,transcriber's note3 this book uses several non-standard spellings1 e4g4 tho 7though71 thoro1 thoroly 7thorough1 thoroughly71 thru 7through71 etc4 ,,from ,,bondage ,,to ,,liberty ,,in ,,religion ,a ,,spiritual ,,autobiography ,,by ,,george ,t4 ,,ashley ,,the ,,beacon ,,press ,,boston ,copyright1 #aiai ,,by ,,the ,,beacon ,,press1 ,,inc4 ,all rights reserved ,,foreword ,the substance of what is written in this book has been given on several occasions during the past five years in the form of sermons or lectures4 ,on each occasion they met with such hearty commendation1 and so many requests that they be written and published in book form that they might have a wider circulation1 that ,i have been induced to undertake it4 ,this volume is the result4 ,it is in no sense a treatise on controverted theological questions2 altho some of these are incidentally treated1 but only as they entered as factors into my own religious life and experience4 ,this book is simply the story of my own religious life from my early childhood to the present time1 in its various transitions from the narrowest orthodoxy to a broad1 liberal1 rational religious faith4 ,it necessarily deals to some extent with certain theological problems that from time to time confronted me1 the way in which ,i solved them1 the conclusions ,i finally reached1 and why ,i reached them4 ,but these have been treated in mere outline only4 ,the temptation has been very great to treat1 some of these at least1 more elaborately2 but ,i have been compelled to content myself often with the bare statement of my views1 with few or no detailed arguments to support them4 ,but as my object has been1 not so much to try to solve these problems for others1 as to point the way thereto1 and stimulate the reader to further inquiry and deeper investigation of the subjects treated1 if ,i have succeeded in this1 my main object has been accomplished4 ,no one is more sensible of the many defects in this work than ,i am4 ,it makes no pretension to any literary merit1 nor to any scholarly erudition4 ,i am not a professional writer4 ,i have simply tried to tell my story in a simple way and make it readable if possible4 ,my sole purpose in writing these pages has been to try to help others who may still be in the fetters of ecclesiastical bondage1 or wandering in the quagmires of agnosticism--and ,i know there are many such--to find the way to light and liberty in a rational religious faith4 ,if ,i can accomplish this1 even in a small degree1 ,i shall feel abundantly repaid for the time and labor spent in reviewing the story of my own religious evolution4 ,,introduction ,when the traveller1 bent on some important quest1 makes a prolonged and perilous journey and returns in safety to his friends and neighbors1 instinctively those who have known him in former years realize that he is1 and he is not1 the same person who had dwelt among them4 ,he has seen unfamiliar peoples1 traversed strange lands1 encountered unexpected dangers4 ,old prepossessions have been effaced1 erroneous opinions have been corrected1 new habits of thought have taken the place of old ones and the narrow world of youth has expanded on every side4 ,naturally1 what has happened to him becomes a matter of curiosity and enquiry1 and the hero of a great achievement is expected to relate the story of his adventures4 ,the man who1 in these revolutionary days1 takes religion seriously--there are many who do not--must make a journey which is fraught with as many surprises and filled with as many anxieties--especially if it be a pilgrimage from orthodoxy to personal independence--as that which the explorer encounters in a voyage to the ,north ,pole or the jungles of ,africa4 ,at every turning of the way he must be prepared for disillusions and the discovery of facts and errors which call for unlimited courage and boundless faith4 ,religion is not simply a matter of the emotions1 its very perpetuity depends upon that sane and persistent activity of the intellect without which the emotions are tyrannous and fateful4 ,emotion in religion is the driving force by which religion may be applied to human welfare1 but if emotion be not governed and directed by the well-trained intellect1 informed by patient thought and the use of all the evidence available from those who are entitled to be summoned as witnesses1 the result inevitably is merely a matter of superstition1 or a spineless acquiescence in old and futile beliefs4 ,to continue all the while to believe in religion while one is pursuing a course of reasoning which is bound to shatter many of the interpretations of it which one has previously accepted1 requires the kind of intellectual endurance and the quality of faith which characterize the inventor1 or the scientific explorer4 ,when the author of this volume1 as an unquestioning disciple of his ancestral fellowship1 earnestly sought to pledge all that he was and all that he hoped to become to the salvation of those who he believed stood in peril of everlasting torment1 it was the unadulterated spirit of religion which prompted him4 ,but he was at that time unaware of that fact4 ,religion was with him when it moved him to give himself for others1 but to him religion was itself something entirely different4 ,he was urged and commanded by a force1 old as mankind1 and it took him1 as the reader of these pages will see1 many years of heart-breaking endeavor1 to learn that what most he desired was what most he possessed4 ,his quest was a long and weary one1 and the reality of it and the importance of it to him are proven by the thoroughness and the eloquence with which his spiritual experience is recalled and set down in these pages4 ,only one who had begun in earnest1 proceeded in anxiety and continued to the end1 as if he absolutely believed in the integrity of the human reason and the intimate friendliness of a supreme ,guidance1 could have emerged at last triumphantly and with the ability to tell the tale4 ,to him who thinks of religion only as a matter of course1 or as an affair of the church1 or as a medium of social advantage2 or to him who identifies religion with the ravings of half-witted fanatics and regards it with patronizing contempt1 this book will make no appeal4 ,but to the man or woman who has learned that religion is one thing and theology another1 and at whatever cost1 is willing to share with the author in his struggle to know the truth about it and be at peace1 these pages will command undivided attention2 for they relate not only the story of mental perplexity ending in a great personal solution1 but they likewise have the charm of a real romance of the soul4 ,,lewis ,g4 ,,wilson4 ,,contents ,,chapter ,i ,,my ,,childhood1 ,,youth ,,and ,,education ,,ii ,,seeking ,,liberty ,,iii ,,new ,,visions ,,and ,,disturbances ,,iv ,,nearer ,,the ,,crisis ,v ,,the ,,crisis ,,vi ,,the ,,reaction3 ,a ,,new ,,confession ,,of ,,faith ,,vii ,a ,,new ,,interpretation ,,of ,,religion ,,viii ,,jesus ,,of ,,nazareth ,,from ,,bondage ,,to ,,liberty ,,in ,,religion ,a ,,religious ,,autobiography ,,chapter ,i ,,my ,,childhood1 ,,youth ,,and ,,education ,practically all people inherit their first religious opinions from their parents1 their early environment or both1 as ,i did mine4 ,the trouble with most of us is that we never get beyond that stage4 ,we take it for granted that these opinions1 whether about religion1 politics or anything else1 are correct1 because we have been told so1 and never go out of our way or trouble ourselves for a moment to investigate their truth or error4 ,and thus we go on from generation to generation1 traveling in the same old ruts1 thinking the same old thoughts1 in the same old way1 each of us assuming that our particular ancestors could not possibly have been wrong about anything2 and although ,christianity is divided into several hundred different denominations and creeds1 each believes his creed to be absolutely correct and all the others partly or wholly wrong4 ,like ,saul of ,tarsus1 ,i belonged to the ,pharisees of the strictest sect4 ,i was taught from infancy that the church of my parents was the one and only true1 scriptural and orthodox church on earth1 with an unbroken organic succession from ,jesus ,christ himself down to the present time2 that it was the only true exponent of apostolic faith and practice2 the only true and lawful custodian of the word of ,god1 and the only authority for the administration of the ordinances of the gospel2 that all other organizations claiming to be churches were not churches in fact1 but merely religious societies2 and that while some of these societies might do some little good in the world1 and some of their members might ultimately be saved1 they could never reach those sublime heights of glory reserved exclusively for the truly baptized members of the true and only church4 ,just when and how these ideas first took concrete form in my mind it is impossible for me now to remember4 ,as above intimated1 in the plastic condition of my youthful mind1 ,i naturally absorbed them from the very atmosphere in which ,i lived1 from the common talk ,i heard around me1 as well as from the direct instruction given me4 ,as far back as ,i can remember1 ,i understood the ,bible to be the word of ,god1 every word of it1 from the first word in ,genesis to the last ,amen of ,revelation2 that it was all divinely inspired1 verbatim et literatim1 just as it appeared in the old ,king ,james version2 that it was ,god's revelation to mankind1 beside and outside of which there never was1 and never would be any other2 that every word of it was literally1 and infallibly true1 just as it read4 ,such a thing as figurative1 or allegorical interpretations ,i never heard of until ,i was a grown man1 as we shall see later4 ,this1 of course1 meant a literal six-day ,creation1 an anthropomorphic ,god1 a literal physical heaven1 and likewise a literal1 physical hell1 a personal devil1 the absolute1 literal1 truth of the story of ,eden1 the original perfection and fall of man1 total depravity of the race1 vicarious atonement and the eternal damnation of all mankind1 individually and collectively1 who did not accept the prescribed creed of the church of my parents1 as the only means of escape4 ,my first conception of ,god was that of a great big good man sitting high up in heaven on a great white throne1 whence ,he would judge the world2 that heaven was a great city somewhere up in the skies1 with streets of gold and walls of jasper2 that hell was a literal burning lake of fire and brimstone somewhere down under the world1 and that it was presided over by the devil and was made to burn people in who were not good1 or who had not believed in ,christ as a personal ,savior4 ,as a little child ,i was taught that if ,i was not a good boy1 when ,i died1 the devil1 usually spoken of as the bad man1 would get me and burn me in this hell forever and ever2 and that ,i never could burn up or die1 and if ,i called for water he would pour melted lead down my throat4 ,many a time ,i would think over this horrible torture that ,i might inadvertently fall into by doing some bad thing when at heart ,i really meant to be good1 and sincerely wish ,i had never been born4 ,in my night visions ,i could see the devil with his tea-kettle of melted lead1 pouring it down the throats of the helpless little ones1 writhing in the tortures of the never ending fire6 ,on the day that ,i was twelve years old a little incident occurred that so indelibly stamped itself on my mind1 and so changed the course of my thoughts thereafter1 that it is necessary to mention it4 ,i was proud ,i had reached that stage of life4 ,i was boasting of it to a hired man1 with whom ,i was doing an errand1 informing him that ,i was now more than half a man1 and that in nine more years ,i would be a man1 when ,i could do as ,i pleased4 ,he informed me that1 after all1 it was not a thing to be so proud of2 that ,i had that day reached the age of accountability2 that on that day ,i became personally responsible to ,god for my sins2 that if ,i had died before that day ,i would have been saved from hell by ,god's free grace1 because of my infancy2 but that from that day on1 ,i must account to ,god for myself2 and that it would be necessary for me to repent1 and pray daily for the forgiveness of my sins1 lest ,i die and fall into the bottomless pit for all eternity4 ,this was news to me4 ,i had never heard of before4 ,it produced a profound sensation in my thought2 and to say it seriously troubled me is to put it mildly4 ,as soon as my errand was done ,i went to my mother with it4 ,she confirmed it4 ,then ,i sincerely wished ,i had died before ,i reached that fateful day4 ,another serious trouble confronted me4 ,when told ,i must repent of my sins and pray for forgiveness1 ,i could not comprehend just what it meant to repent4 ,i was told that it was to be sorry for my sins4 ,to be frank1 ,i was not conscious of any sin4 ,i had tried to be a good boy2 ,i was obedient to my parents1 and did no evil to any one that ,i was aware of4 ,true1 ,i made childish mistakes every day1 as all children do4 ,but ,i could not recognize that ,i had been personally sinful against ,god4 ,i knew ,i had not meant to be4 ,then they told me that ,i was born a sinner6 ,that when ,adam ate the forbidden fruit it made every person that was ever born into the world thereafter1 a sinner by nature2 and ,i would have to repent of this sin1 as