Part 1 (2/2)

V.

WAS JEHOVAH A G.o.d OF LOVE?

Did these words come from the heart of love? -- ”When the Lord thy G.o.d shall drive them before thee, thou shalt smite them and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, or show mercy unto them.””I will heap mischief upon them. I will send mine arrows upon them; they shall be burned with hunger and devoured with burning heat and with bitter destruction.”

”I will send the tooth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust.””The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin; the suckling also with the man of gray hairs.””Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow; let his children be continually vagabonds and beg; let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places; let the extortioner catch all that he hath, and let the stranger spoil his labor; let there be none to extend mercy unto him, neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children.””And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body -- the flesh of thy sons and daughters.””And the heaven that is over thee shall be bra.s.s, and the earth that is under thee shall be iron.””Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.””I will make my arrows drunk with blood.””I will laugh at their calamity.”Did these curses, these threats, come from the heart of love or from the mouth of savagery?Was Jehovah G.o.d or devil?Why should we place Jehovah above all the G.o.ds?Has man in his ignorance and fear ever imagined a greater monster?Have the barbarians of any land, in any time, wors.h.i.+ped a more heartless G.o.d?Brahma was a thousand times n.o.bler, and so was Osiris and Zeus and Jupiter. So was the supreme G.o.d of the Aztecs, to whom they offered only the perfume of flowers. The worst G.o.d of the Hindus, with his necklace of skulls and his bracelets of living snakes, was kind and merciful compared with Jehovah.Compared with Marcus Aurelius, how small Jehovah seems. Compared with Abraham Lincoln, how cruel, how contemptible, is this G.o.d.

VI.

JEHOVAH'S ADMINISTRATION.

He created the world, the hosts of heaven, a man and woman -- placed them in a garden. Then the serpent deceived them, and they were cast out and made to earn their bread.Jehovah had been thwarted.Then he tried again. He went on for about sixteen hundred years trying to civilize the people.No schools, no churches, no Bible, no tracts -- n.o.body taught to read or write. No Ten Commandments. The people grew worse and worse, until the merciful Jehovah sent the flood and drowned all the people except Noah and his family, eight in all.Then he started again, and changed their diet. At first Adam and Eve were vegetarians. After the flood Jehovah said: ”Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you” -- snakes and buzzards.Then he failed again, and at the Tower of Babel he dispersed and scattered the people.

Finding that he could not succeed with all the people, he thought he would try a few, so he selected Abraham and his descendants. Again he failed, and his chosen people were captured by the Egyptians and enslaved for four hundred years.Then he tried again -- rescued them from Pharaoh and started for Palestine.Then he changed their diet, allowing them to eat only the beasts that parted the hoof and chewed the cud. Again he failed. The people hated him, and preferred the slavery of Egypt to the freedom of Jehovah. So he kept them wandering until nearly all who came from Egypt had died. Then he tried again -- took them into Palestine and had them governed by Judges.This, too, was a failure -- no schools, no Bible. Then he tried kings, and the kings were mostly idolaters.Then the chosen people were conquered and carried into captivity by the Babylonians.Another failure.Then they returned, and Jehovah tried prophets -- howlers and wailers -- but the people grew worse and worse. No schools, no sciences, no arts, no commerce. Then Jehovah took upon himself flesh, was born of a woman, and lived among the people that he had been trying to civilize for several thousand years. Then these people, following the law that Jehovah had given them in the wilderness, charged this Jehovah-man -- this Christ -- with blasphemy; tried, convicted and killed him.Jehovah had failed again.Then he deserted the Jews and turned his attention to the rest of the world.And now the Jews, deserted by Jehovah, persecuted by Christians, are the most prosperous people on the earth. Again has Jehovah failed.What an administration!

VII.

THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Who wrote the New Testament?Christian scholars admit that they do not know. They admit that, if the four gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, they must have been written in Hebrew. And yet a Hebrew ma.n.u.script of any one of these gospels has never been found. All have been and are in Greek. So, educated theologians admit that the Epistles, James and Jude, were written by persons who had never seen one of the four gospels. In these Epistles -- in James and Jude -- no reference is made to any of the gospels, nor to any miracle recorded in them.The first mention that has been found of one of our gospels was made about one hundred and eight years after the birth of Christ, and the four gospels were first named and quoted from at the beginning of the third century, about one hundred an seventy years after the death of Christ.

