in life's last storm are to be saved; and the saved,when they reach shore, are to look back with joyupon the great ship going down to the eternal depths!This is what I call the unutterable meanness of or-thodox Christianity.Mr. Talmage speaks of the "meanness of in-"fidelity."The meanness of orthodox Christianity permits thehusband to be saved, and to be ineffably happy, whilethe wife of his bosom is suffering the tortures of hell.The meanness of orthodox Christianity tells theboy that he can go to heaven and have an eternityof bliss, and that this bliss will not even be cloudedby the fact that the mother who bore him writhes ineternal pain.The meanness of orthodox Christianity allowsa soul to be so captivated with the companionshipof angels as to forget all the old loves and friend-ships of this world.170The meanness of orthodox Christianity, its un-speakable selfishness, allows a soul in heaven to exultin the fact of its own salvation, and at the same timeto care nothing for the damnation of all the rest.The orthodox Christian says that if he can onlysave his little soul, if he can barely squeeze intoheaven, if he can only get past Saint Peter's gate,if he can by hook or crook climb up the oppositebank of Jordan, if he can get a harp in his hand, itmatters not to him what becomes of brother orsister, father or mother, wife or child. He is willingthat they should burn if he can sing.Oh, the unutterable meanness of orthodox Chris-tianity, the infinite heartlessness of the orthodoxangels, who with tearless eyes will forever gaze uponthe agonies of those who were once blood of theirblood and flesh of their flesh!Mr. Talmage describes a picture of the scourgingof Christ, painted by Rubens, and he tells us thathe was so appalled by this picture—by the sight ofthe naked back, swollen and bleeding—that he couldnot have lived had he continued to look; yet thissame man, who could not bear to gaze upon apainted pain, expects to be perfectly happy in heaven,while countiess billions of actual—not painted—men,171women, and children writhe—not in a pictured flame,but in the real and quenchless fires of hell.Question. Mr. Talmage also claims that we areindebted to Christianity for schools, colleges, univer-sities, hospitals and asylums?Answer. This shows that Mr. Talmage has notread the history of the world. Long before Chris-tianity had a place, there were vast libraries. Therewere thousands of schools before a Christian existedon the earth. There were hundreds of hospitalsbefore a line of the New Testament was written.Hundreds of years before Christ, there were hospitalsin India,—not only for men, women and children, buteven for beasts. There were hospitals in Egypt longbefore Moses was born. They knew enough thento cure insanity with music. They surrounded theinsane with flowers, and treated them with kindness.The great libraries at Alexandria were not Chris-tian. The most intellectual nation of the MiddleAges was not Christian. While Christians wereimprisoning people for saying that the earth is round,the Moors in Spain were teaching geography withglobes. They had even calculated the circumferenceof the earth by the tides of the Red Sea.Where did education come from? For a thousand172years Christianity destroyed books and paintings andstatues. For a thousand years Christianity was filledwith hatred toward every effort of the human mind.We got paper from the Moors. Printing had beenknown thousands of years before, in China. A fewmanuscripts, containing a portion of the literature ofGreece, a few enriched with the best thoughts ofthe Roman world, had been preserved from thegeneral wreck and ruin wrought by Christian hate.These became the seeds of intellectual progress.For a thousand years Christianity controlled Europe.The Mohammedans were far in advance of theChristians with hospitals and asylums and institutionsof learning.Just in proportion that we have done away withwhat is known as orthodox Christianity, humanityhas taken its place. Humanity has built all the asy-lums, all the hospitals. Humanity, not Christianity,has done these things. The people of this countryare all willing to be taxed that the insane may becared for, that the sick, the helpless, and the desti-tute may be provided for, not because they areChristians, but because they are humane; and theyare not humane because they are Christians.The colleges of this country have been poisoned by173theology, and their usefulness almost destroyed. Justin proportion that they have gotten from ecclesiasticalcontrol, they have become a good. That college, to-day, which has the most religion has the least truelearning; and that college which is the nearest free,does the most good. Colleges that pit Moses againstmodern geology, that undertake to overthrow theCopernican system by appealing to Joshua, havedone, and are doing, very little good in this world.Suppose that in the first century Pagans had saidto Christians: Where are your hospitals, where areyour asylums, where are your works of charity, whereare your colleges and universities?The Christians undoubtedly would have replied:We have not been in power. There are but fewof us. We have been persecuted to that degreethat it has been about as much as we could do tomaintain ourselves.Reasonable Pagans would have regarded such ananswer as perfectly satisfactory. Yet that questioncould have been asked of Christianity after it hadheld the reins of power for a thousand years, andChristians would have been compelled to say: Wehave no universities, we have no colleges, we haveno real asylums.174The Christian now asks of the atheist: Whereis your asylum, where is your hospital, where is youruniversity? And the atheist answers: There havebeen