well as all that ,i ever committed1 if ,i ever expected to escape the lake of fire and brimstone where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched4 ,my whole nature1 even as a child1 revolted against the injustice of thus making me responsible for1 and punishing me for something some one else did thousands of years ago2 but ,i had no remedy and had to take it and prepare to repent of ,adam's sin4 ,what a monstrous doctrine to teach a child6 ,can any mortal in this age of the world believe such nonsense1 or perpetrate such a caricature of ,god8 ,i wondered how the ,good ,man up in the skies on his great white throne in his beautiful city of gold1 could be just and plunge a little child into hell and burn it for ever and ever because ,adam ate fruit from the wrong tree6 ,but ,i believed it then1 because ,i was told so1 and knew no better4 ,i don't believe it now1 and how any human being with the instincts of justice pertaining to the common brute creation can believe such a thing is a mystery to me4 ,as time went on ,i learned more about repentance1 faith1 conversion1 baptism and the current theology of my time and environment4 ,but ,i was ever anxious to escape from that dreaded hell that ever yawned before me in daytime and disturbed my dreams at night4 ,the thought of it was a veritable nightmare to me4 ,it destroyed the happiness of my early life4 ,as a child ,i could not reconcile it with any conception of ,god's goodness or justice4 ,i was often1 in the silence of my heart1 tempted to rebel against ,god and defy him4 ,but ,i was afraid4 ,my thought was to make the best ,i could of a bad situation1 and at the earliest possible moment make good my escape4 ,perhaps this is as good a place as any to state the fact that my parents were members of the ,baptist ,church1 and that in this faith ,i was brought up4 ,however1 ,i am glad to be able to state that they were much broader and more liberal in their views than many of their brethren4 ,i do not wish to be unjust to this great organization2 but it is necessary here to make some statements concerning its doctrine and practice1 in order that my future relations to it may be the better understood--statements1 the truth of which1 all intelligent ,baptists will testify to4 ,first1 the ,baptist ,church is just as exclusive in its claim to being the only true1 scriptural1 orthodox1 apostolic ,church as are the ,catholics1 ,episcopalians1 or any other ,christian body4 ,but this applies only to their ecclesiastical organization1 and not to the character of its membership4 ,second1 it does not hold that baptism is essential to salvation1 but that it is to church membership4 ,they do not baptize people to make them ,christians2 but because they recognize them as already being ,christians1 thru repentance1 faith in ,christ1 and the regeneration of the ,holy ,spirit4 ,thus1 they recognize the true ,christian character of any and all others who furnish evidence of these fundamental characteristics of a ,christian life1 tho they do not recognize them as church members1 no matter to what other ecclesiastical organization they may belong4 ,these statements are necessary to understand what follows4 ,now in the country where ,i was brought up1 in the time of my boyhood1 there were but two churches1--,baptists and ,methodists4 ,in fact ,i was nearly grown before ,i knew there were any others at all4 ,these churches were generally friendly--in a way4 ,while there was occasional criticism of each by the other1 and some controversy over doctrinal differences1 there was no open warfare2 and often members of each would attend and worship with the other4 ,as above said1 ,i was anxious to make terms with ,god by repenting1 being baptized1 or anything else that would relieve me of that constant dread of eternal damnation that overshadowed my life4 ,perhaps the reader has already surmised that ,i was brought up in the country districts4 ,our churches usually held services but once a month4 ,but in the summer1 when the crops were laid-by1 we usually had our protracted meetings1 usually lasting a week--from ,sunday to ,sunday--having two services a day at the church1 with dinner on the ground for all who came4 ,this was the annual revival season1 when sinners were snatched from the eternal burning1 back-sliders reclaimed and the cold and indifferent warmed up and aroused4 ,well1 the summer after ,i was twelve years old and had reached that fateful period of personal accountability1 at our protracted meeting1 ,i wanted to go to the mourner's bench1 repent1 join the church and be baptized1 and thus make good my escape and my calling and election sure4 ,at this time ,i had no clear conception of the meaning of conversion4 ,somehow ,i identified it with joining the church and being baptized4 ,contrary to the teachings of my church--which at that time ,i did not understand1--to me1 baptism was the main thing4 ,i wanted to be baptized4 ,but they told me ,i was too young1--and too small to go down into the deep water4 ,this was a great disappointment4 ,but ,i saw a ray of hope4 ,the next week the ,methodist ,church near our home had its protracted meeting and we attended4 ,there ,i saw children1 younger and smaller than myself go to the mourner's bench1 join the church and be baptized1--by sprinkling4 ,they even sprinkled babies4 ,while ,i clearly understood that this was not true baptism1 ,i also knew that many of the ,methodists were considered truly good people1 good ,christians1 and sure of heaven at death1 notwithstanding their lack of true baptism4 ,i therefore conceived the idea that after all1 this sprinkling might possess some merit1 at least provisionally2 and ,i therefore insisted on being permitted to join the ,methodist ,church and be sprinkled for the time being1 as a sort of emergency measure1 until ,i should grow up to that age--and size--where ,i might join the ,baptist ,church and be baptized right4 ,but this pleasure was denied me4 ,during the next two years ,i learned much2 for ,i was a close student1 altho only a child4 ,my mind also underwent a considerable change4 ,that constant and tormenting fear and dread of hell gradually weakened4 ,in fact ,i was consciously growing more and more indifferent toward it4 ,yet ,i was not altogether uninterested4 ,i had learned much more about the meaning of conversion as ,i saw it manifested in many1 and sometimes violent1 forms of demonstration4 ,as ,i saw these ,i fancied that this was the kind of conversion ,i would like to have4 ,i wanted to get happy and shout as some of the others did4 ,the time came for the annual protracted meeting at the church of my parents4 ,at this meeting ,i found myself the object of considerable solicitude4 ,i was now old