On this subject, Lord Bacon, himself a Christian, says:--

"Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to

laws, to reputation: all which may be guides to an outward moral virtue,

though religion were not. But superstition dismounts all these, and

createth an absolute monarchy in the minds of men; therefore Atheism did

never perturb States, for it makes men wary of themselves, as looking

no further, and we see the limes inclined to Atheism (as the time

of Augustus Caesar) were civil times; but superstition, that bone

of contention of many States, bringeth in a new _primum mobile_ that

ravishes all the spheres of government."

There are thousands of Atheists in almost every civilized country, and

how is it, if Atheism tends to crime, that you will seldom or never

find one in prison for any crime? Buddhism, one of the most ancient

religions, long ante-dating Christianity, is essentially Atheistic. It

has had, and has now, hundreds of millions of followers, and for pure

morality no system of religion has ever equalled it. Webster, the

Christian lexicographer, admits that Buddhism was "characterized by

admirable humanity and morality." The religion of Confucius--of him

who taught the "golden rule" five centuries before Christianity

appeared--was also Atheistic. Therefore, what we "most need" is, not a

"conviction that there _is_ a personal God" (we have that already; all

the murderers, thieves and defaulters believe that doctrine), but we

need more of the "admirable morality" of Buddhism, and more of the

practice of the "golden rule" of Confucius to "do not unto others what

you would not they should do to you." As Emerson has said, "We want some

good Paganism."

Mr. Wendling's next argument for the existence of a personal God is the

assumed universality of the belief in God, "among every people in every

quarter of the habitable globe," now and "from the very furthest reach

of history." As the value of this argument turns simply on a question

of fact, and as every educated or well-read man knows that the facts

in this case are against Mr. Wendling, and that his assertion is

historically incorrect, it is hardly worth while to spend much time over

it. However, as some readers may not have looked into the authorities on

the subject, I may, perhaps not unprofitably quote briefly from some of

them, and simply refer the reader to others.

To say nothing of the _Atheistic_ character of the Buddhistic religion,

already referred to, with its millions of followers, there have been,

and are to-day, tribes and peoples who have no belief whatever in, or

conception of, a God or Gods. This fact is conclusively proved by

such authorities as Livingston, the great African explorer (himself a

Christian), Sir John Lubbock, J. S. Mill, Darwin, and even John Wesley,

the founder of Methodism, who, surely, ought to be good authority

with Christians; and him we will first put in the witness box against

Mr.-Wendling. Wesley says, in his Sermons, vol. 2, Sermon C:

"After all that has been so plausibly written concerning the 'innate

idea of God;' after all that has been said of its being common to all

men, in all ages and nations, it does not appear that man has any more

idea of God than any of the beasts of the field; he has no knowledge

of God at all. Whatever change may afterward be wrought by his own

reflection or education, he is by nature a mere Atheist."

Charles Darwin, the greatest naturalist in the world, and who is

proverbially careful in his statements, has the following on this

subject in his "Descent of Man," vol. 1, p. 62-3:--

"There is ample evidence, derived not from hasty travellers, but from

men who have long resided with savages, that numerous races have existed

and still exist, who have no idea of one or more Gods, and who have no

words in their languages to express such an idea."

Ingersoll in Canada: A Reply to Wendling, Archbishop Lynch, Bystander; and Others · 第 10 / 21 题