but few atheists. The world is not yet suffi-ciently advanced to produce them. For hundredsand hundreds of years, the minds of men have beendarkened by the superstitions of Christianity. Priestshave thundered against human knowledge, have de-nounced human reason, and have done all withintheir power to prevent the real progress of mankind.You must also remember that Christianity hasmade more lunatics than it ever provided asylumsfor. Christianity has driven more men and womencrazy than all other religions combined. Hundredsand thousands and millions have lost their reason incontemplating the monstrous falsehoods of Chris-tianity. Thousands of mothers, thinking of theirsons in hell—thousands of fathers, believing theirboys and girls in perdition, have lost their reason.So, let it be distinctly understood, that Christianityhas made ten lunatics—twenty—one hundred—where it has provided an asylum for one.Mr. Talmage also speaks of the hospitals. Whenwe take into consideration the wars that have beenwaged on account of religion, the countless thou-175sands who have been maimed and wounded, throughall the years, by wars produced by theology—then Isay that Christianity has not built hospitals enoughto take care of her own wounded—not enough totake care of one in a hundred. Where Christianityhas bound up the wounds of one, it has pierced thebodies of a hundred others with sword and spear,with bayonet and ball. Where she has providedone bed in a hospital, she has laid away a hundredbodies in bloody graves.Of course I do not expect the church to doanything but beg. Churches produce nothing. Theyare like the lilies of the field. "They toil not, neither"do they spin, yet Solomon in all his glory was not"arrayed like most of them."The churches raise no corn nor wheat. Theysimply collect tithes. They carry the alms' dish.They pass the plate. They take toll. Of coursea mendicant is not expected to produce anything.He does not support,—he is supported. The churchdoes not help. She receives, she devours, sheconsumes, and she produces only discord. She ex-changes mistakes for provisions, faith for food,prayers for pence. The church is a beggar. But wehave this consolation: In this age of the world, this176beggar is not on horseback, and even the walking isnot good.Question. Mr. Talmage says that infidels havedone no good?Answer. Well, let us see. In the first place,what is an "infidel"? He is simply a man in advanceof his time. He is an intellectual pioneer. He isthe dawn of a new day. He is a gentleman with anidea of his own, for which he gave no receipt to thechurch. He is a man who has not been branded asthe property of some one else. An "infidel" is onewho has made a declaration of independence. Inother words, he is a man who has had a doubt. Tohave a doubt means that you have thought uponthe subject—that you have investigated the question;and he who investigates any religion will doubt.All the advance that has been made in the religiousworld has been made by "infidels," by "heretics,"by "skeptics," by doubters,—that is to say, bythoughtful men. The doubt does not come from theignorant members of your congregations. Heresy isnot born of stupidity,—it is not the child of the brain-less. He who is so afraid of hurting the reputationof his father and mother that he refuses to advance,177is not a "heretic." The "heretic" is not true tofalsehood. Orthodoxy is. He who stands faithfullyby a mistake is "orthodox." He who, discoveringthat it is a mistake, has the courage to say so, is an"infidel."An infidel is an intellectual discoverer—one whofinds new isles, new continents, in the vast realm ofthought. The dwellers on the orthodox shore de-nounce this brave sailor of the seas as a buccaneer.And yet we are told that the thinkers of newthoughts have never been of value to the world.Voltaire did more for human liberty than all theorthodox ministers living and dead. He broke athousand times more chains than Luther. Luthersimply substituted his chain for that of the Catholics.Voltaire had none. The Encyclopaedists of Francedid more for liberty than all the writers upon theology.Bruno did more for mankind than millions of "be-"lievers." Spinoza contributed more to the growthof the human intellect than all the orthodox theolo-gians.Men have not done good simply because they havebelieved this or that doctrine. They have done goodin the intellectual world as they have thought andsecured for others the liberty to think and to ex-178press their thoughts. They have done good in thephysical world by teaching their fellows how totriumph over the obstructions of nature. Everyman who has taught his fellow-man to think, hasbeen a benefactor. Every one who has supplied hisfellow-men with facts, and insisted upon their rightto think, has been a blessing to his kind.Mr. Talmage, in order to show what Christianshave done, points us to Whitefield, Luther, Oberlin,Judson, Martyn, Bishop Mcllvaine and HannahMore. I would not for one moment compare GeorgeWhitefield with the inventor of movable type, andthere is no parallel between Frederick Oberlin andthe inventor of paper; not the slightest betweenMartin Luther and the discoverer of the New World;not the least between Adoniram Judson and the in-ventor of the reaper, nor between Henry Martynand the discoverer of photography. Of what use tothe world was Bishop Mcllvaine, compared withthe inventor of needles? Of what use were ahundred such priests compared with the inventorof matches, or even of clothes-pins? Suppose thatHannah More had never lived? about the samenumber would read her writings now. It is hardly fairto compare her with the inventor of the steamship?179The progress of the world—its present improvedcondition—can