If what is known as the Christian Religion is true, nothing can be more
wonderful than the fact that Matthew, Mark and Luke say nothing about
"salvation by faith;" that they do not even hint at the doctrine of
the atonement, and are as silent as empty tombs as to the necessity of
believing anything to secure happiness in this world or another.
For a good many years it has been claimed that the writers of these
gospels knew something about the teachings of Christ, and had, at least,
a general knowledge of the conditions of salvation. It now seems to
be substantiated that the early Christians did not place implicit
confidence in the gospels, and did not hesitate to make such changes and
additions as they thought proper. Such changes and additions are about
the only passages in the New Testament that the Evangelical Churches
now consider sacred. That portion of the last chapter of Mark, in which
unbelievers are so cheerfully and promptly damned, has been shown to be
an interpolation, and it is asserted that in the revised edition of the
New Testament, soon to be issued, the infamous passages will not appear.
With these expunged, there is not one word in Matthew, Mark, or Luke,
even tending to show that belief in Christ has, or can have, any effect
upon the destiny of the soul.
The four gospels are the four corner-stones upon which rests the fabric
of orthodox Christianity. Three of these stones have crumbled, and the
fourth is not likely to outlast this generation. The gospel of John
cannot alone uphold the infinite absurdity of vicarious virtue and vice,
and it cannot, without the aid of "interpolation," sustain the illogical
and immoral dogma of salvation by faith. These frightful doctrines must
be abandoned; the miraculous must be given up, the wonderful stories
must be expunged, and from the creed of noble deeds the forgeries
of superstition must be blotted out. From the temple of Morality
and Truth--from the great windows towards the sun--the parasitic and
poisonous vines of faith and fable must be torn.
The church will be compelled at last to rest its case, not upon the
wonders Christ is said to have performed, but upon the system of
morality he taught. All the miracles, including the resurrection and
ascension, are, when compared with portions of the "Sermon on the
Mount," but dust and darkness.
The careful reader of the New Testament will find three Christs
described:--One who wished to preserve Judaism--one who wished to
reform it, and one who built a system of his own. The apostles and their
disciples, utterly unable to comprehend a religion that did away with
sacrifices, churches, priests, and creeds, constructed a Christianity
for themselves, so that the orthodox churches of to-day rest--first,
upon what Christ endeavored to destroy--second, upon what he never said,
and, third, upon a misunderstanding of what he did say.
If a certain belief is necessary to insure the salvation of the soul,
the church ought to explain, and without any unnecessary delay, why such
an infinitely important fact was utterly ignored by Matthew, Mark
and Luke. There are only two explanations possible. Either belief is
unnecessary, or the writers of these three gospels did not understand
the Christian system. The "sacredness" of the subject cannot longer hide
the absurdity of the "scheme of salvation," nor the failure of Matthew,
Mark and Luke to mention, what is now claimed to have been, the entire
mission of Christ. The church must take from the New Testament the
supernatural'; the idea that an intellectual conviction can subject an
honest man to eternal pain--the awful doctrine that the innocent can
justly suffer for the guilty, and allow the remainder to be discussed,
denied or believed without punishment and without reward. No one will
object to the preaching of kindness, honesty and justice. To preach less
is a crime, and to practice more is impossible.
There is one thing that ought to be again impressed upon the average
theologian, and that is the utter futility of trying to answer arguments
with personal abuse. It should be understood once for all that these
questions are in no sense personal. If it should turn out that all the
professed Christians in the world are sinless saints, the question of
how Matthew, Mark, and Luke, came to say nothing about the atonement and
the scheme of salvation by faith, would still be asked. And if it should
then be shown that all the doubters, deists, and atheists, are vile and
vicious wretches, the question still would wait for a reply.
The origin of all religions, creeds, and sacred books, is substantially
the same, and the history of one, is, in the main, the history of all.
Thus far these religions have been the mistaken explanations of our
surroundings. The appearances of nature have imposed upon the ignorance
and fear of man. But back of all honest creeds was, and is, the desire
to know, to understand, and to explain, and that desire will, as I
most fervently hope and earnestly believe, be gratified at last by
the discovery of the truth. Until then, let us bear with the theories,
hopes, dreams, mistakes, and honest thoughts of all.
Robert G. Ingersoll.
Washington, D. C.,
October, 1880.