues in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." 
 (That is Mr. Timothy.) " But I would have you know that the head of 
 every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head 
 of Christ is God." 
 
 I suppose that every old maid is acephalous. 
 
 " For a m;in indeed ought not to cover head, forasmuch as he is the 
 Image and glory of God ; but the woman is the glory of man. For the 
 man is not of the woman, but woman of the man. Neither was the man
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 13> 
 
 created for the woman, but the woman for the man. Wives, submit 
 yourselves unto your own husband as unto the Lord, for the husband is 
 the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the Church." 
 
 Do you hear that ! You didn't know how much we were above you. 
 When you go back to the Old Testament, to the great law-giver, you find 
 that the woman has to ask forgiveness for having borne a child. If it was. 
 a boy, thirty-three days she was unclean ; if it was a girl sixty-six. Nice 
 laws! Good laws! If there is a pure thing in this worM, if there is a 
 picture of perfect purity, it is a mother with her child in her arms. 
 Yes, I think more of a good woman and a child than I do of all the gods 
 I have ever heard these people tell about. Just think of this: 
 
 When thon goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath, 
 delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, and secst arnon 
 the captive a beautiful woman and hast a desire unto her that ihou wouldst have her 
 to thy wife, then thou ghalt bring her home to thine house, nnd she shall shave her 
 head, and pare her nails. 
 
 Wherefore, ye must needs be subject not only for love, but for conscience sake, and 
 for this cause pay ye tribute, for they are God's ministers. 
 
 I despise this wretched doctrine. Wherever the sword of rebellion is 
 drawn in favor of the right, I am a rebel. I suppose Alexander, czar 
 of Russia, was put there by the order of God, was he ? I am sorry he 
 was not removed by the nihilist that shot at him the other day. 
 
 I tell you in a country like that, where there are hundreds of girls not 1ft 
 years of age prisoners in Siberia, simply for giving their ideas about 
 liberty, and we telegraphed to that country congratulating that wretch 
 that he was not killed, my heart goes into the prison, my heart goes with 
 the poor girl working as a miner in the mines, crawling on her hands 
 and knees getting the precious ore out of the mines, and my sympathies 
 go with her, and my symphathies cluster around the point of the dagger. 
 
 Does the Bible describe a God of mercy ? Let me read you a verse or 
 two. 
 
 I will make my arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh. Thy 
 foot may be dipped in the blood of thine enemies. 
 
 And the tongue of thy dogs in the same. 
 
 And the Lord thy God will put out those nations before thce by little and little; 
 thon inayest not consume them at once, lest the beasts of the field increase upon thee. 
 
 But the Lord thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a. 
 mighty destruction, until they be destroyed. 
 
 And He shall deliver their kings unto thine hand, and thon shalt destroy their 
 name from under Heaven ; then shall no mau be able to stand before thee, until thou 
 have destroyed them. 
 
 I can see what he had her nails pared for. Does the Bible teach 
 polygamy ? 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Newman, consul general to all the world had a discus- 
 sion with Elder Heber or Kimball, or some such wretch in Utah
 
 140 MISTAKES OF INOERSOLL. 
 
 "whether the Bible sustains polygamy, and the Mormons have printed 
 that discussion as a campaign document. Read the order of Moses in 
 the 31st chapter of Numbers. A great many chapters I dare not read to 
 you. They are too fill hy. I leave all that to the clergy. Read the 31st 
 chapter of Exodus, the 31st chapter of Deuieronomy, the life of Abra- 
 ham, and the life of David, and the life of Solomon, and then tell me 
 that the Bible does not uphold polygamy and concubinage! 
 
 Let them answer. Then I said that the Bible upheld tyranny. Let 
 me read you a little: "Let every soul be subject to the higher powers 
 the powers that be are ordained of God." 
 
 George III. was king by the grace of God, and when our fathers rose 
 in rebellion, according to this doctrine, they rose against the power of 
 God ; and if they did they were successful. 
 
 And so it goes on telling of all the cities that were destroyed, and of 
 the great-hearted men, that they dashed their brains out, and all the 
 little babes, and all the swoet women that they killed and plundered 
 all in the name of a most merciful God. Well, think of it! T4$c Old 
 Testament is filled with anathemas, and with curses, and with words of 
 revenge, and jealousy, and hatred, and meanness, and brutality. 
 
 Have 1 read enough to show that what I said is so? I think I have. 
 I wish I had time to read to you further of what the dear old fathers of 
 the church said about wo.nao wait a minute, and I will read you a 
 little. We have got them running. 
 
 St. Augustine in his 22d book says: "A woman ought to serve her 
 husband as unto God, affirming that woman ought to be braced and 
 bridled beti.nes, if she aspire to any dominion, alleging that dangerous 
 And perilous it is to suffer her to precede, although it be in temporal 
 and corporeal things. How can woman be in the image of God, seeing 
 she is subject to man, and hath no authority to teach, neither to be a 
 witness, neither to judge, much less to rule or bear the rod of empire." 
 
 Oh, he is a good one. These are the very words of Augustine. Let 
 me read some more. "Woman shall bo subject unto man as unto 
 Christ." That is St. Augustine, and this sentence of Augustine ought to 
 be noted of all women, for in it he plainly affirms that women are all the 
 more subject to man. And now, St. Ambrose, he is a good b.>y. "Adam 
 was deceived by Eve called lleva and not I leva by Adam, and there- 
 fore just it is that woman receive and acknowledge him for governor 
 whom she called sin, lest that again she slip and fall with womanly 
 facility." Don't you see that woman has sinned once, and man never ? If 
 you give woman an opportunity, she will sin again, whereas if you give it 
 to man, whenever, never, never betrayed his trust in the world, nothing 
 bad can happen. " Let women be subject, to their own husbands as unto 
 the Lord, for man is the head of woman, and Christ is the head of the
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 14t 
 
 congregation." They are all real good men, all of them. "It is not 
 permitted to woman to speak; let her be in silence; as the law said: 
 unto thy husband shalt thou ever be, and he shall bear dominion over 
 thce." 
 
 So St. Chrysostom. He is another good man. " Woman," he says, 
 "was put under the power of man, and man was pronounced lord over 
 her; that she should obey man, that the head should not follow the feet. 
 False priests do commonly deceive women, because they are easily per- 
 suaded to any opinion, especially if it be again given, and because they 
 lack prudence and right reason to judge the things that be spoken; 
 which should not be the nature of those that are appointed to govern 
 others. For they should be constant, stable, prudent, and doing every- 
 thing with discretion and reason: which virtues woman can not have 
 in equality with man." 
 