be accounted for only by the discov-eries of genius, only by men who have had thecourage to express their honest thoughts.After all, the man who invented the telescopefound out more about heaven than the closed eyes ofprayer had ever discovered. I feel absolutely certainthat the inventor of the steam engine was a greaterbenefactor to mankind than the writer of the Presby-terian creed. I may be mistaken, but I think thatrailways have done more to civilize mankind, than anysystem of theology. I believe that the printing presshas done more for the world than the pulpit. It ismy opinion that the discoveries of Kepler did athousand times more to enlarge the minds of menthan the prophecies of Daniel. I feel under fargreater obligation to Humboldt than to Haggai.The inventor of the plow did more good than themaker of the first rosary—because, say what youwill, plowing is better than praying; we can live byplowing without praying, but we can not live bypraying without plowing. So I put my faith in theplow.As Jehovah has ceased to make garments for hischildren,—as he has stopped making coats of skins,180I have great respect for the inventors of the spinning-jenny and the sewing machine. As no more lawsare given from Sinai, I have admiration for the realstatesmen. As miracles have ceased, I rely onmedicine, and on a reasonable compliance with theconditions of health.I have infinite respect for the inventors, thethinkers, the discoverers, and above all, for the un-known millions who have, without the hope of fame,lived and labored for the ones they loved.FIFTH INTERVIEW.Parson. You had belter join the church; it isthe safer way.Sinner. I can't live up to your doctrines, and youknow it.Parson. Well, you can come as near it in thechurch as out; and forgivenesswill be easier if you join us.Sinner. What do you mean by that?Parson. I will tell you. If you join the church,and happen to back-slide now and then, Christ willsay to his Father: "That man is a "friend of mine,and you may charge his account to me."Question. What have you to say about thefifth sermon of the Rev. Mr. Talmage in replyto you?Answer. The text from which he preached is:"Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?"I am compelled to answer these questions in thenegative. That is one reason why I am an infidel.I do not believe that anybody can gather grapes ofthorns, or figs of thistles. That is exactly my doctrine.But the doctrine of the church is, that you can. The184church says, that just at the last, no matter if youhave spent your whole life in raising thorns and thistles,in planting and watering and hoeing and plowingthorns and thistles—that just at the last, if you willrepent, between hoeing the last thistle and taking thelast breath, you can reach out the white and palsiedhand of death and gather from every thorn a clusterof grapes and from every thistle an abundance offigs. The church insists that in this way you cangather enough grapes and figs to last you through alleternity.My doctrine is, that he who raises thorns mustharvest thorns. If you sow thorns, you must reapthorns; and there is no way by which an innocentbeing can have the thorns you raise thrust into hisbrow, while you gather his grapes.But Christianity goes even further than this. Itinsists that a man can plant grapes and gather thorns.Mr. Talmage insists that, no matter how good youare, no matter how kind, no matter how much youlove your wife and children, no matter how manyself-denying acts you do, you will not be allowed toeat of the grapes you raise; that God will step be-tween you and the natural consequences of yourgoodness, and not allow you to reap what you sow.185Mr. Talmage insists, that if you have no faith in theLord Jesus Christ, although you have been goodhere, you will reap eternal pain as your harvest; thatthe effect of honesty and kindness will not be peaceand joy, but agony and pain. So that the churchdoes insist not only that you can gather grapes fromthorns, but thorns from grapes.I believe exactly the other way. If a man is agood man here, dying will not change him, and hewill land on the shore of another world—if there isone—the same good man that he was when he leftthis; and I do not believe there is any God in thisuniverse who can afford to damn a good man. ThisGod will say to this man: You loved your wife,your children, and your friends, and I love you.You treated others with kindness; I will treat youin the same way. But Mr. Talmage steps up tohis God, nudges his elbow, and says: Although hewas a very good man, he belonged to no church;he was a blasphemer; he denied the whale story, andafter I explained that Jonah was only in the whale'smouth, he still denied it; and thereupon Mr. Tal-mage expects that his infinite God will fly in apassion, and in a perfect rage will say: What! didhe deny that story? Let him be eternally damned!186Not only this, but Mr. Talmage insists that a manmay have treated his wife like a wild beast; may havetrampled his child beneath the feet of his rage; mayhave lived a life of dishonesty, of infamy, and yet,having repented on his dying bed, having made hispeace with God through the intercession of his Son,he will be welcomed in heaven with shouts of joy.I deny it. I do not believe that angels can be soquickly made from rascals. I have but little confi-dence in repentance without restitution, and a hus-band who has driven a wife to insanity and death byhis cruelty—afterward repenting and finding himselfin heaven, and missing his wife,—were he worthy tobe an angel, would wander through all the gulfs ofhell until he clasped her once again..Now, the next question is, What must be done withthose who are sometimes good and sometimes bad?That