We now know that there were many other gospels besides our four, some of which have been lost. There were the gospels of Paul, of the Egyptians, of the Hebrews, of Perfection, of Judas, of Thaddeus, of the Infancy, of Thomas, of Mary, of Andrew, of Nicodemus, of Marcion and several others.So there were the Acts of Pilate, of Andrew, of Mary, of Paul and Thecla and of many others; also a book called the Shepherd of Hermas.At first not one of all the books was considered as inspired. The Old Testament was regarded as divine; but the books that now const.i.tute the New Testament were regarded as human productions. We now know that we do not know who wrote the four gospels.The question is, Were the authors of these four gospels inspired?If they were inspired, then the four gospels mast be true. If they are true, they mast agree.The four gospels do not agree.Matthew, Mark and Luke knew nothing of the atonement, nothing of salvation by faith. They knew only the gospel of good deeds -- of charity. They teach that if we forgive others G.o.d will forgive us.With this the gospel of John does not agree.

In that gospel we are taught that we must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ; that we must be born again; that we must drink the blood and eat the flesh of Christ. In this gospel we find the doctrine of the atonement and that Christ died for us and suffered in our place.This gospel is utterly at variance with the other three. If the other three are true, the gospel of John is false. If the gospel of John was written by an inspired man, the writers of the other three were uninspired. From this there is no possible escape. The four cannot be true.It is evident that there are many interpolations in the four gospels.For instance, in the 28th chapter of Matthew is an account to the effect that the soldiers at the tomb of Christ were bribed to say that the disciples of Jesus stole away his body while they, the soldiers, slept.This is clearly an interpolation. It is a break in the narrative.The 10th verse should be followed by the 16th. The 10th verse is as follows:”Then Jesus said unto them, 'Be not afraid; go tell my brethren that they go unto Galilee and there shall they see me.'”The 16th verse:”Then the eleven disciples went away unto Galilee into a mountain, where Jesus had appointed them.”The story about the soldiers contained in the 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th and 15th verses is an interpolation -- an afterthought -- long after. The 15th verse demonstrates this.

Fifteenth verse: ”So they took the money and did as they were taught. And this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.”Certainly this account was not in the original gospel, and certainly the 15th verse was not written by a Jew. No Jew could have written this: ”And this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.”Mark, John and Luke never heard that the soldiers had been bribed by the priests; or, if they had, did not think it worth while recording. So the accounts of the Ascension of Jesus Christ in Mark and Luke are interpolations. Matthew says nothing about the Ascension.Certainly there never was a greater miracle, and yet Matthew, who was present -- who saw the Lord rise, ascend and disappear -- did not think it worth mentioning.On the other hand, the last words of Christ, according to Matthew, contradict the Ascension: ”Lo I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.”John, who was present, if Christ really ascended, says not one word on the subject.As to the Ascension, the gospels do not agree.Mark gives the last conversation that Christ had with his disciples, as follows:”Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be d.a.m.ned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover. So, then, after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven and sat on the right hand of G.o.d.”

Is it possible that this description was written by one who witnessed this miracle?This miracle is described by Luke as follows.”And it came to pa.s.s while he blessed them he was parted from them and carried up into heaven.””Brevity is the soul of wit.”In the Acts we are told that: ”When he had spoken, while they beheld, he was taken up, and a cloud received him out of their sight.”Neither Luke, nor Matthew, nor John, nor the writer of the Acts, heard one word of the conversation attributed to Christ by Mark. The fact is that the Ascension of Christ was not claimed by his disciples.At first Christ was a man -- nothing more. Mary was his mother, Joseph his father. The genealogy of his father, Joseph, was given to show that he was of the blood of David.Then the claim was made that he was the son of G.o.d, and that his mother was a virgin, and that she remained a virgin until her death.Then the claim was made that Christ rose from the dead and ascended bodily to heaven.It required many years for these absurdities to take possession of the minds of men.If Christ rose from the dead, why did he not appear to his enemies? Why did he not call on Caiaphas, the high priest? Why did he not make another triumphal entry into Jerusalem?If he really ascended, why did he not do so in public, in the presence of his persecutors? Why should this, the greatest of miracles, be done in secret. in a corner?It was a miracle that could have been seen by a vast mult.i.tude -- a miracle that could not be simulated -- one that would have convinced hundreds of thousands.After the story of the Resurrection, the Ascension became a necessity. They had to dispose of the body.So there are many other interpolations in the gospels and epistles.Again I ask: Is the New Testament true? Does anybody now believe that at the birth of Christ there was a celestial greeting; that a star led the Wise Men of the East; that Herod slew the babes of Bethlehem of two years old and under?The gospels are filled with accounts of miracles. Were they ever performed?Matthew gives the particulars of about twenty-two miracles, Mark of about nineteen, Luke of about eighteen and John of about seven.According to the gospels, Christ healed diseases, cast out devils, rebuked the sea, cured the blind, fed mult.i.tudes with five loaves and two fishes, walked on the sea, cursed a fig tree, turned water into wine and raised the dead.Matthew is the only one that tells about the Star and the Wise Men -- the only one that tells about the murder of babes.John is the only one who says anything about the resurrection of Lazarus, and Luke is the only one giving an account of the rising from the dead the widow of Nain's son.How is it possible to substantiate these miracles?The Jews, among whom they were said to have been performed, did not believe them. The diseased, the palsied, the leprous, the blind who were cured, did not become followers of Christ. Those that were raised from the dead were never heard of again.Does any intelligent man believe in the existence of devils? The writer of three of the gospels certainly did. John says nothing about Christ having cast out devils, but Matthew, Mark and Luke give many instances.Does any natural man now believe that Christ cast out devils? If his disciples said he did, they were mistaken. If Christ said he did, he was insane or an impostor.If the accounts of casting out devils are false, then the writers were ignorant or dishonest. If they wrote through ignorance, then they were not inspired. If they wrote what they knew to be false, they were not inspired. If what they wrote is untrue, whether they knew it or not, they were not inspired.At that time it was believed that palsy, epilepsy, deafness, insanity and many other diseases were caused by devils; that devils took possession of and lived in the bodies of men and women. Christ believed this, taught this belief to others, and pretended to cure diseases by casting devils out of the sick and insane. We know now, if we know anything, that diseases are not caused by the presence of devils. We know, if we know anything, that devils do not reside in the bodies of men.If Christ said and did what the writers of the three gospels say he said and did, then Christ was mistaken. If he was mistaken, certainly he was not G.o.d. And if he was mistaken, certainly he was not inspired.

