Ladies and Gentlemen: The history of the world shows that religion has
made enemies instead of friends. That one word "religion" paints the
horizon of the past with every form of agony and torture, and when one
pronounces the name of "religion" we think of 1,500 years of
persecution, of 6,000 years of hatred, slander and vituperation.
Strange, but true, that those who have loved God most have loved men
least; strange that in countries where there has been the most religion
there has been the most agony; and that is one reason why I am opposed
to what is known as religion. By religion I mean the duties that men
are supposed to owe to God; by religion I mean, not what man owes to
man, but what we owe to some invisible, infinite and supreme being.
The question arises, Can any relation exist between finite man and
infinite being? An infinite being is absolutely conditional. An
infinite being can not walk, cannot receive, and a finite being cannot
give to the infinite. Can I increase his happiness or decrease his
misery? Does he need my strength or my life? What can I do for him?
I say, nothing.
For one, I do not believe there is any God who gives rain or sunshine
for praying. For one, I do not believe there is any being who helps
man simply because he kneels. I may be mistaken, but that is my
doctrine--that the finite cannot by any possibility help the infinite,
or the infinite be indebted to the finite; that the finite cannot by
any possibility assist a being who is all in all. What can we do? We
can help man; we can help clothe the naked, feed the hungry; we can
help break the chains of the slave; we can help weave a garment of joy
that will finally cover this world. That is all that man can do.
Wherever he has endeavored to do more he has simply increased the
misery of his fellows. I can find out nothing of these things myself
by my unaided reasoning. If there is an infinite God and I have not
reason enough to comprehend His universe, whose fault is it? I am told
that we have the inspired will of God. I do not know exactly what they
mean by inspired. Not two sects agree on that word. Some tell me that
every great work is inspired; that Shakespeare is inspired. I would be
less apt to dispute that than a similar remark about any other book on
this earth. If Jehovah had wanted to have a book written, the
inspiration of which should not be disputed, He should have waited
until Shakespeare lived.
Whatever they mean by inspiration, they at least mean that it is true.
If it is true, it does not need to be inspired. The truth will take
care of itself. Nothing except a falsehood needs inspiration. What is
inspiration? A man looks at the sea, and the sea says something to
him. Another man looks at the same sea, and the sea tells another story
to him. The sea cannot tell the same story to any two human beings.
There is not a thing in nature, from a pebble to a constellation, that
tells the same story to any two human beings. It depends upon the
man's experience, his intellectual development, and what chord of
memory it touches. One looks upon the sea and is filled with grief;
another looks upon it and laughs.
Last year, riding in the cars from Boston to Portsmouth, sat opposite
me a lady and gentleman. As we reached the latter place the woman, for
the first time in her life, caught a burst of the sea, and she looked
and said to her husband "Isn't that beautiful!" And he looked and
said: "I'll bet you can dig clams right there."
Another illustration: A little while ago a gentleman was walking with
another in South Carolina, at Charleston--one who had been upon the
other side. Said the Northerner to the Southerner, "Did you ever see
such a night as this; did you ever in your life see such a moon?" "Oh,
my God," said he, "you ought to have seen that moon before the War!"
I simply say these things to convince you that everything in nature has
a different story to tell every human being. So the bible tells a
different story to every man that reads it. History proves what I say.
Why so many sects? Why so much persecution? Simply because two people
couldn't understand it exactly alike. You may reply that God intended
it should be so understood, and that is the real revelation that God
intended.
For instance, I write a letter to Smith. I want to convey to him
certain thoughts. If I am honest I will use the words which will
convey to him my thoughts, but not being infinite, I don't know exactly
how Smith will understand my words; but if I were infinite I would be
bound to use the words that I know Smith would get my exact idea from.
If God intended to make a revelation to me He has to make it to me
through my brain and my reasoning. He cannot make a revelation to
another man for me. That other man will have God's word for it but I
will only have that man's word for it. As that man has been dead for
several thousand years, and as I don't know what his reputation was for
truth and veracity in the neighborhood in which he lived, I will wait
for the Lord to speak again.