 I tell you women are more prudent than men. I tell you, as a rule,^ 
 women are more truthful then men. I tell -you that women are more 
 faithful than men ten times as faithful as man. I never saw a man 
 pursue his wife into the very ditch and dust of degradation and take her 
 in his arras. I never saw a man stand at the shore where she had been 
 morally wrecked, waiting for the waves to bring back even her corpse to- 
 his arms; but I have seen woman do it. I have seen woman with her 
 white arms lift man from the mire of degradation, and hold him to her 
 bosom as though he were an angel. 
 
 And these men thought woman not fit to be held as pure in the sight 
 of God as man. I never saw a man that pretended that he didn't love a 
 woman ; that pretended that he loved God better than he did a woman, 
 that he didn't look hateful to me, hateful and unclean. I could read 
 you twenty others, but I haven't time to do it. They are all to the same- 
 eflect exactly. They hate woman, and say man is as much above her as 
 God is above man. I am a believer in absolute equality. I am a be- 
 liever in absolute liberty between man and wife. I believe in liberty, 
 and I say, " Oh, liberty, float not forever in the far horizon remain not v 
 forever in the dream of the enthusiast, the philanthropist and poet; bu 
 come and make thy home among the children of men." 
 
 I know not what discoveries, what inventions, what thoughts may 
 leap from the brain of the world. I know not what garments of glory 
 may be woven by the years to come. I can not dream of the victories 
 to be won upon the field ot thought; but I do know that, coming down 
 the infinite sea of the future, there will never touch this " bank and shoal 
 of time " a richer gift, a rarer blessing than liberty for man, woman and 
 child. 
 
 I never addressed a more magnificent audience in my life, and I thank, 
 you, I thank you a thousand times over.
 
 143 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 \ 
 
 Ingersoll's Catechism and Bible Class. 
 
 Nothing is more gratifying than to see ideas that were received with 
 scorn, flourishing in the sunshine of approval. Only a few weeks ago 
 I stated that the Bible was not inspired ; that Moses was mistaken ; that 
 the "flood " was a foolish myth; that the Tower of Bauel existed only 
 incredulity; that God did not create the universe from nothing, that 
 He did not start the first woman with a rib; that He never upheld 
 slavery; that He was not a polygarnist; that He did not kill people for 
 making hair-oil : that He did not order His Generals to kill the dimpled 
 babes ; that He did not allow the roses of love and the violets of modesty 
 to be trodden under the brutal feet of lust ; that the Hebrew language 
 was written without vowels; that the Bible was composed of many 
 books written by unknown men ; that all translations differed from each 
 other, and that this book had filled the world with agony and crime. 
 
 At that time I had not the remotest idea that the most learned clergy- 
 men in Chicago would substantially agree with me in public. I have 
 read the replies of the Rev. Robert Collyev, Dr. Thomas, Rabbi Kohler, 
 Rev. Brooke Herford, Prof Swing, and Dr. Ryder, and will now ask 
 them a few questions, answering them in their own words : 
 
 First, Rev. ROBERT COLLYER: Question. What is your opinion of 
 the Bible ? Answer. " It is a splendid book. It makes the noblest type 
 of Catholics and the meanest bigots. Through this book men give their 
 hearts for good to God, or for evil to the Devil. The best argument for 
 the intrinsic greatness of the book is that it can touch such wide 
 extremes, and seem to maintain us in the most unparalleled cruelty, as 
 well as the most tender mercy; that it can inspire purity like that of 
 the great saints and afford arguments in favor of polygamy. The Bible 
 is the text book of ironclad Calvinism and sunny Universal ism. It 
 makes the Quaker quiet and the Millerite crazy. It inspired the Union 
 soldier to live and grandly die for the right, and Stonewall Jackson to 
 live nobly and die grandly for the wrong." 
 
 Q. But, Mr. Collyer, do you really think that a book with as many 
 passages in favor of wrong as right, is inspired ? A. " I look upon the 
 Old Testament as a rotting tree. When it falls it will fertilize a bank 
 of violets." 
 
 Q. Do you believe that God upheld slavery and polygamy? Do 
 you believe that He ordered the killing of babes and the violation of 
 maidens ? A. " There is three-fold inspiration in the Bible, the first 
 peerless and perfect, the Word of God to man ; the second simply and 
 purely human, and then below this again, there is an inspiration born 
 of nn evil heart, ruthless and savage there and then as anything well 
 can be. A three-fold inspiration, of Heaven first, then of the Earth, and
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 143 
 
 then of Hell, all in the same book, all sometimes in the same chapter, 
 and then, besides, a great many things that need no inspiration." 
 
 Q. Then, after all, you do not pretend that the Scriptures are really 
 inspired ? A. " The Scriptures make no such claim for themselves as 
 the Church makes for them. They leave me free to say this is false, or 
 this is true. The truth even within the Bible dies and lives, makes on 
 this side and loses on that." 
 
 Q. What do you say to the last verse in the Bible, where a curse is 
 threatened to any man who takes from or adds to the book ? A. "I 
 have but one answer to this question, and it is: Let who will have writ- 
 ten this, I can not lor an instant believe that it was written by a divino 
 inspiration. Such dogmas and threats as these arc not of God, but of 
 man, and not of any man of a free spirit and . heart eager for the truth, 
 but a narrow man who would cripple and confine the hurnau soul in 
 Its quest after the whole truth of God, and back those who have done 
 the shameful things in the name .f the Most High." 
 
 Q. Do you not regard such talk as " slang ?*' 
 
 (Supposed) Answer. If an infidel had said that the writer of Revela- 
 tions was narrow and bigoted, I might have denounced his discourse 
 as " slang," but I think that Unitarian ministers can do so with the 
 greatest propriety. 
 
 Q. Do you believe in the stories of the Bible, about Jael, and the sun 
 standing still, and the walls falling at the blowing of horns ? A. ''They 
 may be legends, myths, poems, or what they will, but they are not the 
 Word of God. So I say again, it was not the God and Father of us all 
 who inspired the woman to drive that nail crashing through ihe king's 
 temple after she had given him that b:>wl of milk and bid him sleep in 
 safety, but a very mean Devil of hatred and revenge that I should 
 hardly expect to find in a squaw on the plains. It was not the ram'a 
 horns and the shouting before which the walls fell flat. If they went 
 down at all, it was through good solid pounding. And not for an in- 
 stant did the steady sun stand still or let his planet stuud still while bar- 
 barian fought barbarian. He kept j ust the time then he keeps now. 
 They might believe it who made the record. I do not. And since the 
 whole Christian world might believe it, still we do not who gather in 
 this church. A free and reasonable mind stands right in our way. 
 Newton might believe it as a Christian and disbelieve it as a philoso- 
 pher. We stand then with the philosopher against the Christian, for 
 we must believe what is true to us in the last test, and these things are 
 not true." 
 