enough to be converted1 join the church and be baptized4 ,they were all anxious that ,i be saved4 ,of course ,i had to repent of my sins1--and also of ,adam's4 ,i was not so self-conscious of innocence now as ,i was a few years before4 ,i really felt that ,i had something to repent of4 ,the preacher1 and a good honest1 sincere man he was1 pictured the flames of hell and the torments of the damned with such power that ,i almost felt the warmth of its fires and smelled its fumes of sulphur4 ,i set out in earnest to repent of my own sins as well as ,adam's4 ,repenting was very easy4 ,i cried until the tears refused to flow longer4 ,believing was easy1 for ,i believed it all4 ,being baptized was easy4 ,but ,i had not yet been converted4 ,there was no miraculous transformation in me4 ,i had not yet got happy and shouted4 ,i waited for it4 ,my tears dried up4 ,i still went to the mourners' bench1 but nothing came of it4 ,i could not even cry4 ,one day the preacher1 noting my condition1 had a talk with me4 ,i told him my feelings1 and he said ,i was converted4 ,but ,i told him that no such change had come over me as the others told about1 and that seemed manifest in their emotions and actions4 ,then he told me that as ,i was young and had never been a great sinner ,i could not expect that wonderful experience that often comes to the old and hardened cases4 ,i was truly glad to hear it4 ,i really felt saved4 ,i had now escaped the devil4 ,i had already learned the doctrine of once in grace always in grace1 and ,i felt supremely happy to think that after all ,i had now escaped from the eternal burning and was entirely out of danger4 ,i joined the church and was baptized4 ,i have thus referred at some length to my childhood for two reasons3 ,it will be seen later how some of these experiences affected my after-life2 and also because ,i feel that in some measure ,i am only repeating in substance the experiences of millions of others who have passed through similar conditions of life4 ,also to say to you1 who were brought up in the light of a liberal faith and free from these dogmas of dread1 despair and damnation1 that you ought to be sincerely thankful that you have escaped at least this much of hell1 no matter how much the orthodox may have in store for you in the future2 and further1 to exonerate my parents from any blame in the premises4 ,they taught me only as they had been taught and firmly believed1 and did it all for what they honestly believed1 to be for my best interests4 ,like millions of others1 they did the best they knew at the time4 ,,the ,,call ,,to ,,preach4--,it was a part of the orthodox belief at that time1 and is very largely so even now1 that after the fall of ,adam1 practically all the human race was lost except now and then a worthy patriarch like ,abel1 ,enoch and ,noah1 down to the call of ,abraham2 and after that only the pious and faithful of the seed of ,abraham1 thru ,isaac1 were saved1 down to the coming of ,christ4 ,all the balance of mankind were utterly and irretrievably lost1 both wicked and apostate ,jews and all ,gentiles4 ,and since the death of ,christ those only are saved who repent and believe in him as a personal savior1 and accept the prescribed creed of the particular church presenting it4 ,all the balance of mankind1 including all ,jews and nine-tenths of the balance of mankind are irretrievably lost4 ,this being the case1 the sole end and aim in life is to escape hell hereafter4 ,nine-tenths of the preaching in my boyhood was to warn men to flee from the wrath to come4 ,but little was said about the love of ,god or the brotherhood of man1 the nobility of character1 human helpfulness1 the promotion of happiness here1 and the general uplift and advancement of civilization and mankind4 ,it was wonderful the way they did ring the changes on hell and damnation1 and fire and brimstone6 ,it thundered from every pulpit like the traditional thunders from ,mt4 ,sinai4 ,taking this view of the world1 of life and mankind1 ,i felt that the greatest thing in the world a man could do would be to devote his life to warning men of their danger and pointing the way to safety4 ,i wanted to sound my voice in warning men to flee from the wrath to come4 ,believing that all men were lost if they did not follow the prescribed course laid down by my church1 ,i felt that if ,i did not do all in my power to direct them in the way of eternal life their blood would be on my hands4 ,while ,i did not feel that ,i would be lost if ,i failed in this--for the doctrine of my church was1 that once being converted all the devils in hell could not keep one ultimately from heaven--yet ,i felt that my future happiness in heaven would be diminished just in proportion as ,i failed to do my best in this behalf4 ,this was interpreted to be a divine call to preach4 ,i accepted it with profound earnestness and deep conviction1 and began early to exercise my gifts4 ,in due course of events ,i went to college to prepare for the ministry4 ,i was in love with the work and happy in its prospects4 ,i was ambitious to be thoroly efficient in my work in the future and pursued my studies with diligence accordingly4 ,incidentally ,i learned much that was not in the books1 as most college students do4 ,i little knew what was before me4 ,here in a school of the prophets1 where ,i was supposed to be thoroly trained1 rooted and grounded in the faith of my church1 ,i was to learn the first lessons that ultimately led me entirely out of the orthodox faith1 into a broad1 rational liberalism6 ,a few of these it will be necessary to state here1 not so much because of any immediate effect they produced1 as to show the working of the leaven that years afterward leavened the whole lump4 ,the first shock ,i got was in the study of ,geology4 ,when ,i began it ,i saw at once that it was out of harmony with the ,bible account of ,creation1 the origin of the earth1 and organic life upon it4 ,while no one told me so1 ,i somehow conceived the idea that we were not studying it because it was recognized as truth1 but just the opposite4 ,being rooted and grounded from my infancy in the belief in the absolute literalness1 and infallible truth of the ,bible2 and supposing that ,i was in college only to be more thoroly instructed in this divine truth1 ,i conceived the idea that this book we were studying was merely the guess-work of some modern infidel1 and that our real purpose in studying it was to be the more able to refute it when we got out into our life work2 all of which would fully appear before we finished the book4 ,one day when we were perhaps half thru1 the professor1 himself a ,baptist minister1 catechised the class individually1 as to their opinions as to the length