Suppose when I read it, the revelation to me, through the bible, is
that it is not true, and God knew that I would know that when I did
read it, and knew, if I did not say it, I would be dishonest. Is it
possible that He would damn me for being honest, and give me wings if I
would play the hypocrite?
The inspiration of the bible depends upon the ignorance of the
gentleman who reads it. Yet they tell me this book was written by the
creator of every shining star. Now let us see. I want to be honest
and candid. I have just as much at stake in the way of soul as any
doctor of divinity that ever lived, and more than some I have met.
According to this book, the first attempt at peopling this world was a
failure. God had to destroy all but eight. He saved some of the same
kind to start again, which I think was a mistake. After that, the
people still getting worse, he selected from the wide world a few of
the tribe of Abraham. He had no time to waste with everybody. He had
no time to throw away on Egypt. It had at that time a vast and
splendid civilization, in which there were free schools; in which the
one man married the one wife; where there were courts of law; where
there were codes of laws.
Neither could He give attention to India, that had at that time a
literature as splendid almost as ours, a language as perfect; that had
produced poets, philosophers, statesmen. He had no time to waste with
them, but took a few of the tribe of Abraham, and He did His best to
civilize these people. He was their governor, their executive, their
supreme court. He established a despotism, and from Mount Sinai He
proclaimed His laws. They didn't pay much attention to them. He
wrought thousands of miracles to convince them that He was God.
Isn't it perfectly wonderful that the priest of one religion never
believes the miracles told by the priest of another? Is it possible
that they know each other? I heard a story the other day. A gentleman
was telling a very remarkable circumstance that happened to himself,
and all the listeners except one said, "Is it possible; did you ever
hear such a wonderful thing in all your life?" They noticed that this
one man didn't appear to take a vivid interest in the story, so one
said to him, "You don't express much astonishment at the story?" "No,"
says he, "I am a liar myself."
I find by reading this book that a worse government was never
established than that established by Jehovah; that the Jews were the
most unfortunate people who lived upon the globe. Let us compare this
book. In all civilized countries it is not only admitted, but
passionately asserted, that slavery is an infamous crime; that a war of
extermination is murder; that polygamy enslaves woman, degrades man and
destroys home; that nothing is more infamous than the slaughter of
decrepit men and helpless women, and of prattling babes; that the
captured maiden should not be given to her captors; that wives should
not be stoned to death for differing in religion from their husbands.
We know there was a time in the history of most nations when all these
crimes were regarded as divine institutions. Nations entertaining
these views today are called savage, and with the exception of the
Feejee islanders, some tribes in Central Africa, and a few citizens of
Delaware, no human being can be found degraded enough to agree upon
those subjects with Jehovah.
Today, the fact that a nation has abolished and abandoned those things
is the only evidence that it can offer to show that it is not still
barbarous; but a believer in the inspiration of the bible is compelled
to say there was a time when slavery was right, when polygamy was the
highest form of virtue, when wars of extermination were waged with the
sword of mercy, and when the creator of the whole world commanded the
soldier to sheathe the dagger of murder in the dimpled breast of
infancy. The believer of inspiration of the bible is compelled to say
there was a time when it was right for a husband to murder his wife
because they differed upon subjects of religion. I deny that such a
time ever was. If I knew the real God said it, I would still deny it.
Four thousand years ago, if the bible is true, God was in favor of
slavery, polygamy, wars of extermination and religious persecution.
Now we are told the devil is in favor of all those things, and God is
opposed to them; in other words, the devil stands now where God stood
4,000 years ago; yet they tell me God is just as good now as he was
then, and the devil just as bad now as God was then. Other nations
believed in slavery, polygamy, and war and persecution without ever
having received one ray of light from heaven. That shows that a
special revelation is not necessary to teach a man to do wrong. Other
nations did no worse without the bible than the Jews did with it.