 SECOND, REV. DR. THOMAS. Question. What is your opinion of the 
 Old Testament? Answer. "My opinion is that it is not one book, but 
 many thirty-nine books bound up m one. The date and authorship
 
 144 MISTAKES OF INGERSOLL. 
 
 of most of these books are wholly unknown. The Hebrews wrote with- 
 out vowels and without dividing the letters into syllables, words or sen- 
 tences. The books were gathered up by Ezra. At that time only two 
 of the Jewish tribes remained. All progress had ceased. In gathering 
 up the sacred book, copyists exercised great liberty in making changes 
 and additions." 
 
 Q. Yes, we know all that, but is the Old Testament inspired ? A. 
 " There may be the inspiration of art, of poetry, or oratory ; of patriot- 
 ism and there are such inspirations. There are moments when great 
 truths and principles come to men. They seek the man and not tho 
 man them." 
 
 Q. Yes, we all admit that, but is the Bible inspired ? A. " But still 
 I know of no way to convince any one of spirit and inspiration and 
 Jod only as His reason may take hold of these things." 
 
 Q. Do you think the Old Testament true ? A. " The story of Eden 
 may be an allegory ; the history of the children of Israel may have mis- 
 takes." 
 
 Q. Must inspiration claim infallibility ? A. " It is a mistake to say 
 that if you believe one part of the Bible you must believe all. Some of 
 the thirty-nine books may be inspired, others not; or there may b<v 
 degrees of inspiration." 
 
 Q. Do you believe that God commanded the soldiers to kill the chil- 
 dren and the married women and save for themselves the maidens, as 
 recorded in Numbers 31 : 2? Do you believe that God upheld slavery? 
 Do you believe that God upheld polygamy? A. "The Bible may bo 
 wrong in some statements. God and right can not be wrong. We must 
 not exalt the Bible above God. It may be that we have claimed too 
 much for the Bible, and thereby given not a little occasion for such men. 
 as Mr. Ingersoll to appear at the other extreme, denying too much." 
 
 Q. What then shall be done ? A. " We must take a middle ground. 
 It is not necessary to believe that the bears devoured the forty-two chiK 
 dren, nor that Jonah was swallowed by the whale." 
 
 THIRD, REV. DR. KOHLER. Question. What is your opinion about 
 tho Old Testament? Answer. "I will not make futile attempts of arti- 
 ficially interpreting the letter of the Bible so as to make it reflect the 
 philosophical, moral and scientific views of our time. The Bible is a 
 sacred record of humanity's childhood." 
 
 Q. Arc you an orthodox Christian ? A. " No. Orthodoxy, with its 
 face turned backward to a ruined temple or a dead Messiah, is fast 
 becoming like Lot's wife, a pillar of salt." 
 
 Q. Do you really believe the Old Testament was inspired? A. "I 
 greatly acknowledge our indebtedness to men like Voltaire and Thomas 
 Paine, whose bold denial and cutting wit were so instrumental in bring-
 
 SKULLS AND REPLIES. 145 
 
 Ing about this glorious era of freedom, so congenial and blissful, par 
 ticularly to the long-abused Jewish race." 
 
 Q. Do you believe in the inspiration of the Bible? A. "Of course 
 there is a destructive axe needed to strike down the old building in order 
 to make room for the grander new. The divine origin claimed by the 
 Hebrews for their national literature was claimed by all nations for their 
 old records and laws as preserved by the priesthood. As Moses, the 
 Hebrew l;iw-giver, is repix-sented as having received the law from. Gotten 
 the holy mountain, so is Zoroaster, the Persian, Manu, the Hindoo, Minos, 
 the Cretan, Lycurgus, the Spartan, and Numa, the Roman." 
 
 Q. Do you believe all the stories in the Bible? A. "All that can \ 
 and must be said against them is that they have been too long retained \ 
 around the arms and limbs of grown-up manhood to check the spiritual \ 
 progress of religion ; that by Jewish ritualism and Christian dogmatism 
 they became fetters unto the soul, turning the light of Heaven into a J 
 misty haze to blind the eye, and even into a Hell fire of fanaticism to.' 
 consume souls." 
 
 Q. Is the Bible inspired? A. "True, the Bible is not free from 
 errors, nor is any work of man and time. It abounds in childish views 
 and offensive matters. I trust that it will, in a time not far off, be pre- 
 sented for common Tise in families, schools, synagogues and churches, 
 in a refined shape, cleansed from all dross and chaff, and stumbling, 
 blocks on which the scoffer delights to dwell." 
 
 FOURTH, REV. MR. HERPORD. Question. Is the Bible true ? Answer. 
 "Ingersoll is very fond of saying 'The question is not, is the Bible 
 inspired, but is it true ?' That sounds very plausible, but you know as 
 applied to any ancient book it is simply nonsense." 
 
 Q. Do you think the stories in the Bible exaggerated ? A. "I dare 
 say the numbers are immensely exaggerated." 
 
 Q. Do you think that God upheld polygamy ? A. "The truth of 
 which simply is, that four thousand years ago polygamy existed among 
 the Jews, as everywhere else on earth then, and even their prophets did 
 not come to the idea of its being wrong. But what is there to be indig- 
 nant/ about in that ?" 
 
 Q. And so you really wonder why any man should be indignant at 
 the idea that God upheld and sanctioned that beastliness called polyg- 
 amy ? A. " Whf t is there to be indignant about in that?" 
 
 FIFTH, PROP. SWING. Question. What is your idea of the Bible? 
 Answer. ' I think it a poem." 
 
 SIXTH, REV. DR. RYDER. Question. And what is your idea of the 
 sacred Scriptures? Answer. "Like other nations, the Hebrews had 
 their patriotic, descriptive, didactic and lyrical poems in the same 
 varieties as other nations; but with them, unlike other nations, what-
 
 140 INQERSOLUS FUNERAL ORATION 
 
 ever may be the form of their poetry, it always possesses the character- 
 istic of religion." 
 
 Q. I suppose you fully appreciate the religious characteristics of tho 
 Song of Solomon ? No answer. 
 
 Q. Does the Bible uphold polygamy ? A. " The law of Moses did 
 not forbid it, but contained many provisions against its worst abuses, 
 and such as were intended to restrict it within narrow limits." 
 
 Q. So you think God corrected some of the worst abuses of polyg- 
 amy, but preserved the institution itself? 
 
 I might question many others, but have concluded not to consider 
 those as members of my Biblo class who deal in calumnies and epithets. 
 From the so-called "replies "of such ministers it appears that, while 
 Christianity changes the heart, it does not improve the manners, and 
 that one can get into Heaven in the next world without having been a 
 gentleman in this. 
 
 It is difficult for me to express the deep and thrilling satisfaction I 
 have experienced in reading the admissions of the clergy of Chicago. 
 Surely the battle of intellectual liberty is almost won when ministers 
 admit that the Bible is filled with ignorant and cruel mistakes; that 
 each man has the right to think for himself, and that it is not necessary 
 to believe the Scriptures in order to be saved. 
 