Is it a fact that the Devil tried to bribe Christ?Is it a fact that the Devil carried Christ to the top of the temple and tried to induce him to leap to the ground?How can these miracles be established?The princ.i.p.als have written nothing, Christ has written nothing, and the Devil has remained silent.How can we know that the Devil tried to bribe Christ? Who wrote the account? We do not know. How did the writer get his information? We do not know.Somebody, some seventeen hundred years ago, said that the Devil tried to bribe G.o.d; that the Devil carried G.o.d to the top of the temple and tried to induce him to leap to the earth and that G.o.d was intellectually too keen for the Devil.This is all the evidence we have.Is there anything in the literature, of the world more perfectly idiotic?Intelligent people no longer believe in witches, wizards, spooks and devils, and they are perfectly satisfied that every word in the New Testament about casting out devils is utterly false.Can we believe that Christ raised the dead?A widow living in Nain is following the body of her son to the tomb. Christ halts the funeral procession and raises the young man from the dead and gives him back to the arms of his mother.This young man disappears. He is never heard of again. No one takes the slightest interest in the man who returned from the realm of death. Luke is the only one who tells the story. Maybe Matthew, Mark and John never heard of it, or did not believe it and so failed to record it.John says that Lazarus was raised from the dead; Matthew, Mark and Luke say nothing about it.It was more wonderful than the raising of the widow's son. He had not been laid in the tomb for days. He was only on his way to the grave, but Lazarus was actually dead. He had begun to decay.Lazarus did not excite the least interest. No one asked him about the other world. No one inquired of him about their dead friends. When he died the second time no one said: ”He is not afraid. He has traveled that road twice and knows just where he is going.”We do not believe in the miracles of Mohammed, and yet they are as well attested as this. We have no confidence in the miracles performed by Joseph Smith, and yet the evidence is far greater, far better.If a man should go about now pretending to raise the dead, pretending to cast out devils, we would regard him as insane. What, then, can we say of Christ? If we wish to save his reputation we are compelled to say that he never pretended to raise the dead; that he never claimed to have cast out devils.We must take the ground that these ignorant and impossible things were invented by zealous disciples, who sought to deify their leader.In those ignorant days these falsehoods added to the fame of Christ. But now they put his character in peril and belittle the authors of the gospels.Can we now believe that water was changed into wine? John tells of this childish miracle, and says that the other disciples were present, yet Matthew, Mark and Luke say nothing about it.Take the miracle of the man cured by the pool of Bethseda. John says that an angel troubled the waters of the pool of Bethseda, and that whoever got into the pool first after the waters were troubled was healed.Does anybody now believe that an angel went into the pool and troubled the waters? Does anybody now think that the poor wretch who got in first was healed? Yet the author of the gospel according to John believed and a.s.serted these absurdities. If he was mistaken about that he may have been about all the miracles he records.John is the only one who tells about this pool of Bethseda. Possibly the other disciples did not believe the story.How can we account for these pretended miracles?In the days of the disciples, and for many centuries after, the world was filled with the supernatural. Nearly everything that happened was regarded as miraculous. G.o.d was the immediate governor of the world. If the people were good, G.o.d sent seed time and harvest; but if they were bad he sent flood and hail, frost and famine. If anything wonderful happened it was exaggerated until it became a miracle.Of the order of events -- of the unbroken and the unbreakable chain of causes and effects -- the people had no knowledge and no thought.A miracle is the badge and brand of fraud. No miracle ever was performed. No intelligent, honest man ever pretended to perform a miracle, and never will.If Christ had wrought the miracles attributed to him; if he had cured the palsied and insane; if he had given hearing to the deaf, vision to the blind; if he had cleansed the leper with a word, and with a touch had given life and feeling to the withered limb; if he had given pulse and motion, warmth and thought, to cold and breathless clay; if he had conquered death and rescued from the grave its pallid prey -- no word would have been uttered, no hand raised, except in praise and honor. In his presence all heads would have been uncovered -- all knees upon the ground.Is it not strange that at the trial of Christ no one was found to say a word in his favor? No man stood forth and said: ”I was a leper, and this man cured me with a touch.” No woman said: ”I am the widow of Nain and this is my son whom this man raised from the dead.”No man said: ”I was blind, and this man gave me sight.”All silent.