Suppose the devil had inspired a book. In what respect would he have
differed from God on the subject of slavery, polygamy, wars of
extermination, and religious persecution? Suppose we knew that after
God had finished his book the devil had gotten possession of it, and
written a few passages to suit himself. Which passages, O Christian,
would you pick out now as having probably been written by the devil?
Which of these two, "Love thy neighbor as thyself," or "Kill all the
males among the little ones, and kill every man, but all the women and
girls keep alive for yourselves"--which of those two passages would
they select as having been written by the devil?
If God wrote the last, there is no need of a devil. Is there a
Christian in the wide world who does not wish that God, from the
thunder and lightning of Sinai, had said: "You shall not enslave your
fellow-man!" I am opposed to any man who is in favor of slavery. If
revolution is needed at all it is to prevent man enslaving his
fellow-man.
But they say God did the best He could; that the Jews were so bad that
He had to come up kind of slow. If He had told them suddenly they must
not murder and steal, they would not have paid any respect to the ten
commandments. Suppose you go to the Cannibal Islands to prevent the
gentlemen there from eating missionaries, and you found they ate them
raw. The first move is to induce them to cook them. After you get
them to eat cooked missionaries, you will then, without their knowing
it, occasionally slip in a little mutton. We will go on gradually
decreasing missionaries and increasing mutton until finally the last
will be so cultivated that they will prefer the sheep to the priest, I
think the missionaries would object to that mode, of course.
I know this was written by the Jews themselves. If they were to write
it now, it would be different. Today they are a civilized people. I
do not wish it understood that a word I say tonight touches the
slightest prejudice in any man's mind against the Jewish people. They
are as good a people as live today. I will say right here, they never
had any luck until Jehovah abandoned them.
Now we come to the new testament. They tell me that is better than the
old, I say it is worse. The great objection to the old testament is
that it is cruel; but in the old testament the revenge of God stopped
with the portals of the tomb. He never threatened punishment after
death. He never threatened one thing beyond the grave. It was
reserved for the new testament to make known the doctrine of eternal
punishment.
Is the new testament inspired? I have not time to give many reasons,
but I will give some. In the first place, they tell me the very fact
that the witnesses disagree in minor matters shows that they have not
conspired to tell the same story. Good. And I say in every lawsuit
where four or five witnesses testify, or endeavor to testify, to the
same transaction, it is natural that they should differ on minor
points. Why? Because no two occupy exactly the same position; no two
see exactly alike; no two remember precisely the same, and their
disagreement is due to and accounted for by the imperfection of human
nature, and the fact that they did not all have an equal opportunity to
know. But if you admit or say that the four witnesses were inspired by
an infinite being who did see it all, then they should remember all the
same, because inspiration does not depend on memory.
That brings me to another point. Why were there four gospels? What is
the use of more than one correct account of anything? If you want to
spread it, send copies. No human being has got the ingenuity to tell
me why there were four gospels, when one correct gospel would have been
enough. Why should there have been four original multiplication
tables? One is enough, and if anybody has got any use for it he can
copy that one. The very fact that we have got four gospels shows that
it is not an inspired book.
The next point is that, according to the new testament, the salvation
of the world depended upon the atonement. Only one of the books in the
new testament says anything about that, and that is John. The church
followed John, and they ought to follow John, because the church wrote
that book called John. According to that, the whole world was to be
damned on account of the sins of one man; and that absurdity was the
father and mother of another absurdity--that the whole world could be
saved on account of the virtue of another man. I deny both
propositions. No man can sin for me; no man can be virtuous for me; I
must reap what I sow. But they say the law must be satisfied. What
kind of a law is it that would demand punishment of the innocent? Just
think of it. Here is a man about to be hanged, and another comes up
and says: "That man has got a family, and I have not; that man is in
good health and I am not well, and I will be hung in his place." And
the governor says: "All right; a murder has been committed, and we
have got to have a hanging--we don't care who." Under the Mosaic
dispensation there was no remission of sins without the shedding of
blood. If a man committed a murder he brought a pair of doves or a
sheep to the priest, and the priest laid his hands on the animal, and
the sins of the man were transferred to the animal. You see how that
could be done easy enough. Then they killed the animal, and sprinkled
its blood on the altar. That let the man off. And why did God demand
the sacrifice of a sheep? I will tell you; because priests love mutton.