is my condition. If there is another world, Iexpect to have the same opportunity of behavingmyself that I have here. If, when I get there, I failto act as I should, I expect to reap what I sow. If,when I arrive at the New Jerusalem, I go into thethorn business, I expect to harvest what I plant. IfI am wise enough to start a vineyard, I expect tohave grapes in the early fall. But if I do there as I187have done here—plant some grapes and some thorns,and harvest them together—I expect to fare verymuch as I have fared here. But I expect year byyear to grow wiser, to plant fewer thorns everyspring, and more grapes.Question. Mr. Talmage charges that you havetaken the ground that the Bible is a cruel book, andhas produced cruel people?Answer. Yes, I have taken that ground, and Imaintain it. The Bible was produced by cruel people,and in its turn it has produced people like its authors.The extermination of the Canaanites was cruel.Most of the laws of Moses were bloodthirsty andcruel. Hundreds of offences were punishable bydeath, while now, in civilized countries, there are onlytwo crimes for which the punishment is capital. Icharge that Moses and Joshua and David and Samueland Solomon were cruel. I believe that to read andbelieve the Old Testament naturally makes a mancareless of human life. That book has producedhundreds of religious wars, and it has furnished thebattle-cries of bigotry for fifteen hundred years.The Old Testament is filled with cruelty, but itscruelty stops with this world, its malice ends with188death; whenever its victim has reached the grave,revenge is satisfied. Not so with the New Testament.It pursues its victim forever. After death, comeshell; after the grave, the worm that never dies. Sothat, as a matter of fact, the New Testament is in-finitely more cruel than the Old.Nothing has so tended to harden the human heartas the doctrine of eternal punishment, and thatpassage: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be"saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned,"has shed more blood than all the other so-called"sacred books" of all this world.I insist that the Bible is cruel. The Bible inventedinstruments of torture. The Bible laid the foundationsof the Inquisition. The Bible furnished the fagots andthe martyrs. The Bible forged chains not only for thehands, but for the brains of men. The Bible was atthe bottom of the massacre of St. Bartholomew.Every man who has been persecuted for religion'ssake has been persecuted by the Bible. That sacredbook has been a beast of prey.The truth is, Christians have been good in spite ofthe Bible. The Bible has lived upon the reputations ofgood men and good women,—men and women whowere good notwithstanding the brutality they found189upon the inspired page. Men have said: "My mother"believed in the Bible; my mother was good; there-"fore, the Bible is good," when probably the mothernever read a chapter in it.The Bible produced the Church of Rome, andTorquemada was a product of the Bible. Philip ofSpain and the Duke of Alva were produced by theBible. For thirty years Europe was one vast battle-field, and the war was produced by the Bible. The re-vocation of the Edict of Nantes was produced by thesacred Scriptures. The instruments of torture—thepincers, the thumb-screws, the racks, were producedby the word of God. The Quakers of New Englandwere whipped and burned by the Bible—their childrenwere stolen by the Bible. The slave-ship had for itssails the leaves of the Bible. Slavery was upheld inthe United States by the Bible. The Bible was theauction-block. More than this, worse than this,infinitely beyond the computation of imagination, thedespotisms of the old world all rested and still restupon the Bible. "The powers that be" were sup-posed to have been "ordained of God;" and he whorose against his king periled his soul.In this connection, and in order to show the stateof society when the church had entire control of civil190and ecclesiastical affairs, it may be well enough toread the following, taken from theNew York SunofMarch 21, 1882. From this little extract, it will beeasy in the imagination to re-organize the governmentthat then existed, and to see clearly the state of so-ciety at that time. This can be done upon the sameprinciple that one scale tells of the entire fish, or onebone of the complete animal:"From records in the State archives of Hesse-"Darmstadt, dating back to the thirteenth century,"it appears that the public executioner's fee for boiling"a criminal in oil was twenty-four florins; for decapi-"tating with the sword, fifteen florins and-a-half; for"quartering, the same; for breaking on the wheel,"five florins, thirty kreuzers; for tearing a man to"pieces, eighteen florins. Ten florins per head was"his charge for hanging, and he burned delinquents"alive at the rate of fourteen florins apiece. For ap-"plying the 'Spanish boot' his fee was only two"florins. Five florins were paid to him every time he"subjected a refractory witness to the torture of the"rack. The same amount was his due for 'branding"'the sign of the gallows with a red-hot iron upon"'the back, forehead, or cheek of a thief,' as well as"for 'cutting off the nose and ears of a slanderer or191"'blasphemer.' Flogging with rods was a cheap"punishment, its remuneration being fixed at three"florins, thirty kreuzers."The Bible has made men cruel. It is a cruel book.And yet, amidst its thorns, amidst its thistles, amidstits nettles and its swords and pikes, there are someflowers, and these I wish, in common with all goodmen, to save.I do not believe that men have ever been mademerciful in war by reading the Old Testament. I donot believe that men have ever been prompted tobreak