Part 10 (1/2)

Ladies and Gentlemen: There is an old story of a missionary trying to convert an Indian. The Indian made a little circle in the sand and said, ”That is what the Indian knows.” Then he made another circle a little larger and said, ”that is what missionary knows; but outside there the Indian knows just as much as missionary.”

I am going to talk mostly outside that circle tonight.

First, what is the origin of the crime known as blasphemy? It is the belief in a G.o.d who is cruel, revengeful, quick tempered and capricious; a G.o.d who punishes the innocent for the guilty; a G.o.d who listens with delight to the shrieks of the tortured and gazes enraptured on their spurting blood. You must hold this belief before you can believe in the doctrine of blasphemy. You must believe that this G.o.d loves ceremonies, that this G.o.d knows certain men to whom He has told all His will. It then follows that, if this G.o.d loves ceremonies and has certain men to teach His will and perform these ceremonies, these men must have a place to live in. This place was called a temple, and it was sacred. And the pots and pans and kettles and all in it were sacred too. No one but the priests must touch them.

Then the G.o.d wrote a book in which He told His covenants to men, and gave this book to priests to interpret. While it was sacrilege to touch with the hands the pots and pans of the temple, it was blasphemy to doubt or question anything in the book. And then the right to think was gone, and the right to use the brain that G.o.d had given was taken away, and religion was entrenched behind that citadel called blasphemy.

G.o.d was a kind of juggler. He did not wish man to be impudent or curious about how He did things. You must sit in audience and watch the tricks and ask no questions. In front of every fact He has hung the impenetrable curtain of blasphemy. Now, then, all the little reason that poor man had is useless. To say anything against the priest was blasphemy and to say anything against G.o.d was blasphemy--to ask a question was blasphemy. Finally we sank to the level of fetis.h.i.+sm. We began to wors.h.i.+p inanimate things. If you will read your bible you will find that the Jews had a sacred box. In it were the rod of Aaron and a piece of manna and the tables of stone. To touch this box was a crime. You remember that one time when a careless Jew thought the box was going to tip he held it. G.o.d killed him. What a warning to baggage smashers of the present day.

We find also that G.o.d concocted a hair oil and threatened death to any one who imitated it. And we see that He also made a certain perfume and it was death to make anything that smelt like it. It seems to me this is carrying protection too far. It always has been blasphemy to say ”I do not know whether G.o.d exists or not.” In all Catholic countries it is blasphemy to doubt the bible, to doubt the sacredness of the relics. It always has been blasphemy to laugh at a priest, to ask questions, to investigate the Trinity. In a world of superst.i.tion, reason is blasphemy. In a world of ignorance, facts are blasphemy. In a world of cruelty, sympathy is a crime, and in a world of lies, truth is blasphemy. Who are the real blasphemers? Webster offers the definition; blasphemy is an insult offered to G.o.d by attributing to Him a nature and qualities differing from His real nature and qualities, and dishonoring Him. A very good definition, if you only know what His nature and qualities are. But that is not revealed; for, studying Him through the medium of the bible, we find Him illimitably contradictory.

He commands us not to work on the Sabbath day, because it is holy. Yet G.o.d works himself on the Sabbath day. The sun, moon and stars swing round in their orbits, and all the creation attributed to this G.o.d goes on as on other days. He says: ”Honor thy father and mother,” and yet this G.o.d, in the person of Christ, offered honors, and glory, and happiness a hundred fold to any who would desert their father and mother for Him. Thou shalt not kill, yet G.o.d killed the first-born of Egypt, and he commanded Joshua to kill all His enemies, not sparing old or young, man, woman or child, even an unborn child. ”Thou shalt not commit adultery,” he says, and yet this G.o.d gave the wives of defeated enemies to His soldiers of Joshua's army. Then again He says, ”Thou shalt not steal.” By this command He protected the inanimate property and the cattle of one man against the hand of another, and yet this G.o.d who said ”Thou shalt not steal,” established human slavery. The products of industry were not to be interfered with, but the producer might be stolen as often as possible. ”Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” And yet the G.o.d who said this said also, ”I have sent lying spirits unto Ahab.” The only commandment He really kept was, ”Thou shalt have none other G.o.ds but Me.”

Is it blasphemous to describe this G.o.d as malicious? You know that laughter is a good index of the character of a man. You like and rejoice with the man whose laugh is free and joyous and full of good will. You fear and dislike him of the sneering laugh. How does G.o.d laugh? He says, ”I will laugh at their calamity and mock at their misfortune,” speaking of some who have sinned. Think of the malice and malignity of that in an infinite G.o.d when speaking of the sufferings He is going to impose upon His children. You know that it is said of a Roman emperor that he wrote laws very finely, and posted them so high on the walls that no one could read them, and then he punished the people who disobeyed the laws. That is the acme of tyranny: to provide a punishment for breach of laws the existence of which were unknown. Now we all know that there is sin against the Holy Ghost which will not be forgiven in this world nor in the world to come.