To make the innocent suffer is the greatest crime. I don't wish to go
to heaven on the virtues of somebody else. If I can't settle by the
books and go, I don't wish to go. I don't want to feel as if I was
there on sufferance--that I was in the poorhouse of the universe,
supported by the town.
They tell us Judas betrayed Christ. Well, if Christ had not been
betrayed, no atonement would have been made, and then every human soul
would have been damned, and heaven would have been for rent.
Supposing that Judas knew the Christian system, then perhaps he thought
that by betraying Christ he could get forgiven, not only for the sins
that he had already committed but for the sin of betrayal, and if, on
the way to Calvary, and later, some brave, heroic soul had rescued
Christ from the mob, he would have made his own damnation sure. It
won't do. There is no logic in that.
They say God tried to civilize the Jews. If He had succeeded,
according to the Christian system, we all would have been damned,
because if the Jews had been civilized they would not have crucified
Christ. They would have believed in the freedom of speech, and as a
result the world would have been lost for two thousand years. The
Christian world has been trying to explain the atonement, and they have
always ended by failing to explain it.
Now I come to the second objection, which is that certain belief is
necessary to salvation. I will believe according to the evidence. In
my mind are certain scales, which weigh everything, and my integrity
stands there and knows which side goes up and which side goes down. If
I am an honest man I will report the weights like an honest man. They
say I must believe a certain thing or I will be eternally damned. They
tell me that to believe is the safer way. I deny it. The safest thing
you can do is to be honest. No man, when the shadows of the last hours
were gathering around him, ever wished that he had lived the life of a
hypocrite. If I find at the Day of Judgment that I have been mistaken,
I will say so, like a man. If God tells me then that he is the author
of the old testament I will admit that he is worse than I thought He
was, and when He comes to pronounce sentence upon me, I will say to
Him: "Do unto others as You would that others should do unto You." I
have a right to think; I cannot control my belief; my brain is my
castle, and if I don't defend it, my soul becomes a slave and a serf.
If you throw away your reason, your soul is not worth saving. Salvation
depends, not upon belief but upon deed--upon kindness, upon justice,
upon mercy. Your own deeds are your savior, and you can be saved in no
other way. I am told in this testament to love my enemies. I cannot;
I will not. I don't hate enemies; I don't wish to injure enemies, but
I don't care about seeing them. I don't like them. I love my friends,
and the man who loves enemies and friends loves me. The doctrine of
non-resistance is born of weakness. The man that first said it, said
it because it was the best he could do under the circumstances. While
the church said, "love your enemies," in her sacred vestments gleamed
the daggers of assassination. With her cunning hand, she wore the
purple for hypocrisy, and placed the crown upon the brow of crime.
For more than one thousand years larceny held the scales of justice,
and hypocrisy wore the mitre, and the tiara of Christ was in fact God.
He knew of the future. He knew what crimes and horrors would be
committed in His name. He knew the fires of persecution would climb
around the limbs of countless martyrs; that brave men and women would
languish in dungeons and darkness; that the church would use
instruments of torture; that in His name His followers would trade in
human flesh; that cradles would be robbed and women's breasts unbabed
for gold, and yet He died with voiceless lips. If Christ was God, why
did He not tell His disciples, and through them, the world, "Man shall
not persecute his fellow-man?" Why didn't He say, "I am God?" Why
didn't He explain the doctrine of the Trinity? Why didn't He tell what
manner of baptism was pleasing to Him? Why didn't He say the old
testament is true? Why didn't He write His testament himself? Why did
He leave His words to accident, to ignorance, to malice, and to chance?
Why didn't He say something positive, definite, satisfactory, about
another world? Why did He not turn the tear-stained hope of
immortality to the glad knowledge of another life? Why did he go
dumbly to His death, leaving the world to misery and to doubt? Because
He was a man.