the chain of a slave by reading the Pentateuch.The question is not whether Florence Nightingale andMiss Dix were cruel. I have said nothing aboutJohn Howard, nothing about Abbott Lawrence.I say nothing about people in this connection. Thequestion is: Is the Bible a cruel book? not: WasMiss Nightingale a cruel woman? There have beenthousands and thousands of loving, tender and char-itable Mohammedans. Mohammedan mothers lovetheir children as well as Christian mothers can.Mohammedans have died in defence of the Koran—died for the honor of an impostor. There weremillions of charitable people in India—millions inEgypt—and I am not sure that the world has ever192produced people who loved one another better thanthe Egyptians.I think there are many things in the Old Testamentcalculated to make man cruel. Mr. Talmage asks:"What has been the effect upon your children? As"they have become more and more fond of the"Scriptures have they become more and more fond"of tearing off the wings of flies and pinning grass-"hoppers and robbing birds' nests?"I do not believe that reading the bible would makethem tender toward flies or grasshoppers. Accordingto that book, God used to punish animals for thecrimes of their owners. He drowned the animals ina flood. He visited cattle with disease. He bruisedthem to death with hailstones—killed them by thethousand. Will the reading of these things makechildren kind to animals? So, the whole system ofsacrifices in the Old Testament is calculated to hardenthe heart. The butchery of oxen and lambs, the killingof doves, the perpetual destruction of life, the con-tinual shedding of blood—these things, if they haveany tendency, tend only to harden the heart of child-hood.The Bible does not stop simply with the killing ofanimals. The Jews were commanded to kill their193neighbors—not only the men, but the women; notonly the women, but the babes. In accordance withthe command of God, the Jews killed not only theirneighbors, but their own brothers; and according tothis book, which is the foundation, as Mr. Talmagebelieves, of all mercy, men were commanded to killtheir wives because they differed with them on thesubject of religion.Nowhere in the world can be found laws more un-just and cruel than in the Old Testament.Question. Mr. Talmage wants you to tell wherethe cruelty of the Bible crops out in the lives of Chris-tians?Answer. In the first place, millions of Christianshave been persecutors. Did they get the idea ofpersecution from the Bible? Will not every honestman admit that the early Christians, by reading theOld Testament, became convinced that it was notonly their privilege, but their duty, to destroy heathennations? Did they not, by reading the same book,come to the conclusion that it was their solemn dutyto extirpate heresy and heretics? According to theNew Testament, nobody could be saved unless hebelieved in the Lord Jesus Christ. The early Chris-194tians believed this dogma. They also believed thatthey had a right to defend themselves and theirchildren from "heretics."We all admit that a man has a right to defend hischildren against the assaults of a would-be murderer,and he has the right to carry this defence to theextent of killing the assailant. If we have the rightto kill people who are simply trying to kill the bodiesof our children, of course we have the right to killthem when they are endeavoring to assassinate, notsimply their bodies, but their souls. It was in thisway Christians reasoned. If the Testament is right,their reasoning was correct. Whoever believes theNew Testament literally—whoever is satisfied that itis absolutely the word of God, will become a perse-cutor. All religious persecution has been, and is, inexact harmony with the teachings of the Old andNew Testaments. Of course I mean with some ofthe teachings. I admit that there are passages inboth the Old and New Testaments against persecu-tion. These are passages quoted only in time ofpeace. Others are repeated to feed the flames ofwar.I find, too, that reading the Bible and believing theBible do not prevent even ministers from telling false-195hoods about their opponents. I find that the Rev.Mr. Talmage is willing even to slander the dead,—that he is willing to stain the memory of a Christian,and that he does not hesitate to give circulationto what he knows to be untrue. Mr. Talmagehas himself, I believe, been the subject of a churchtrial. How many of the Christian witnesses againsthim, in his judgment, told the truth? Yet they wereall Bible readers and Bible believers. What effect, inhis judgment, did the reading of the Bible have uponhis enemies? Is he willing to admit that the testi-mony of a Bible, reader and believer is true? Is hewilling to accept the testimony even of ministers?—of his brother ministers? Did reading the Biblemake them bad people? Was it a belief in the Biblethat colored their testimony? Or, was it a belief inthe Bible that made Mr. Talmage deny the truth oftheir statements?Question. Mr. Talmage charges you with havingsaid that the Scriptures are a collection of pollutedwritings?Answer. I have never said such a thing. I havesaid, and I still say, that there are passages in theBible unfit to be read—passages that never should196have been written—passages, whether inspired oruninspired, that can by no possibility do any humanbeing any good. I have always admitted that thereare good passages in the Bible—many good, wiseand just laws—many things calculated to make menbetter—many things calculated to make men worse.I admit that the Bible is a mixture of good and bad,of truth and falsehood, of history and fiction, of senseand nonsense, of virtue and vice, of aspiration andrevenge, of liberty and tyranny.I have