Hundreds of thousands of people have been driven to the lunatic asylum by the thought that they had committed this unpardonable sin. Every educated minister knows that that part of the bible is an interpolation, but they all preach it. What that sin against the Holy Ghost is, is not specified. I say, ”Oh, but my good G.o.d, tell me what this sin is.” And He answers, ”Maybe now asking is the crime. Keep quiet.” So I keep quiet and go about tortured with the fear that I have committed that sin. Is it blasphemy to describe G.o.d as needing a.s.sistance from the Legislature? Calling for the aid of a mob to enforce His will here, compare that G.o.d with a man, even with Henry Bergh. See what Mr. Bergh has done to awaken pity in our people and call sympathy to the rescue of suffering animals. And yet our G.o.d was a torturer of dumb brutes.

It is blasphemy to say that our G.o.d sent the famine and dried the mother's breast from her infant's withered lips? Is it blasphemy to say that He is the author of the pestilence; that He ordered some of His children to consume others with fire and sword? Is it blasphemy to believe what we read in the 109th Psalm? If these things are not blasphemy, then there is no blasphemy. If there be a G.o.d I desire Him to write in the book of judgment opposite my name that I denied these lies for Him.

Let us take another step; let us examine the Presbyterian confession of faith. If it be possible to commit blasphemy, then I contend that the Presbyterian creed is most blasphemous, for, according to that, G.o.d is a cruel, unrelenting, revengeful, malignant and utterly unreasonable tyrant. I propose now to pay a little attention to the creed. First, it confesses that there is such a thing as a light of nature. It is sufficient to make man inexcusable, but not sufficient for salvation; just light enough to lead man to h.e.l.l. Now imagine a man who will put a false light on a hilltop to lure a s.h.i.+p to destruction. What would we say of that man? What can we say of a G.o.d who gives this false light of nature which, if its lessons are followed, results in h.e.l.l?

That is the Presbyterian G.o.d. I don't like Him. Now it occurred to G.o.d that the light of nature was somewhat weak, and He thought He'd light another burner. Therefore He made His book and gave it to His servants, the priests, that they might give it to men. It was to be accepted, not on the authority of Moses, or any other writer, but because it was the word of G.o.d. How do you know it's the word of G.o.d?

You're not to take the word of Moses, or David, or Jeremiah, or Isaiah, or any other man, because the authenticity of their work has nothing to do with the matter; this creed expressly lets them out. How are you to know that it is G.o.d's word? Because it is G.o.d's word. Why is it G.o.d's word? What proof have we that it is G.o.d's word? Because it is G.o.d's word.

Now, then, I find that the next thing in this wonderful confession of faith of the Presbyterians is the decree of predestination. [Reads the decree.] I am pleased to a.s.sure you that it is not necessary to understand this. You have only to believe it. You see that by the decree of G.o.d some men and angels are predestinated to heaven and others to eternal h.e.l.l, and you observe that their number is so certain and definite that it can neither be changed nor altered. You are asked to believe that billions of years ago this G.o.d knew the names of all the men and women whom He was going to save. Had 'em in His book, that being the only thing except Himself that then existed. He had chosen the names by the aid of the secret council. The reason they called it secret was because they knew all about it.

In making His choice, G.o.d was not at all bigoted. He did not choose John Smith because He foresaw that Smith was to be a Presbyterian, and was to possess a loving nature, was to be honest and true and n.o.ble in all his ways, doing good himself and encouraging others in the same.

Oh, no! He was quite as likely to pick Brown, in spite of the fact that He knew long before that Brown would be a wicked wretch. You see He was just as apt to send Smith to the devil and take Brown to heaven--and all for ”His glory.” This G.o.d also blinds and hardens--ah!

he's a peculiar G.o.d. If sinners persevere, He will blind and harden and give them over at last to their own wickedness instead of trying to reclaim and save them.

Now we come to the comforting doctrine of the total depravity of man, and this leads us to consider how he came that way. Can any person read the first chapters of Genesis and believe them unless his logic was a.s.sa.s.sinated in the cradle? We read that our first parents were placed in a pleasant garden; that they were given the full run of the place and only forbidden to meddle with the orchard; that they were tempted as G.o.d knew they were to be tempted; that they fell as G.o.d knew they would fall, and that for this fall, which He knew would happen before He made them, He fixed the curse of original sin upon them, to be continued to all their children. Why didn't He stop right there?

Why didn't He kill Adam and Eve and make another pair who didn't like apples? Then when He brought His flood why did He rescue eight people if their descendants were to be so totally depraved and wicked? Why didn't He have His flood first, and then drown the devil? That would have solved the problem, and He could then have tried experiments unmolested.