VIII.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF CHRIST.

Millions a.s.sert that the philosophy of Christ is perfect -- that he was the wisest that ever uttered speech.Let us see:Resist not evil. If smitten on one cheek turn the other.Is there any philosophy, any wisdom in this? Christ takes from goodness, from virtue, from the truth, the right of self-defence. Vice becomes the master of the world, and the good become the victims of the infamous.No man has the right to protect himself, his property, his wife and children. Government becomes impossible, and the world is at the mercy of criminals. Is there any absurdity beyond this?Love your enemies.Is this possible? Did any human being ever love his enemies? Did Christ love his, when he denounced them as whited sepulchers, hypocrites and vipers?We cannot love those who hate us. Hatred in the hearts of others does not breed love in ours. Not to resist evil is absurd; to love your enemies is impossible.Take no thought for the morrow.The idea was that G.o.d would take care of us as he did of sparrows and lilies. Is there the least sense in that belief?Does G.o.d take care of anybody?

Can we live without taking thought for the morrow? To plow, to sow, to cultivate, to harvest, is to take thought for the morrow. We plan and work for the future, for our children, for the unborn generations to come. Without this forethought there could be no progress, no civilization. The world would go back to the caves and dens of savagery.If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out. If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off.Why? Because it is better that one of our members should perish than that the whole body should be cast into h.e.l.l.Is there any wisdom in putting out your eyes or cutting off your hands? Is it possible to extract from these extravagant sayings the smallest grain of common sense?Swear not at all; neither by Heaven, for it is G.o.d's throne; nor by the Earth, for it is his footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is his holy city.Here we find the astronomy and geology of Christ. Heaven is the throne of G.o.d, the monarch; the earth is his footstool. A footstool that turns over at the rate of a thousand miles an hour, and sweeps through s.p.a.ce at the rate of over a thousand miles a minute!Where did Christ think heaven was? Why was Jerusalem a holy city? Was it because the inhabitants were ignorant, crud and superst.i.tious?If any man will sue thee at the law and take away thy coat let him have thy cloak also.

Is there any philosophy, any good sense, in that commandment? Would it not be just as sensible to say: ”If a man obtains a judgment against you for one hundred dollars, give him two hundred.”Only the insane could give or follow this advice.Think not I come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother.If this is true, how much better it would have been had he remained away.Is it possible that he who said, ”Resist not evil,” came to bring a sword? That he who said, ”Love your enemies,” came to destroy the peace of the world?To set father against son, and daughter against father -- what a glorious mission!He did bring a sword, and the sword was wet for a thousand years with innocent blood. In millions of hearts he sowed the seeds of hatred and revenge. He divided nations and families, put out the light of reason, and petrified the hearts of men.And every one that hath forsaken house, or breathren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

According to the writer of Matthew, Christ, the compa.s.sionate, the merciful, uttered these terrible words. Is it possible that Christ offered the bribe of eternal joy to those who would desert their fathers, their mothers, their wives and children? Are we to win the happiness of heaven by deserting the ones we love? Is a home to be ruined here for the sake of a mansion there?And yet it is said that Christ is an example for all the world. Did he desert his father and mother? He said, speaking to his mother: ”Woman, what have I to do with thee?”The Pharisees said unto Christ: ”Is it lawful to pay tribute unto Caesar?Christ said: ”Show me the tribute money.”They brought him a penny. And he saith unto them: ”Whose is the image and the superscription? ”They said: ”Caesar's.” And Christ said: ”Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's.”Did Christ think that the money belonged to Caesar because his image and superscription were stamped upon it? Did the penny belong to Caesar or to the man who had earned it? Had Caesar the right to demand it because it was adorned with his image?Does it appear from this conversation that Christ understood the real nature and use of money?Can we now say that Christ was the greatest of philosophers?

<script>