never said anything against Solomon'sSong. I like it better than I do any book that pre-cedes it, because it touches upon the human. In thedesert of murder, wars of extermination, polygamy,concubinage and slavery, it is an oasis where thetrees grow, where the birds sing, and where humanlove blossoms and fills the air with perfume. I donot regard that book as obscene. There are manythings in it that are beautiful and tender, and it iscalculated to do good rather than harm.Neither have I any objection to the book of Eccle-siastes—except a few interpolations in it. That bookwas written by a Freethinker, by a philosopher.There is not the slightest mention of God in it, norof another state of existence. All portions in which197God is mentioned are interpolations. With some ofthis book I agree heartily. I believe in the doctrineof enjoying yourself, if you can, to-day. I think itfoolish to spend all your years in heaping up treas-ures, not knowing but he who will spend them is tobe an idiot. I believe it is far better to be happy withyour wife and child now, than to be miserable here,with angelic expectations in some other world.Mr. Talmage is mistaken when he supposes that allBible believers have good homes, that all Bible readersare kind in their families. As a matter of fact, nearly allthe wife-whippers of the United States are orthodox.Nine-tenths of the people in the penitentiaries arebelievers. Scotland is one of the most orthodoxcountries in the world, and one of the most intem-perate. Hundreds and hundreds of women arearrested every year in Glasgow for drunkenness.Visit the Christian homes in the manufacturing dis-tricts of England. Talk with the beaters of childrenand whippers of wives, and you will find them be-lievers. Go into what is known as the "Black"Country," and you will have an idea of the Chris-tian civilization of England.Let me tell you something about the "Black"Country." There women work in iron; there women198do the work of men. Let me give you an instance:A commission was appointed by Parliament to ex-amine into the condition of the women in the "Black"Country," and a report was made. In that reportI read the following:"A superintendent of a brickyard where women"were engaged in carrying bricks from the yard to"the kiln, said to one of the women:"'Eliza, you don't appear to be very uppish this"morning.'""'Neither would you be very uppish, sir,' she re-"plied, 'if you had had a child last night.'"This gives you an idea of the Christian civilizationof England.England and Ireland produce most of the prize-fighters. The scientific burglar is a product of GreatBritain. There is not the great difference that Mr.Talmage supposes, between the morality of Pekinand of New York. I doubt if there is a city inthe world with more crime according to the populationthan New York, unless it be London, or it may beDublin, or Brooklyn, or possibly Glasgow, wherea man too pious to read a newspaper published onSunday, stole millions from the poor.I do not believe there is a country in the world199where there is more robbery than in Christian lands—no country where more cashiers are defaulters, wheremore presidents of banks take the money of depositors,where there is more adulteration of food, wherefewer ounces make a pound, where fewer inches makea yard, where there is more breach of trust, morerespectable larceny under the name of embezzlement,or more slander circulated as gospel.Question. Mr. Talmage insists that there are nocontradictions in the Bible—that it is a perfect har-mony from Genesis to Revelation—a harmony asperfect as any piece of music ever written byBeethoven or Handel?Answer. Of course, if God wrote it, the Bibleought to be perfect. I do not see why a ministershould be so perfectly astonished to find that aninspired book is consistent with itself throughout.Yet the truth is, the Bible is infinitely inconsistent.Compare the two systems—the system of Jehovahand that of Jesus. In the Old Testament the doctrineof "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" wastaught. In the New Testament, "forgive your"enemies," and "pray for those who despitefully"use you and persecute you." In the Old Testament200it is kill, burn, massacre, destroy; in the New forgive.The two systems are inconsistent, and one is justabout as far wrong as the other. To live for andthirst for revenge, to gloat over the agony of anenemy, is one extreme; to "resist not evil" is theother extreme; and both these extremes are equallydistant from the golden mean of justice.The four gospels do not even agree as to the termsof salvation. And yet, Mr. Talmage tells us thatthere are four cardinal doctrines taught in the Bible—the goodness of God, the fall of man, the sympatheticand forgiving nature of the Savior, and two desti-nies—one for believers and the other for unbelievers.That is to say:1. That God is good, holy and forgiving.2. That man is a lost sinner.3. That Christ is "all sympathetic," and ready totake the whole world to his heart.4. Heaven for believers and hell for unbelievers.First. I admit that the Bible says that God isgood and holy. But this Bible also tells what Goddid, and if God did what the Bible says he did, then Iinsist that God is not good, and that he is not holy,or forgiving. According to the Bible, this goodGod believed in religious persecution; this good201God believed in extermination, in polygamy, in con-cubinage, in human slavery; this good God com-manded murder and massacre, and this good Godcould only be mollified by the shedding of blood.This good God wanted a butcher for a priest. Thisgood God wanted husbands to kill their wives—wanted fathers and mothers to kill their children.This good God persecuted animals