of time the earth was in process of formation1 previous to the appearance of life upon it4 ,i noticed1 with surprise1 that the answers varied from a few millions to hundreds of billions of years1 until the question came to me1 when ,i answered promptly1 ,six days6 ,everybody laughed1 professor and all4 ,of course ,i felt cheap2 but insisted on the correctness of my answer because the ,bible said so1 notwithstanding ,lyell and ,dana to the contrary4 ,the professor complimented me on my loyalty to the ,scriptures1 but explained that the story of creation in ,genesis was to be interpreted figuratively2 that it referred to six great geological epochs in terms of days2 and that what we were studying was to be accepted as scientific truth in its general principles1 subject1 however1 to possible revision in some of its details as further geological discoveries were made4 ,this was a revelation to me4 ,i know the intelligent reader of today will be provoked to laugh at my native1 inherent greenness4 ,but it must not be forgotten that this was thirty-six years ago2 and besides this1 there are still1 in this year of grace #aiai1 literally millions of men and women1 long past the age of student life1 who still hold substantially the same views concerning the relations of science to religion and the ,bible that ,i held then4 ,the simplicity of faith is often sublime4 ,and ,i am not sure that it is not often the truth that1 ,ignorance is bliss where it is folly to be wise2 especially where the wisdom is just sufficient to disturb the mind but not enough to settle it4 ,but ,i had a revelation1--two of them4 ,first1 that modern science is to be taken seriously2 and second1 that much of the ,bible must be interpreted figuratively4 ,the latter was the most disturbing to me4 ,the question that confronted me was this3 ,if the ,bible is partly literal and partly figurative1 when ,i get out into my life work as a minister1 how am ,i to be able to always determine correctly just what parts are literal and what figurative2 and how to interpret the figures8 ,but the answer came as quickly as the question3 ,this is just what ,i am here to learn1 and before ,i am thru ,i will doubtless know it all6 ,some time after this a discussion arose among the divinity students1 about the doctrines of inspiration--as to whether the ,bible was literally and verbally inspired1 word for word1 or was merely an inspiration of ideas1 the writers being left to write their inspirations in their own language and manner4 ,my idea had always been that of the former1 that the ,bible was inspired word for word1 just as it reads4 ,but ,i found the more progressive and better educated class among both students and professors had abandoned this idea1 and accepted the doctrine of the inspiration of ideas only4 ,it was strange to me that ,god could not have dictated the words as easily as the ideas1 and thus have made sure of their correctness4 ,but it set me to thinking4 ,i had never had any doubt about the inspiration of the ,bible1 yet ,i could give no reason for it1 except that ,i had always been told so4 ,now as progress and education were going to compel me to revise my opinions about the manner of inspiration1 ,i began to wonder what evidence we really had that the ,bible was inspired at all4 ,i really had no doubts about the fact4 ,i supposed1 of course1 the evidence existed somewhere1 but that they had never been specifically pointed out to me2 and ,i wanted to know just what and where they were4 ,i confided my inquiries to a senior student in whom ,i had great confidence4 ,he told me the devil was whispering doubts in my ear and ,i should not listen to him6 ,that there could be no possible doubt about the fact of inspiration2 that this question had been definitely and finally settled over eighteen hundred years ago by the wisest and best men of the world1 and there had never been a shadow of a doubt about it since2 that the evidences of inspiration of ideas instead of verbal inspiration were found in the many different styles and manner of writing found in the ,bible itself as represented by the different writers4 ,but as to the fundamental fact of divine inspiration itself1 there had never been a shadow of a doubt6 ,so ,i accepted the new idea of inspiration and said ,get thee behind me1 ,satan1 and after that for many years ,i did not permit myself to doubt the fact of inspiration4 ,yet occasionally ,i could not keep from thinking1 and many years later this question arose again in my mind with tragic force and effect4 ,,chapter ,,ii ,,seeking ,,liberty ,other questions now began to arise that were soon to materially affect my church relations1 without1 however1 any material change in my fundamental theology4 ,as before stated1 my sole ambition in life was to warn sinners to flee from the wrath to come4 ,to this one purpose all other things must be made subordinate4 ,for this one purpose ,i was pursuing my studies in college that ,i might become the more efficient in its accomplishment4 ,impressed as ,i was with the awful truth of man's total depravity and natural alienation from ,god1 and the certainty of his eternal damnation in the never-ending flames1 unless he accepted fully1 and followed implicitly the prescribed course which ,i had been taught was the only means of escape1 ,i felt that ,woe is me1 if ,i preach not the gospel4 ,i felt that any deflection on my part1 from the full performance of my duty in this particular1 up to the full extent of my power and opportunity1 would not only entail eternal torments upon all who might have been thus saved thru my efforts1 but would also detract from my own eternal glory in heaven in exactly the same ratio4 ,i began to look upon the church as being at most but a means1 or agency to this end2 the channel thru which ,i might work to accomplish this central purpose4 ,leaving other churches out of consideration1 as not being germane to the purpose of this narrative1 while yet in school ,i had become more fully informed as to the fundamental theology of the ,methodist ,church2 and somewhat to my surprise1 ,i found there was no substantial difference between it and the ,baptist ,church1 to which ,i belonged4 ,they both appealed to the same infallible revelation2 both taught the same doctrine of the fall of man1 total depravity and inherited sin2 both taught the same doctrines concerning the personality and character of ,christ1 and the vicarious atonement in his death2 the same doctrines concerning heaven and hell2 and the same doctrines of salvation by repentance1 faith in ,jesus ,christ1 and regeneration by the ,holy ,spirit4 ,i perceived that the only substantial difference between the two was purely one of ecclesiastical organization