The Presbyterian confession says this corruption was in all men. It was born with them, it lived through their life, and after death survived in the children. Well, can't man help himself? No, I'll show you, G.o.d's got him. Listen to this. [Reads extracts.] So that a natural man is not only dead in sin and unable to accomplish salvation, but he is also incapable of preparing himself therefore. Absolutely incapable of taking a trick. He is saved, if at all, completely by the mercy of G.o.d. If that's the case, then why doesn't He convert us all? Oh, He doesn't. He wishes to send the most of us to h.e.l.l--to show His justice.

Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerate. So also are all persons incapable of unbelief. That includes insane persons and idiots, because an idiot is incapable of unbelief. Idiots are the only fellows who've got the dead wood on G.o.d. Then according to this, the man who has lived according to the light of nature, doing the best he knew how to make this earth happy, will be d.a.m.ned by G.o.d because he never heard of His son. Whose fault is it that an infinite G.o.d does not advertise?

Something wrong about that. I am inclined to think that the Presbyterian church is wrong. I find here how utterly unpardonable sin is. There is no sin so small but it is punished with h.e.l.l, and away you go straight to the deepest burning pit unless your heart has been purified by this confession of faith--unless this snake has crawled in there and made itself a nest. Why should we help religion? I would like people to ask themselves that question. An infinite G.o.d, by practicing a reasonable economy, can get along without a.s.sistance.

Loudly this confession proclaims that salvation comes from Christ alone. What, then, becomes of the savage who, having never known the name of Christ, has lived according to the light of nature, kind and heroic and generous, and possessed of and cultivating all the natural virtues? He goes to h.e.l.l. G.o.d, you see, loves us. If He had not loved us what would He have done? The light of nature then shows that G.o.d is good and therefore to be feared--on account of his goodness, to be served and honored without ceasing. And yet this creed says that on the last day G.o.d will d.a.m.n anyone who has walked according to this light. It's blasphemy to walk by the light of nature.

The next great doctrine is on the preservation of the saints. Now, there are peculiarities about saints. They are saints without their own knowledge or free will; they may even be down on saints, but its no good. G.o.d has got a rolling hitch on them, and they have to come into the kingdom sooner or later. It all depends on whether they have been elected or not. G.o.d could have made me a saint just as easy as not, but He pa.s.sed me by. Now you know the Presbyterians say I trample on holy things. They believe in h.e.l.l and I come and say there is no h.e.l.l.

I hurt their hearts, they say, and they add that I am going to h.e.l.l myself. I thank them for that; but now let's see what these tender Presbyterians say of other churches. Here it is:

This confession of faith calls the pope of Rome anti-Christ and a son of perdition. Now there are forty Roman Catholics to one Presbyterian on this earth. Do not the Presbyterians rather trample on the things that are holy to the Roman Catholics, and do they respect their feelings? But the Presbyterians have a pope themselves, composed of the presbyters and preachers. This confession attributes to them the keys of heaven and h.e.l.l and the power to forgive sins. [Here extracts are read.] Therefore these men must be infallible, for G.o.d would never be so foolish as to entrust fallible men with the keys of heaven and h.e.l.l.

I care nothing for their keys, nor for any world these keys would open or lock; I prefer the country.

We are told by this faith that at the last day all the men and women and children who have ever lived on the earth will appear in the self same bodies they have had when on earth. Everyone who knows anything knows the constant exchange which is going on between the vegetable and animal kingdom. The millions of atoms which compose one of our bodies have all come from animals and vegetables, and they in their turn drew them from animals and vegetables which preceded them. The same atoms which are now in our bodies have previously been in the bodies of our ancestors. The negro from Central Africa has many times been mahogany and the mahogany has many times been negro. A missionary goes to the cannibal islands and a cannibal eats him and dies. The atoms which composed the missionary's body now compose in great part the cannibal's body. To whom will these atoms belong on the morning of the resurrection?

How did the devil, who had always lived in heaven among the best society, ever happen to become bad? If a man surrounded by angels could become bad, why cannot a man surrounded by devils become good?

Here is the last Presbyterian joy: At the day of judgment the righteous shall be caught up to heaven and shall stand at the right hand of Christ and share with Him in judging the wicked. Then the Presbyterian husband may have the ineffable pleasure of judging his wife and condemning her to eternal h.e.l.l, and the boy will say to his mother, echoing the command of G.o.d: ”Depart, thou accursed, into everlasting torment!” Here will come a man who has not believed in G.o.d. He was a soldier who took up arms to free the slaves and who rotted to death in Andersonville prison rather than accept the offer of his captors to fight against freedom. He loved his wife and his children and his Home and his native country and all mankind, and did all the good he knew. G.o.d will say to the Presbyterians, ”What shall We do to this man?”; and they will answer, ”Throw him into h.e.l.l.”

Last night there was a fire in Philadelphia, and at a window fifty feet above the ground Mr. King stood amid flame and smoke and pressed his children to his breast one after the other, kissed them, and threw them to the rescuers with a prayer. That was man. At the last day G.o.d takes His children with a curse and hurls them into eternal fire.