on account of thecrimes of their owners. This good God killed thecommon people because the king had displeased him.This good God killed the babe even of the maidbehind the mill, in order that he might get even witha king. This good God committed every possiblecrime.Second. The statement that man is a lost sinneris not true. There are thousands and thousands ofmagnificent Pagans—men ready to die for wife, orchild, or even for friend, and the history of Pagancountries is filled with self-denying and heroic acts.If man is a failure, the infinite God, if there be one,is to blame. Is it possible that the God of Mr. Tal-mage could not have made man a success? Accord-ing to the Bible, his God made man knowing that inabout fifteen hundred years he would have to drownall his descendants.202Why would a good God create a man that heknew would be a sinner all his life, make hundredsof thousands of his fellow-men unhappy, and who atlast would be doomed to an eternity of suffering?Can such a God be good? How could a devil havedone worse?Third.If God is infinitely good, is he not fully assympathetic as Christ? Do you have to employChrist to mollify a being of infinite mercy? Is Christany more willing to take to his heart the whole worldthan his Father is? Personally, I have not theslightest objection in the world to anybody believingin an infinitely good and kind God—not the slightestobjection to any human being worshiping an infi-nitely tender and merciful Christ—not the slightestobjection to people preaching about heaven, or aboutthe glories of the future state—not the slightest.Fourth. I object to the doctrine of two destiniesfor the human race. I object to the infamous false-hood of eternal fire. And yet, Mr. Talmage is en-deavoring to poison the imagination of men, womenand children with the doctrine of an eternal hell.Here is what he preaches, taken from the "Constitu-"tion of the Presbyterian Church of the United"States:"203"By the decrees of God, for the manifestation of"his glory, some men and angels are predestinated"to everlasting life, and others foreordained to ever-"lasting death."That is the doctrine of Mr. Talmage. He wor-ships a God who damns people "for the manifesta-"tion of his glory,"—a God who made men, knowingthat they would be damned—a God who damnsbabes simply to increase his reputation with theangels. This is the God of Mr. Talmage. Such aGod I abhor, despise and execrate.Question. What does Mr. Talmage think of man-kind? What is his opinion of the "unconverted"?How does he regard the great and glorious of theearth, who have not been the victims of his particularsuperstition? What does he think of some of thebest the earth has produced?Answer. I will tell you how he looks upon allsuch. Read this from his "Confession of Faith:""Our first parents, being seduced by the subtlety"of the tempter, sinned in eating the forbidden fruit."By this sin, they fell from their original righteous-"ness and communion with God, and so became"dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties204"and parts of soul and body; and they being the"root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was"imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted"nature conveyed to all their posterity. From this"original corruption—whereby we are utterly indis-"posed, disabled, and made opposite to all good,"and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual"transgressions."This is Mr. Talmage's view of humanity.Why did his God make a devil? Why did heallow the devil to tempt Adam and Eve? Why didhe leave innocence and ignorance at the mercy ofsubtlety and wickedness? Why did he put "the"tree of the knowledge of good and evil" in thegarden? For what reason did he place temptationin the way of his children? Was it kind, was it just,was it noble, was it worthy of a good God? Nowonder Christ put into his prayer: "Lead us not"into temptation."At the time God told Adam and Eve not to eat,why did he not tell them of the existence of Satan?Why were they not put upon their guard against theserpent? Why did not God make his appearancejust before the sin, instead of just after. Why didhe not play the role of a Savior instead of that of a205detective? After he found that Adam and Eve hadsinned—knowing as he did that they were thentotally corrupt—knowing that all their childrenwould be corrupt, knowing that in fifteen hundredyears he would have to drown millions of them, whydid he not allow Adam and Eve to perish in accord-ance with natural law, then kill the devil, and make anew pair?When the flood came, why did he not drown all?Why did he save for seed that which was "perfectly"and thoroughly corrupt in all its parts and facul-"ties"? If God had drowned Noah and his sonsand their families, he could have then made a newpair, and peopled the world with men not "wholly"defiled in all their faculties and parts of soul and"body."Jehovah learned nothing by experience. He per-sisted in his original mistake. What would we thinkof a man who finding that a field of wheat wasworthless, and that such wheat never could beraised with profit, should burn all of the field with theexception of a few sheaves, which he saved for seed?Why save such seed? Why should God have pre-served Noah, knowing that he was totally corrupt,and that he would again fill the world with infamous206people—people incapable of a good action? Hemust have known at that time, that by preservingNoah, the Canaanites would be produced, that thesesame Canaanites would have to be murdered, thatthe babes in the cradles would have to be strangled.Why did he produce them? He knew at that time,that Egypt would result from the salvation of Noah,that the Egyptians would have to be