 From the bottom of my heart I congratulate my pupils on th 
 advance they havo made, and hope soon to meet them on the serene 
 heights of perfect freedom. 
 
 AT HIS BROTHER'S ORATE 
 
 The funeral of Hon. Ebon C. lugersoll, brother of Col. Robert G. Ingor- 
 soil, of Illinois, took place at his residence in Washington, D. C., Juno 
 2, 1879. The ceremonies were extremely simple, consisting merely of 
 viewing the remains by relatives ami friends, and a funeral oration by 
 Col. liobert G. Ingersoll, brother of the deceased. A large number of 
 distinguished gentlemen were present, including Secretary Sherman, 
 Assistant Secretary Hawk'}', Senators Blame, Voorhces, Paddock, Alii- 
 son, Logan, lion. Thomas Henderson, Gov. Pound, lion. Win. M. Mor- 
 rison, Gen. Jeffreys, Gen. Williams, Col. James Fishback, and others. 
 The pall-bearers were Senators Blainc, Voorhees, David Davis. Paddock 
 and Allison, Col. Ward, II. Lamon, lion. Jeremiah Wilson of Indiana, 
 and lion. Thomas A. Boyd of Illinois.
 
 AT HIS BROTHERS GRAVE. 147 
 
 Soon after Mr. Insrersoll began to read his eloquent characterization 
 of the dead, his eyes filled with tears. He tried to hide them behind 
 his eye-glasses, but he could not do it, and finally he bowed his head 
 upon the dead man's coffin in uncontroluble grief. It was after some 
 delay and the greatest efforts at self-mastery, that Col. Ingersoll was 
 able to finish reading his address, which was as follows : 
 
 Colonel Ingersoll's Funeral Oration. 
 
 MY FRIENDS: I am going to do that which the dead often promised 
 he would do for me. The loved and loving brother, husband, father, 
 friend, died where manhood's morning almost touches noon, and while 
 the t-hadows siill were falling toward the West. He had not passed on 
 life's highway the slone that marks the highest point, but being weary 
 for a moment he laid clown by the Avayside, and, using his burden for a 
 pillow, fell iulo that dreamless sleep that kisses down his eyelids still. 
 While yet in love wiih life and raptured wiih the world, he passed to 
 silence and pathetic dust. Yet, after ail, it may be best, just in the hap- 
 piest, sunniest hour of all the voyage, while eager winds are kissing 
 c-very sail, to dash against the unseen rock, and in an instant hear the 
 billows roar a sunken hhip. For, whether in mid-sea or among the 
 breakers oi tlie farther shore, a wreck must mark at last the end of 
 each Jind all. And every life, no matter if its every hour is rich with 
 lve and every moment jeweled with a joy, will, at its close, become a 
 tragedy, us sad, and deep, and dark as can bo woven of the warp and 
 \vo >r of mysiery and death. This brave and tender man in every storm 
 of life was oak and rock, but in the sunshine he was vine and flower. 
 He was the friend of all heroic souls. He climbed the heights and left 
 all superstitions far below, while on his forehead fell the golden dawning 
 of si grander day. He loved the beautiful and was with color, form 
 and music touched to tears. He sided with the weak, and with a will ing 
 hand gave alms ; with loyal heart and wiih the purest hand he faith- 
 fuily discharged all public trusts. He was a worshipprr of libeity and 
 a friend of the oppressed. A thousand times I have heard him quote 
 the words : "For justice all place a temple and all season summer." 
 He believed that happiness was the only good, reason the only torch, 
 justice the only worshipper, humanity the only religion, and love the 
 priest. 
 
 He added to the sum of human joy, and were every one for whom 
 hrdid some loving service to bring a blossom to his grave he would 
 sleep to-night beuealh a wilderness of flowers. Life is a narrow vale 
 between ilie cold and barren peaks of two eternities. We strive in vain 
 to look beyond the heights. We cry aloud, and the only answer is the 
 echo of our wailing cry. From the voiceless lips of the unreplying 
 tlea;l there comes no word; but in the night of death hope sees a star 
 aud listening love can hear the rusile of a wing. He who sleeps here, 
 wlr.-:i dying, nvstakiug the approach of death for the return of health, 
 whispered with his la'est breath, " I am better now." Let us believe, 
 in spite of doubt* and dogmas and tears and fears that these dear words 
 are ti tie of ail the countless dead. An* now, to you who have been 
 -chosen from among 'ho many men he loved to do the lasts id office for 
 the dead, we give his sacred dust. Speech can not contain our love. 
 There ,vuc there is no gentler, stronger, manlier man.
 
 148 INGERSOLDS FUNERAL ORATION. 
 
 BEECHER'S COMMENTS, 
 
 Henry Ward Bsecher's Comments on Mr. Ingersoll'a Faith, and 
 
 Funeral Discourse. 
 
 " The root element of faith is iu the imagination. The tendency of 
 our age, or in certain lines of it, is a rising tendency among the educated 
 to give to the evidence of the physical senses not only greater weight 
 than comes with the imagination, but to deny to the imagination all use 
 except that of producing pleasure. To a certain extent we are indebted 
 for this to the perversion of religious views. The ascetic school ban- 
 \ ished the imagination from religion and made it a mere minion of 
 pleasure and turned the thoughts of men to what are called weightier 
 things. We arc told in the t-erious words of the ascetic teachers that 
 life is too important to trifle away. They have stripped oil' the wings 
 , of the imagination to make quills to write their dull treatises withal. 
 There is also danger from the scientific or materialistic tendencies ot 
 the age, the votaries of which hold that all things must be proven by 
 tangible evidence that the soul is but matter. But taking the mate- 
 rialistic view that the soul is but matter, it is matter so different from or. 
 dinary matter that it is to be judged by entirely diff rent laws. But 
 without taking that ground and adhering as I do to the ground that it 
 is a spiritual matter, the necessity is much stronger lor applying the true 
 principle in dealing with its consideration. 
 