[Colonel Ingersoll read several extracts from the bible, which he said
originated with Zoroaster, Buddha, Cicero, Epictetus, Pythagoras and
other ancient writers, and he read extracts from various pagan writers,
which he claimed compared favorably with the best things in the bible.
He continued:]
No God has a right to create a man who is to be eternally damned.
Infinite wisdom has no right to make a failure, and a man who is to be
eternally damned is not a conspicuous success. Infinite Wisdom has no
right to make an instrument that will not finally pay a dividend. No
God has a right to add to the agony of this universe, and yet around
the angels of immortality Christianity has coiled this serpent of
eternal pain. Upon love's breast the church has placed that asp, and
yet people talk to me about the consolations of religion.
A few days ago the bark Tiger was found upon the wide sea 126 days from
Liverpool. For nine days not a mouthful of food or a drop of water was
to be had. There was on board the captain, mate, and eleven men. When
they had been out 117 days they killed the captain's dog. Nine days
more--no food, no water, and Captain Kruger stood upon the deck in the
presence of his starving crew. With a revolver in his hand, put it
upon his temple, and said, "Boys, this can't last much longer; I am
willing to die to save the rest of you." The mate grasped the revolver
from his hand, and said, "Wait;" and the next day upon the horizon of
despair was the smoke of the ship which rescued them. Do you tell me
tonight if Captain Kruger was not a Christian and he had sent that ball
crashing through his generous brain that there was an Almighty waiting
to clutch his naked soul that He might damn him forever? It won't do.
Ah, but they tell me "You have no right to pick the bad things out of
the bible." I say, an infinite God has no right to put bad things into
His bible. Does anybody believe if God was going to write a book now
He would uphold slavery; that He would favor polygamy; that He would
say kill the heathen, stab the women, dash out the brains of the
children? We have civilized him. We make our own God, and we make Him
better day by day.
Some honest people really believe that in some wonderful way we are
indebted to Moses for geology, to Joshua for astronomy and military
tactics, to Samson for weapons of war, to Daniel for holy curses, to
Solomon for the art of cross-examination, to Jonah for the science of
navigation, to Saint Paul for steamships and locomotives, to the four
Gospels for telegraphs and sewing-machines, to the Apocalypse; for
looms, saw-mills, and telephones; and that to the sermon on the mount
we are indebted for mortars and Krupp guns. We are told that no nation
has ever been civilized without a bible. The Jews had one, and yet
they crucified a perfectly innocent man. They couldn't have done much
worse without a bible.
God must have known 6,000 years ago that it was impossible to civilize
people without a bible just as well as they know it now. Why did He
ever allow a nation to be Without a bible? Why didn't He give a few
leaves to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden? Take from the bible the
miracles, and I admit that the good passages are true. If they are
true they don't need to be inspired. Miracles are the children of
mendacity. Nothing can be more wonderful than the majestic, sublime,
and eternal march of cause and effect. Reason must be the final
arbiter. An inspired book cannot stand against a demonstrated fact.
Is a man to be rewarded eternally for believing without evidence or
against evidence? Do you tell me that the less brain a man has the
better chance he has for heaven? Think of a heaven filled with men who
never thought. Better that all that is should cease to be; better that
God had never been; better that all the springs and seeds of things
should fall and wither in great nature's realm; better that causes and
effects should lose relation; better that every life should change to
breathless death and voiceless blank, and every star to blind oblivion
and moveless naught, than that this religion should be true.
The religion of the future is humanity. The religion of the future
will say to every man, "You have the right to think and investigate for
yourself." Liberty is my religion--everything that is true, every good
thought, every beautiful thing, every self-denying action--all these
make my bible. Every bubble, every star, are passages in my bible. A
constellation is a chapter. Every shining world is a part of it. You
cannot interpolate it; you cannot change it. It is the same forever.
My bible is all that speaks to man. Every violet, every blade of
grass, every tree, every mountain crowned with snow, every star that
shines, every throb of love, every honest act, all that is good and
true combined, make my bible; and upon that book I stand.