nearly de-stroyed, that he would have to kill their first-born,that he would have to visit even their cattle withdisease and hailstones. He knew also that theEgyptians would oppress his chosen people for twohundred and fifteen years, that they would upon theback of toil inflict the lash. Why did he preserveNoah? He should have drowned all, and startedwith a new pair. He should have warned themagainst the devil, and he might have succeeded, inthat way, in covering the world with gentlemen andladies, with real men and real women.We know that most of the people now in theworld are not Christians. Most who have heard thegospel of Christ have rejected it, and the Presby-terian Church tells us what is to become of all thesepeople. This is the "glad tidings of great joy."Let us see:207"All mankind, by their fall, lost communion with"God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made"liable to all the miseries of this life, to death itself,"and to the pains of hell forever."According to this good Presbyterian doctrine, allthat we suffer in this world, is the result of Adam'sfall. The babes of to-day suffer for the crime of thefirst parents. Not only so; but God is angry at usfor what Adam did. We are under the wrath of aninfinite God, whose brows are corrugated with eternalhatred.Why should God hate us for being what we areand necessarily must have been? A being that Godmade—the devil—for whose work God is responsible,according to the Bible wrought this woe. God of hisown free will must have made the devil. What didhe make him for? Was it necessary to have a devilin heaven? God, having infinite power, can ofcourse destroy this devil to-day. Why does he per-mit him to live? Why did he allow him to thwart hisplans? Why did he permit him to pollute the inno-cence of Eden? Why does he allow him now towrest souls by the million from the redeeming handof Christ?According to the Scriptures, the devil has always208been successful. He enjoys himself. He is called"the prince of the power of the air." He has noconscientious scruples. He has miraculous power.All miraculous power must come of God, otherwiseit is simply in accordance with nature. If the devilcan work a miracle, it is only with the consent andby the assistance of the Almighty. Is the God ofMr. Talmage in partnership with the devil? Dothey divide profits?We are also told by the Presbyterian Church—I quote from their Confession of Faith—that "there"is no sin so small but it deserves damnation.'' YetMr. Talmage tells us that God is good, that he is filledwith mercy and loving-kindness. A child nine or tenyears of age commits a sin, and thereupon it deserveseternal damnation. That is what Mr. Talmage calls,not simply justice, but mercy; and the sympatheticheart of Christ is not touched. The same being whosaid: "Suffer little children to come unto me," tellsus that a child, for the smallest sin, deserves to beeternally damned. The Presbyterian Church tells usthat infants, as well as adults, in order to be saved,need redemption by the blood of Christ, and regen-eration by the Holy Ghost.I am charged with trying to take the consolation209of this doctrine from the world. I am a criminalbecause I am endeavoring to convince the motherthat her child does not deserve eternal punishment.I stand by the graves of those who "died in their"sins," by the tombs of the "unregenerate," over theashes of men who have spent their lives working fortheir wives and children, and over the sacred dust ofsoldiers who died in defence of flag and country,and I say to their friends—I say to the living wholoved them, I say to the men and women for whomthey worked, I say to the children whom they edu-cated, I say to the country for which they died:These fathers, these mothers, these wives, thesehusbands, these soldiers are not in hell.Question. Mr. Talmage insists that the Bible isscientific, and that the real scientific man sees nocontradiction between revelation and science; that,on the contrary, they are in harmony. What is yourunderstanding of this matter?Answer. I do not believe the Bible to be a sci-entific book. In fact, most of the ministers now admitthat it was not written to teach any science. Theyadmit that the first chapter of Genesis is not geo-logically true. They admit that Joshua knew nothing210of science. They admit that four-footed birds didnot exist in the days of Moses. In fact, the onlyway they can avoid the unscientific statements of theBible, is to assert that the writers simply used thecommon language of their day, and used it, not withthe intention of teaching any scientific truth, but forthe purpose of teaching some moral truth. As amatter of fact, we find that moral truths have beentaught in all parts of this world. They were taughtin India long before Moses lived; in Egypt long be-fore Abraham was born; in China thousands ofyears before the flood. They were taught by hundredsand thousands and millions before the Garden ofEden was planted.It would be impossible to prove the truth of arevelation simply because it contained moral truths.If it taught immorality, it would be absolutely certainthat it was not a revelation from an infinitely goodbeing. If it taught morality, it would be no reasonfor even suspecting that it had a divine origin. Butif the Bible had given us scientific truths; if theignorant Jews had given us the true theory of oursolar system; if from Moses we had learned thenature of light and heat; if from Joshua we hadlearned something of electricity; if the minor pro-211phets had given us the distances to other planets;if the orbits of the stars had been marked by thebarbarians of that day, we might have admitted thatthey must have been inspired. If they had said any-