 "There is a growing tendency towards materialism in the German 
 mind, and this has long been the tendency of the French mind. It has- 
 made inroads into the sturdy old English mind, and it has with ten 
 thousand other immigrants that we could have spared come across the 
 seas and gained a foothold here. But to apply to the imagination tho 
 same rules you apply to things that have no imagination is impolitic, 
 unphilosophical nnd unwise. There arc a great many men who say 
 /with Tyndall: ' If you present God ns a poem I can accept it, but if 
 / you present Him as a fact I resist it; I say there is no evidence: it is not 
 I proven.' There arc realities which can not be proven. No formula can 
 I demonstrate the sentiment of honor; yet honor demonstrates itself, 
 \ and the intellect discerns things by the aid of the imagination that 
 \it can not discern without it. Reasonings ure uo more than spider- 
 y-ebbing*, -j 
 
 " That which comforts must be accepted as true, although it can not bo 
 roveu by nny direct line of evidence. Take, for instance, the pictures 
 of the Virgin Mary which arc the objects of such veneration to devout
 
 BEECHERS COMMENTS. 149 
 
 Roman Catholics. They are not really the Virgin Mary; they don't 
 even look like her; but they are a representation of the tenderness of 
 the mother towards the child, and that tenderness is a reality. I, too, 
 hang the pictures in my parlor and in my bedroom, and I, too, am a 
 worshipper of the Virgin. 1 worship the tender, loving spirit of God 
 out of which theology has cheated us. Put that in theology and you 
 would not want any pictorial illustration. So as to ministering angels; 
 I never thought of an angel except with wings. I never saw an angel 
 painted wi h wings that it did not look like an old hen to me. So with 
 ministering angels. The moment you apply to them all that belongs to 
 them that moment you destroy them. 
 
 ''A French philosopher once said very truly: ' Every body believes in 
 God until you attempt to prove his existence.' Take the existence of the 
 soul in heaven that is a mere question of reason without evidence such 
 as belongs to regulated forms of matter and it is full of obscurities 
 But k-t it hang in the realm of imagination and it is not only the product 
 of Ihe imagination of one man, but of all the nations through the growth 
 of time. It is the imagination that has been reaped and threshed and 
 winnowed and grown into the very bread of life. It is not any poem 
 or notion; it is the work, the final work of the imagination of the 
 human race, speaking all languages, under all governments; it is the 
 result, to which men come that death doesn't stop human life; it goes 
 on unending. 
 
 " Air. Ingersoll is a man of great merit and power and he has made 
 himself perhaps as widely known as almost any other man in this gen- 
 eration by his contemning of, I will not say religion, but of those views 
 of religion handed down to us by the teachers of Christianity. He has 
 great power of the imagination a flaming wit and has said a great 
 many things, not wise, but by which wise men may profit He has 
 uttered a great many criticisms on the subject of Christianity which are 
 just criticisms, yet taking his views of religion as a whole, they lack 
 completeness; it is a special plea, a fault-finding plea, which sees only 
 one side. Now, while I accord to him the extremes! liberty of discus- 
 sion and disclaim any right to interfere with this liberty, we have a right 
 to whatever of instruction there may be, and I think he can instruct us 
 hy his latest utterance. He has lost a brother dearly beloved, a good 
 man who lived happily with his family and was respected by the com- 
 munity, and at that brother's funeral, Mr. Ingersoll made one of the 
 most exquisite, yet one of the most sad and mournful, sermons that I 
 ever read. 
 
 " Was ever anything uttered by the lips of man more pathetic ? But wo 
 have not only a hope, we have the certainty we know that if our 

 
 150 INGERSOLVS FUNERAL ORATION. 
 
 earthy tabernacle is lost we have a building not made with hands eternal 
 in the heavens. To us the sweet voice comes under burdens, under sor- 
 rows, in pain, in persecution, in the prison dungeon ihe voice of the 
 spirit and the bride says come and the voice of the whole Church of 
 God cries out to us 'it is real, it is real come; ' and when this noble 
 brother of Mr. Ingersoll felt the touch of death, I don't doubt he felt 
 the touch of God the second time, and saw in the eternal world things 
 which he had counted but shadows here. Even skepticism and that 
 which had been provocative of skepticism in others says when it comes 
 to the death of hope : ' In spite of doubts or dogmas, let us hope that 
 there is a better world.' " 
 
 ARNOLD'S COMMENTS. 
 
 Hon. Isaac N. Arnold's Comments on Ingersoll's Funeral 
 Oration. 
 
 The sad, pathetic, and almost hopeless cry of Robert G. Ingersoll 
 over the grave of his brother has been widely read. It is eloquent with 
 feeling, and shows that his heart is tender and affectionate; and one can 
 not but sympathize with a grief which is not soothed by any hope of a 
 reunion hereafter. He says, speaking of death: "Whether in mid- 
 sea or among the breakers of the farther shore, a wreck must mark 
 at last the end of each and all; and every life . . will at its closo 
 become a tragedy as sad, and deep, and dark as can be woven of tho 
 warp and woof of mystery and death. And Life is a narrow vale 
 between the cold and barren peaks of two eternities. We strive in vain 
 to look beyond the hights. We cry aloud, and the only answer is the 
 echo of our wailing cry." 
 
 This, then, is the despairing moan of one of the brightest infidels of 
 our country of one who is doing more to destroy faith in God and 
 immortality than any other! How striking the contrast between such 
 a " wreck," as Ingersoll calls it, and the joyous, hopeful death of a 
 Christian. 
 
 I have lately been reading an account of the last hours of Sir Walter 
 Scott. As death approached this great and healthy minded Scotchman, 
 be asked Lockhart to read to him. 
 
 " What shall I read?" said Lockhart. 
 
 "Need you ask?" said Sir Walter. " There is but one Book." And 
 ,thc words that have comforted the dying and soothed the living for 
 I eighteen hundred years fell gratefully upon his car: 
 
 \ Let not your heart be troubled. In my Father's house arc many mansions. I go 
 to prepare a place for yon.
 
 ARNOLD'S COMMENTS. 151 
 
 * Lockhart," were the last words of Scott, " Lockharl, I have bur. a 
 moment to speak to you ; ray dear, be a good man ; be virtuous, be 
 religious! Noihing else will give you any comfort when you come to 
 lie here." 
 
 Ingcrsoll sadly says over the remains of his beloved brother, "We 
 cry aloud, and the only answer is the echo of our wailing cry;" and, 
 speaking of his dead brother, he says: " He climbed the hights, and 
 left all superstition far below." 
 
 If such are the results of "climbing the hights;" if to climb is 
 only to iook into the black gulf of despair, to hear over the grave only 
 the " echoes of our wailing cry," who would not rather stay in the 
 warm valley of faith and hope? 
 
 I would kindly ask Ingcrsoll, Are not faith and hope better than 
 doubt and despair? And, if so, why make it your life's mission to 
 ridicule, satirize, and destroy the faith and hope of the thousands who 
 find in their religion the only refuge from the sufferings and sorrows of 
 this life? Why labor to make your brother of humanity believe that 
 
 he is but 
 
 The pilgrim of a day? 
 
 Spouse of the worm and brother of the clay, 
 Frail as the leaf in Autumn's yellow bower, 
 Dust in the wind, or dew upon the flower? 
 ******* 
 
 A child without a sire. 
 Whose mortal life and transitory flre 
 Light to the grave his chance-created form, 
 As oceuu wrecks illuminate the storm. 
 