and polity4 ,as before noted1 the ,baptist ,church did not hold that either baptism or church membership was necessary to salvation2 but that salvation was first necessary before one was scripturally entitled to either baptism or church membership4 ,it was also freely admitted that a truly repentant and converted ,methodist was just as truly saved and as sure of heaven as any ,baptist1--and that there were many such there could be no doubt1--true members of the kingdom of ,god and the ,church ,universal2 true heirs of glory and fit subjects for the heavenly kingdom1--yet not fit for membership in the earthly church1 admittedly imperfect at its best1 solely because they had not been dipped under the water1 an ordinance admitted to be secondary1 and wholly unnecessary to the main object6 ,i began to wonder from whence came the authority to bar the doors of ,god's earthly church against those who were clearly admitted to be members of the ,church ,universal1 and of ,god's spiritual kingdom4 ,thus my faith in the exclusive claims of my church to be the only true church on earth1 was very much weakened2 tho ,i still firmly believed it to be the best church1 and by far the most scriptural1 orthodox and apostolic4 ,yet1 ,i could not see why we might not affiliate with1 and co-operate more with our ,methodist brethren1 imperfect and unscriptural 787 as their ecclesiastical organization was1 especially in carrying forward the great central object we both had in view1 the salvation of souls from hell2 and more especially1 since there was no substantial disagreement between us as to the means and processes of accomplishing this object2 our real differences beginning only after this was accomplished4 ,the ,methodists were always willing to co-operate with us to the fullest extent we would permit them2 but we1 never1 with them4 ,during the summer that followed the close of my sophomore year in college 7which1 as subsequent events will show1 proved to be my last71 an event occurred that so affected my future ecclesiastical relations that it needs to be told in some detail4 ,as is generally well known1 one of the principal differences between the ,baptist and ,methodist churches is their difference of view in regard to the ,sacrament of the ,lord's ,supper1 as well as that of the mode of baptism4 ,the ,methodists1 as liberal evangelicals1 offer it to all ,christians present when it is celebrated1 leaving it to each individual to judge for himself as to his fitness to partake of it2 while the ,baptists limit it to members in good and regular standing in their own faith and order4 ,the ,baptists generally disclaim being close communionists1 but close baptists4 ,that is1 they insist that no person is eligible to partake of the ,lord's ,supper until after baptism by immersion2 and that by a regularly ordained ,baptist minister1 upon the authority of a ,baptist church1 expressed by a vote of its members4 ,i do not know that ,i ever saw the ordinance celebrated in a ,baptist church1 that some explanation along this line was not made1 by way of apology4 ,the event that so influenced my future thought was this3 ,at a ,baptist church1 some six miles from my father's residence1 their annual protracted meeting had been going on a week1--from ,sunday to ,sunday4 ,some eight or ten persons had joined the church during the week and were to be baptized at #aj ,a4,m4 on this last ,sunday1 after which was to follow the regular church services at #aa ,a4,m42 and then the celebration of the ,lord's ,supper4 ,a half mile away was a ,methodist church1 and the place of baptism was the ford of a creek about half way between the two4 ,the ,methodist ,sunday ,school usually met at #i4cj ,a4,m4 ,but on this occasion superintendent1 teachers and pupils1 came in a body down to the ford to see the baptising4 ,after it was over the ,methodist superintendent1 with several of his teachers and older pupils1 remained for the services at the ,baptist church4 ,at the close of the sermon two persons presented themselves for membership1 and were accepted1 by vote of the members1 subject to baptism1 at the next regular monthly meeting2 after which ,brother ,crawford1 the ,methodist ,sunday ,school ,superintendent1 was called on to lead in prayer1 a function in which he was earnest1 able and eloquent1 as well as being universally recognized as a man of unblemished character1 sincere and deep piety4 ,the minister then proceeded to administer the ,lord's ,supper1 prefacing it with the usual apologies and explanations about close baptism instead of close communion2 and to illustrate this point1 he referred to the fact that two persons had just presented themselves for church membership1 and had been accepted1 subject to baptism1 concerning whose conversion and sincere ,christian character1 there was just as sure confidence as there was of any that had been baptized that morning2 yet these two could not partake of the ,lord's ,supper because they had not yet been baptized4 ,just at this point there suddenly darted into my mind1 almost with the force of a clap of thunder from a clear sky1 the question1 ,where is the scriptural authority for this8 ,i had heard it perhaps a hundred times4 ,i was as familiar with it as ,i was with the alphabet1 but for the first time in life the thought came to me with the suddenness of lightning1 ,where is the scriptural authority for it8 ,i could not remember that ,i had ever heard a single passage of scripture quoted in its support1 or defense4 7,the reader must keep in mind that up to this time1 and for several years thereafter1 to me1 the ,bible was infallible1 inerrant1 and the sole and final authority in all matters pertaining to religion and the church47 ,the shock was so great1 and my mental agitation so intense1 that it threw me into a fever4 ,i went home sick4 ,during the following week ,i read the ,new ,testament thru in special search for some passage to support the doctrine that baptism1 in any form1 was a necessary prerequisite to a proper participation in the ,lord's ,supper4 ,and ,i did not find it4 ,in fact ,i did not find any direct evidence in the ,gospel record that any of the twelve to whom ,jesus first administered this supper were ever baptized at all6 and if they were1--which is only an inference1 or a reading into the record1 not what actually is there1 but what somebody thinks ought to be there1--it was not ,christian baptism1 but the baptism of ,john1 which1 according to the teachings of the ,baptist ,church1 was an entirely different thing in meaning and purpose1 tho the same in form4 ,john's baptism1 according to the teachings of my church1 was a baptism unto repentance1 in preparation for the appearance of ,christ2 while ,christian