 And then 
 
 To iiight and silence sink forevermorel 
 
 If these 
 
 The pompons teachings ye proclaim, 
 Lights of the world and domi-gods ol fame, 
 The laurel wreath that murderer rears, 
 Blood nursed and watt-red by the widow's tears, 
 Seems not so foul, so tainted, and so dread, 
 As the daily mgbtt-hndc round the skeptic's head. 
 
 Infidelity is indeed the " deadly nightshade,' deadly alike to happi- 
 ness and to virtue. There are exceptions like Ingersoll, who have 
 inherited irom their Christian ancestors natures so generous that their 
 sturdy vinues have resisted the deadly influence. 
 
 But every blow this modern apostle of infidelity strikes against 
 Christianiiy is a blow in favor of vice and immorality. To the young 
 man whose faith Ingersoll by his wit and eloquence has shaken, I would 
 ssiv, listen to his cry of despair over his dead brother, and compare it 
 with the Christian's triumphant death and joyous hope, and choose the 
 truth.
 
 THE AUDIPHONE, 
 
 GOOD NEWS FOR THE DEAF. 
 
 An Instrument that enables the Deaf to Hear with Ease through 
 
 the Medium of the Teeth, and the Deaf and Dumb 
 
 to Hear and Learn to Speak. 
 
 INVENTED BY R. S. RHODES, CHICAGO, ILLS. 
 
 The Audi phono resembles a fan. It is made of a peculiar composi- 
 tion, that, like a telephone diaphragm, gathers the faintest sounds and 
 conveys them, through the medium of the teeth and 
 auditory nerve, to the brain. 
 
 When in use the instrument is strung, or bent, to 
 the proper tension and its upper edge is pressed 
 against tho ed?e of the upper teeth. See Figs. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Fig. j. The Audiphone 
 in its natural position; 
 used as a fan. 
 
 Fig. 2. The Audiphone 
 in tension ; the proper 
 position for hearing. 
 
 Fig. 3. The Audiphone 
 properly adjusted 10 the 
 upper teeth ; ready lor 
 use. (Side view.) 
 
 With ordinarily good upper teeth and auditory nerve the Audiphone 
 gives good satisfaction. With artificial teeth, if they fit firmly, it gives 
 good results. 
 
 Care should be taken, in all cases, to adjust the instrument properly. 
 
 Persons not accustomed to hearing articulate sounds, or who. 
 by the use of car trumpets, have become accustomed to unnatural sound, 
 will generally require a little practice before they get the full benefit of 
 the instrument. 
 
 In all cases the result improves as the instrument is used. Its use 
 also improves the natural sense of hearing.
 
 3 THE AUDIPHONE. 
 
 FROM PERSONS USIXG THE AUDIPIIOXE. 
 
 The following testimony is in all respects authentic, and in every 
 instance lias come to Rhodes & McClure, unsolicited. The same is 
 also true concerning the notices " From the Press." 
 
 " I hear ordinary conversation with ease, and it is a wonder to me every time I use it. 
 Sounds that 1 had not heard 'or years and had quite forg^tim came back distinct. y, and 
 the more 1 use it the better I like it. " ABBIE R. aTEVENS, 
 
 "Oct. 9, 1879. " Salem, Mass." 
 
 " I atiend church, hear perfectly six pews from the desk, and can not hear the minis- 
 ter's voice without the Audi/>hone. I go to lectures and concerts, and, in >h"rt. am 
 alive again and a part of the world. Sometimes 1 think my Audiphonr is hewiiched, it 
 works so well. " ABBIE. R. STEVENS." 
 
 "i)ec. 13, 1879. (Second Letter.] 
 
 " The Audiphone came O. K. By its aid I am now able to join in general conversa- 
 tion, which I have not been ab:e to do for eighteen years. " H. K. I'AYLOK, 
 " Nov. 21, 1879. " Cleveland, O." 
 
 u The "Phone at hand ; and on trial even more satisfactory than could be experted at 
 first use. My wife and friends are delighted and enth siastic over it. They are rejoiced 
 that I can hear, and 1 am glad that it no longer requires an effort on their part to eiuib.c 
 me to do so. " E. C. ELY (firm, Reynolds & Ely). 
 
 " Oct. 4, 1879. " Peoria, Ills." 
 
 " 114 South T wen' y First Street, Philadelphia. Pa., Nov. 15. 
 
 " Messrs. Rhodes & McC'ure. The Audiphone arrived safely, and I hasten 10 assure 
 you of its perject success for my hearing. In ordinary conversation I can not use it 
 against th eye-teeth as it makes the voice-, too loud, although the Audiphone is scarce y 
 drawn. I entered into general conversa ion with perfect ease, last evening, for the first 
 time for five or six years. A melodeon or piano I hear distinctly at great distances. 
 Reading aloud is also easily heard. My f.uni y and friend-: ar- su rejoiced at my -uccess, 
 and regard the instrument in wonder. My physician is delighted with it, and thinks, as 
 my deafness arose gre itlv from nervousness, that the Audiphone will stimul te the audi- 
 tory nerve, and possibly benefit or restore my sense of'heanng. The terrible strain being 
 taken from my mind gives me such re-t and good spirits that I almost forget my deafness. 
 " Yours very truly, " MRS. F. A. LEX." 
 
 "Messrs. Rhodes & McClure. The Audiphone. per Adams* Express, arrived all right, 
 and my wife is delighted with it. She has been to the theater and other public entertain- 
 ments, and for the first time in twelve years was she able to hear all that was >ai"d. 
 " Dec. 9, 1879. " H. A. BARRY, 26 Post Office Ave,, Baltimore, Md." 
 
 "My Audiphone is the wonder of the day. It helps me wonderfully in conversation, 
 
 "B. H. MJLFORD, ESQ., Montrose, Pa." 
 
 " My deafness is of long standing, having originated from an attack of scarlet fever 
 more than thirty years ago. The hearing in each e.ir is defective and in one almost com-, 
 pletely impaired. The Audiphone forwarded has been tested in ordinary conversation 
 and also by attendance upon the opera and perfectly subserves the purposes for which it 
 was intended. Nly hearing when using ihe instrument is ;$ acute :<s though no infirmity 
 existed and ihc effect of the use of the instrument has appreciably toned up and in, proved 
 the auditory organs so much so as to have attracted the attention of my lam ly. 
 
 " I have exhibited the instrument 10 several friends afflifted wiih deafness. Anr>ng 
 ihe parties who have determined to use younovention are J udge MCI. orkle. of Calif'Tiiia ; 
 Gen. Boynton. of the Cincinnati Gazette ; and General Mai ki.am, a resident of this city. 
 All of these gentlemen are afflicted with defective heating. 
 
 " G. W. CARTER. 
 " Nov. 28, '879. Washington, D. C. 
 
 " I fiii-1 that the more accustomed I become to the use of my Audiphone the better 
 
 re*ul t* do I obtain, and having been quite deaf for over thirty years I can assure you it ii 
 
 K r : 't gratification to be able to attend any place whee public speaking is goinu on and 
 
 hear all th it is uttered by the speakers a pleasure th.it has been denied me nil that time, 
 
 Nov. a6. 18/9. "JOHN B. SCOTT, New York."
 
 PERSONAL TESTIMONY. ft 
 
 * It answers the purpose admirably. Has created quite a sensation among my friends. 
 "Sept. 21, 1879. " E. K. TEST, Claim Agent, U. P. R. K.," Omaha, Neb." 
 
 " Your Audipheme to hand. The lady (mv sister) has tried it and finds she can hear 
 now .in rdinai y couversalion which *he can not do without it. I would not part with it for 
 ten times its cost. "W. W.EVANS, 
 
 " hcpt , 1879. " Grant Locomotive Works, Patcr.-on, N. J." 
 
 " I procured an Audiphone yesterday and can already hear quite well an ordinary con- 
 versation. " HENRV M1LNES, Cold Water, Alien." 
 
 " Mu'ic clear in any part of the room. To say that I am gratified would only express 
 moderately hv,w 1 fed. " G. H. PAINE, Freemout, Neb., Sept. 30, 1879." 
 
 " The Audiphone is a great benefit to me. Without it music is a confused murmur 
 of sounds ; with it 1 can hear ihe different parts as well as I ever c >uKI. 
 " Lec. 6, 1879. " ABBIE WEST, Canton. Ills." 
 
 "* 1 am sati-fied from experiments which I have witnessed that, excepting instances in 
 wnich th': Auditory nerve i> totally pjralyzed, all the deaf may, by its help, be enabled to 
 hear and intelligently converse. " REV. S. H. WELLEK, U.D., Morrison, Ills." 
 
 " I have been deaf fjr thirty years, but can now hear distinctly with the Audiphone. 
 
 "JOHN ATKINSON, 
 * Sept. 19, 1879. " Sec., Treas. and Sup't Racine (Wis.) Gaslight Co." 
 
 "St. Joseph's Institute, 
 " Fordham, (ne.tr New York City,) Dec. 4. 1879. 
 
 " On Tuesday, the zd inst., the Audiphone was tested by a number of pupils of the- 
 Instiuite with the following results: 
 
 "CtcilM Lynch, Hge-l 16. is supposed to have been deaf from birth. It has, however, 
 been remarked tr at she en, Id he.tr very loud sounds and could sometimes distinguish her 
 own n .111- if spoken in a loud tone l.y a person quite close to her. She say-; al-o that 
 she -omi; inies lie. us the strains of (he ori;aii in the chapel, but so far from deriving any 
 pleasure from tl e music the confuted sounds are very di agieeable to her. By the use of 
 the Auoiphone she not only heard distinctly but could repeat almost every word spoken 
 to her. A> she ha- been instructed in articulation and reads easily from the lips it was 
 thought that this knowledge a>sited her. One of the persons present then stood behind 
 her ai d icpe.ucd sevrral words which she readily imitated, thus proving, beyond a doubt, 
 the value of the Audiphone. 
 
 " Annie I'oohey, ;<ged 10 years, became deaf at the age of three from spinal meningitis. 
 It was supposed that her hearing was completely destroyed, but on applying the Audiphone 
 to her teeth -he I card and distinctly tepeated after Mr. Rhodes several of the letters of the 
 alphabet. Thi- little girl has begun to mke considerable progress in articulation, but up 
 to Ihe d.iy on wh-ch she tr ed the Audiphon . the vowel K appeared to be an insurmount- 
 able difficulty to her ; by the aid of ihe Audiphone she repeated it with perfect distinci ness. 
 
 " Another little girl, Sarah Hejnrning, also heard the xoice of Mr. Rhodes and others 
 irho sp kr to her. As in the preceding ca^e, her deafness was caused by spinal menin- 
 f itU. by which she was attacked when five years of age. By the aid ol the Audiphone 
 she was ;blw to lepeat several sounds. 
 
 "Several others tested the Audiphone with more or less success. 
 
 "MARY U. MORGAN, Principal." 
 
 In a later le'ter 'Dec. 12) Miss Morgan states: "No doubt the Audiphone will be of 
 great service to our pjpiU." 
 
 " Western and Atlantic R. Co. Office Treasurer. 
 
 " Atlanta. Ga., Nov. 18, '879. 
 
 " Messrs. Rhodes & Mc r lure. Will you please send me a Conversational Audiphone 
 by Express C. O. D., the price of which is $ 10. as per advertisement. 
 
 " Very respectfully, 
 
 " W. C. MF.RRIi.L, bee. and Treas. W. & A. R. Co." 
 
 " Please send me another Conversational Audiphone by Express." (Telegram from 
 W. C Merrill, Nov. 24, 1879.) 
 
 " Please send me Concert Audiphone by Express." (Telegram from same, Dtc. 9 ) 
 " lease send me Conver ational Audiphone bv Express." (T- l-gram from same. De- 
 cemb. r 12.} | .K. Mr. Merrill is not an agent. He purchased these Audiphones, per 
 telegram, for friends who had seen hi-, instrument.] 
 
 '* R S T?h"des. Fsq. Dear Sir. 1 avail myse'f of this opportunity to tender to you my 
 best wishes for the success of your philanthropic invention. 
 
 "Yours, "JAMF.S J. BARCLAY. 
 
 " Dec. 9, 1879. " Sec. Penn. Institute for Deaf and Dumb, Philadelphia."
 
 FROM THE PRESS. 6 
 
 ' Seems to discount any of the instruments invented by Edison to aid the hearing." 
 Jfeiv Orleans Times. Nov. 27, 1879. 
 
 " The invention will have practical value." New York Herald. 
 
 ** It is all the inventor claims it to be." Evansville (Jnd.) Journal. Nov. 30, 1879. 
 
 " The Trial was an eminent success." Boston Traveler. Dec. 2, 1879. 
 
 " It has been tested with rem irknble results in the Indiana Institute for the Deaf." 
 Dr. Footes Health Monthly. December, 1879. 
 
 "The Andiphone, for the deaf, is like'y to supersede the ear trumpet altogether; is 
 not at all objectionable to carry or to use, and-enables thousands who never heard a <-ound 
 in their lives to extinguish letters, words and music for the first time." Church Union. 
 Novell. ber 29, 1879. 
 
 " Immense value for the deaf." The Faderneslandet. Sept., 1879. 
 
 "The deaf, who had only heard conversation bj' its being shouted in a very loud tone 
 or by the use of the ear trumpet, found that they could hear conversa ion in the ordinary 
 tone wi'h considerable ease." Providence {R. 1.) Journal Report of Experiments in 
 Providence^ R. I. 
 
 " Has proved a signal success." Albany (IV. Y.) Press. 
 