baptism1 in the name of the ,father1 and the ,son1 and the ,holy ,ghost was not instituted until after the descent of the ,holy ,ghost1 according to the promise of ,jesus1 on the ,day of ,pentecost4 ,then for the first time1 and not until then1 did ,christian baptism in the name of the ,trinity1 have any existence or meaning4 ,it was therefore quite clear to me1 that this institution that we call the ,lord's ,supper1 being instituted1 and first administered to persons who1 so far as we have any specific knowledge1 were not baptized at all2 and who in the very nature of the case could not have been baptized under that formula commonly known as ,christian baptism2 therefore1 whatever meaning may be attached to the ,lord's ,supper1 it has absolutely no connection with1 or relation to any kind1 or form of baptism whatsoever4 ,it is one of my misfortunes that ,i have never had sense enough to keep my counsel to myself4 ,i have always had a habit of thinking out loud4 ,and when ,i thus began to express myself1 my position in the ,baptist ,church began to grow shaky1 not to say precarious4 ,yet1 ,i still held rigidly to the doctrine that immersion alone was baptism1 and that with all its defects1 the ,baptist ,church was the most scriptural and orthodox in its doctrines and practices of any church in existence4 ,the upshot of this whole matter was1 that ,i was soon cited before my church conference to answer a charge of heresy1 in holding to the doctrine of open communion4 ,i appeared and wanted to make a defense of my position before the church4 ,i was vain and silly enough at that time to think if ,i could only make my argument before the church ,i would be able to convert a majority of the members to my views1 and thus save myself and reform the church4 ,but this ,i was not permitted to do4 ,i was told ,i might answer either guilty or not guilty1 and no more4 ,i refused to answer either way1 unless ,i was further permitted to explain my answer4 ,this was denied me4 ,whereupon1 a motion was made to withdraw fellowship from ,brother ,ashley2 and without debate or further ceremony1 the motion was put1 four persons voting ,aye1 and three1 ,no1 altho about forty members were present4 ,and thus ,i went out of the ,baptist ,church1 whereby my education for the ministry became automatically finished1 and all hope of my ministerial career blasted4 ,strange as it may seem there was a sort of personal satisfaction in this4 ,i had not entered the ministry as a pure matter of choice4 ,while ,i did not shrink from it1 but rather took it up joyously1 it was because ,i felt it to be a duty divinely imposed upon me1 and therefore an honor of which ,i was proud2 and because it was the means thru which ,i might gratify my personal desire to be of some real use to ,god and humanity1 in saving souls from the eternal burning4 ,but now ,i felt that ,i had fulfilled my part as far as ,i possibly could1 and was denied the privilege of going further by the action of the church2 and that thereafter the church1 and not ,i1 was responsible for any failure on my part to go on with the work of warning sinners to flee from the wrath to come4 ,i was a little like ,jonah fleeing to ,tarshish4 ,i was rather secretly glad ,i had gotten away1 and shifted the responsibility somewhere else4 ,but these impressions did not last long4 ,my fundamental theology had not changed4 ,the ,bible was still an infallible divine revelation4 ,humanity was still lost1 totally depraved1 abiding under the wrath of ,god2 hell was a reality towards which all humanity was bound2 and the only means of escape was to believe in the ,lord ,jesus ,christ according to the prescribed formula4 ,the burden of my personal responsibility soon returned4 ,i could not escape it4 ,true1 ,i was out of the church--the ,baptist ,church2 but it seemed quite evident that ,god was using other agencies1 outside the ,baptist ,church1 for the salvation of souls1 and seemed to be doing it quite successfully4 ,if ,god could so use the ,methodist ,church for this purpose1 why might not ,i8 ,what did baptism amount to anyway8 ,i was never taught that it was necessary to salvation4 ,and if not1 why make such a fuss about it8 ,if a person was already saved1 and it was only an outward sign of an inward grace1 what difference could it make how it was administered1 who administered it1 or whether it was administered at all8 ,these were some of the questions that ran thru my mind4 ,i also began to note that there were at least a few places in the ,new ,testament that might be fairly interpreted to imply that baptism was1 at least1 not always by immersion4 ,for example1 the baptism of so many thousands on the ,day of ,pentecost in ,jerusalem1 where the supply of water was very limited1 and this all under the control of the enemies of the new religion4 ,the immersion of so many1 in so short a time and under such circumstances and conditions was next to a physical impossibility1 while easily probable if done by sprinkling4 ,by these processes of reasoning1 in the course of some two years1 ,i found a congenial home in the ,methodist ,church1 at first with some trepidation1 but soon afterwards with perfect satisfaction4 ,while this change in church relations involved quite a radical change in matters of ecclesiastical organization and polity1 it must be kept in mind that it did not involve any material change in matters of fundamental theology4 ,but let it be noted here that during all this time ,i was striving for some degree of religious liberty2 and in passing from the ,baptist to the ,methodist ,church1 ,i was at least making some progress towards it1 however small it might be4 ,to shorten my story1 in a few months ,i found myself a circuit rider in the ,louisiana ,conference of the ,methodist ,episcopal ,church1 ,south--7,i was born and reared in the pine hills of ,mississippi74 ,it is not necessary to go into any lengthy details concerning my work at this time1 beyond the fact that ,i was fairly successful in it1 and for the time being1 ,i found it eminently satisfactory and fairly pleasant to myself4 ,however1 under the workings of the itinerant system1 in a few years ,i found myself located in the state of ,missouri1 where ,i transferred my church relations to the ,st4 ,louis ,conference of the ,m4 ,e4 ,church4 ,this change involved nothing but a matter of personal choice and convenience4 ,,chapter ,,iii ,,new ,,visions ,,and ,,disturbances ,having thus changed my church relations1 and feeling that ,i had a greater field of usefulness open to me1 my zeal for efficiency and success increased4 ,i had a sincere and consuming desire to save men's souls4 ,and believing my creed to be as infallible as the ,bible upon which it was