 " Would be easily mistaken for a fan." Democrat and Chronicle. 
 
 " In many cases of deafness, where the auditory nerve istim paired, the Audiphnne can 
 be of no avail ; but where, as is often the case, the defect is only in those parts f the e .r 
 by which vibrations are conveyed to the nerve from without, this invention will prove a 
 great boon." Washington (D C.) Post. Oct. 27, 1879. 
 
 " Will practically restore to speech and hearing a large class of afflicted persons." 
 Toronto (Canada) Mail. Dec. 5. 1879. 
 
 " Great benefit to those partially deaf." Providence (R. 7.) Journal. Nov 6, 1879. 
 
 " Earlier reports are fully borne out by later experiments." Denver Times. Decem- 
 ber 6, 1879. 
 
 " Mr Rhodes was warmly congratulated by the company, and Mr. Peter CoopT spoke 
 of his invention as a blessing and :i godsend to the afflicted." Correspondents Report o/ 
 New York Exhibition* in Chicago Inter-Ocean. Nov. 29. 
 
 " A new and ingenious device by which the deaf are enabled to hear through the 
 medium of the teeth." New York Graphic. Nov. ai. 1879. 
 
 "One of the wonders of this day of telephones, phonographs and the like, is the 
 Audiphone, invented by Richard S. Rhodes, of Chicago, which enjblrs deaf p ople to 
 bear with their teeth. People who have once heard, but have grown deaf, and thus know 
 the meaning of sounds and can talk thrn-elves, p acti ;illy hive perfect hearing restored 
 by the use of the Audiphone." Springfield Republican. 
 
 " Had it in our possession not more than two minutes before we were satisfied that it 
 was at least all that we anticipated, bur have since found it to be much superior to antici- 
 pations. Besides, we 'find it to impiove by use, also to improve our n:itun,l hearing, which 
 is remarkable." Editor Germantown Telegraph^ Philadelphia, Nov. 26, 1879. 
 
 " With a little practice the sounds thus received are interpreted the same as if they 
 reached the nerves of hearing through the tar. ' Scientific American. 
 
 The Audiphone is Patented throughout the civilized world. 
 
 I> IR I O E: 
 Conversational, plain $10 
 
 Conversational, ornamental $16, $25 and $50 
 
 (According to Decoration.) 
 Double Audiphone (for Deaf Mutes, enabling them to hear their own voice) $ 1 5 
 
 The Audiphone will be sent to any address, on receipt of price, by 
 
 RHODES & McCLURE, 
 
 Agents for the World, 
 
 Methodist Church Block, CHICAGO, ILL. 
 
 (Andlphoue Parlors, Adjacent to tho Office.)
 
 POPULAR BOOKS PUBLISHED BY RHODES & M C CLDRB 
 
 TENTH THOUSAND, 
 ii 
 
 EDISON AND HIS INVENTIONS: 
 
 * vo. f 17 S pages. Illustrated. 
 
 EDITED BY J. B. McCLURE. 
 
 Trice in Cloth, fine, $1.00, Paper (overs, 50 els. 
 
 Tliis book contains the many interesting incidents, and all ihe essen- 
 tial facts, connected with the life of the great inventor, together with a lull 
 explanation of his principal inventions, including the phonograph, tele- 
 phone, aiid electric light, which are explained by the aid of diagrams. 
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS. 
 
 " FrliK'm find II liirei'tinns" is one of tiie la r est and most entertaining bo">ks 
 that ha< b-eii laid n our table. A glance at the titl^-pag-! as n res us that the book 
 rannoi :ail 10 be Interesting when we ee that it has been compiled by Mr. J. B. 
 M. ciiir-. of ihe well kn iwu (inn of Khndes & McClure. Mr. McOlure has spent 
 nioi.ths in oorresfiondo ice \viili parties wno were acquainted with Kdisuii In his 
 bo h.>od days, mill nl-o wi.h ilio parents of the great inventor, who have fur- 
 iiislie<l numerous amiKing anecdote* wn ch liave not as yet been iua e public. 
 The tasimeter. phonograph, telep .one, and all his inventions, are illu-tra'ed, and 
 the ' i-tniN explained iu t>uch a uianuer that they cuu be understood by every 
 one. The Inl< ri,,r. 
 
 " If Mr Kilis n's h<>ad is not turned by his numerous successes In wonderful 
 discovery and invention, he mu t !!* e a leVel head. Just as the announcement 
 nnives. that ihe electric light is to be tested in the ('ap't')l at Washington, a book 
 Is In'd on our table, entitled " Kd son and his Inventions,' 1 which, as the title 
 implies, rela es in the in, in as wed as his work. It gives many interesting anec- 
 dotes or this odd genius with lull expl millions of the telephone, phonograph, 
 tasiin t'T and la-t. and ier ar>s most im:> irtaiit of all, the results of his electric 
 light riiinipli. Nirner .ii* cms make ii omnar lively easy for e.en the unscien- 
 tiiic lo understand the desenp.ive parts." Editorial in the Advance. 
 
 This- volume of Mr. McClur/s is one that will interest every reader. It Is a 
 priip ic sketi-h of the incide ts, anecclotes a:id into esting partic-ular.s of his life, 
 lie -i.e- a eleir and conci-e ex:.lan Uion of the telephone, phonograph, and 
 many others of the leading d seoveries. The volume has many illustrations. 
 > ot on I ih'i-e older will rend ii with interest but it is a book full of valuable 
 in<triiciiou to tlu young, for its facts and lor its suggestive thoughts." T/te Inter- 
 Ocean. 
 
 "There en n be no donlit that Kdison is a r-markabln man. He has already 
 accomplished nvre in the IVMJT of Invenilon.thati any man u^on record, at so 
 e;irlv an age -thirty-two. His" career has been full of adventure, of a certain 
 ki'id. and the -lory" f il is exceedingly i .tere.-tiiis:. Mr. McClure has gathen;.! 
 liis iiniieri il with great industry, and so i sed it as to make a \vy readaule. book. 
 An ex el.ent dea is given UHh'ol the man and ot his work." Tlte Standard. 
 
 - Mr McClur h >s done a -jo d th ng In bringing together so much authentic 
 Infonna Uci Unit relate* to the man and hi* work. Ii is the storv of the patient 
 ov Int. in of e mine talent its dise mriiwmenti and trin ,.phs. with enough of 
 personality to give additional zjsl to the narrativ ;." Chicago Evening Journal. 
 
 "('resents n an I- t-rr-ating manner (he account of the life of the gieatest 
 Invenlo;' of the present lime." Sorlliwestern Christian Advocate. 
 
 Sent by inu.it, post t-nld, o rccrit>t of -prlc~ by tho 
 Liberal discount to tUe Trade.
 
 
 3> 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 S.TII', 'I I-'J