based1 ,i studied to make myself efficient and able in its defense4 ,by following the ordinary methods of interpretation1 ,i soon found no trouble in doing this4 ,does the reader inquire here what are the ordinary methods of interpretation8 ,taking a chapter1 or verse1 or paragraph of the ,bible here and there1 thru the whole book1 from ,genesis to ,revelation1 and weaving them together as a connected whole1 regardless of whether there is any natural connection between them or not2 then disposing of all contradictory passages as either figurative1--with unlimited latitude on the interpretation of the figures1--or as pertaining to those great and mysterious1 unknowable things of ,god's divine revelation1--mysteries too great for man to know6 ,this method of interpretation is the common practice1 to a greater or less extent1 of every church in ,christendom that accepts the doctrine of the infallibility of the ,bible1 and looks to it as its sole and final source of authority in religion4 ,there is not a creed in ,christendom today1 and never has been1 that cannot be supported and proved to be conclusively correct from the ,bible by this method of interpretation4 ,by the same method the ,bible can be made the defense--and it often has been--of war1 murder1 slavery1 polygamy1 adultery1 and the foulest crimes known to humanity1 and these all made the divine institutions of ,god4 ,and these are exactly the leading methods of interpretation of the ,bible that are being followed today1 and have been since ,christianity first began to divide into sects and parties4 ,but this is a digression4 ,while ,i recognized some merit in nearly all the creeds1 ,i firmly believed mine the best4 ,my faith in1 and devotion to the ,methodist ,church had become so intense that ,i believed the sum total of all theological knowledge was concentrated and embodied in ,john ,wesley4 ,there could be no more progress1 no more discovery4 ,it was a finished science1 and ,john ,wesley finished it4 ,there are thousands who still think so1 even to this day6 ,i looked back over history to the days of apostolic purity1 followed the trend of theological thought in its decline into error and superstition1 thru the dark ages1 to the first glimmer of light in ,wickliffe1 followed by ,huss1 until the flame of the ,reformation sprang up in ,luther1 ,zwingli and ,calvin1 followed by ,knox and ,arminius2 but ,wesley was the end of knowledge1 and wisdom died with him4 ,yes1 ,i was soon able to defend and prove my creed to the satisfaction of myself and my superiors4 ,but now ,i wanted to go further4 ,i wanted to prove the proof4 ,as ,i grew older and my mind broadened ,i desired to drink deeper from the fountains of knowledge4 ,i started out with the best materials available to me to make a critical study of the ,bible4 ,up to this time ,i had studied the ,bible only superficially4 ,i had accepted it as truth1 as divine1 as inspired1 as infallible1 except the doubts of my school days before described1 and these ,i had long since cast aside4 ,i had studied the ,bible as the great mass of ,christians study it today--to support and defend preconceived opinions1 most of which ,i had inherited4 ,now ,i was to seek for basic principles4 ,i wanted to know just who wrote each book of the ,bible1 when he wrote it and why1 and just what the specific proofs were as to these facts and of its divine inspiration4 ,in looking back over the period of years that have since intervened1 ,i am still unable to perceive any selfish1 egotistical motive in these my ambitions4 ,my unquenchable thirst for knowledge was inspired solely by my desire to increase my efficiency in that vocation to which ,i sincerely believed ,i was divinely called4 ,i never had the opportunity of taking a ,divinity ,course in a ,divinity ,school4 ,but both the great branches of the ,methodist ,church require all its ministers1 before final ordination1 to take a prescribed course of study1 somewhat after the correspondence method1 covering four years1--and longer if necessary to cover the full prescribed course1--that is practically equal to the curriculum of the average ,divinity ,school1 minus the advantages of class room instruction and class lectures4 ,it was this course of study that ,i pursued1 prescribed by the bishops of the ,m4 ,e4 ,church4 ,and it was here in these orthodox books1 prescribed by the bishops of my church as necessary for me1 not only to read1 but to study1 learn and digest1 to fully equip me for the ministry1 that ,i learned the lessons that completely upset my faith1 and finally led me to abandon the church and religion entirely6 ,i might add that it was perhaps as much what ,i failed to learn from these books1 things that ,i was looking for and could not find because it was not in them1 that led me to this course1 as it was from the affirmative facts ,i did learn4 ,up to this time1 and long afterwards1 ,i had never read a book that might be called at all liberal in theology1 much less anything of a sceptical character4 ,in fact ,i had read nothing1 outside of school text books1 except such books as were authoritatively published by some ,baptist or ,methodist publishing house4 ,robert ,g4 ,ingersoll was then at the height of his fame1 and ,i would not even read a political speech of his1 because he was an infidel4 ,the strange anomaly of the whole thing is that ,i was led1 or rather driven1 clear out of the church into practical agnosticism thru and by my earnest and intense efforts to more strongly fortify and establish myself in my preconceived beliefs about the ,bible and religion4 ,this will appear more fully as we proceed4 ,first of all1 all orthodox ,christianity is based upon the doctrine that the ,bible is the supernaturally inspired1 infallible word of ,god4 ,upon this ,bible as the sole authority1 every doctrine1 creed1 dogma and ecclesiastical practice is based4 ,take away this doctrine of ,biblical infallibility1 and orthodoxy crumbles to dust4 ,as long as it is held to be infallible truth1 every creed in ,christendom can find abundant material in it to prove every point it claims4 ,every one knows that among the many ,christian denominations which fully agree with each other the ,bible is an infallible revelation from ,god2 yet the doctrines and conclusions they deduce from it are as diametrically opposed to each other as midnight and noon4 ,as ,i have already said1 ,i never had any doubt1 up to this time1 of the divine inspiration and infallibility of the ,bible1 except a very slight one about the method of inspiration1 which ,i have already detailed of my student days4 ,as a ,methodist ,i had become fairly proficient in my ability to defend every detail of my church doctrine4 ,i could repeat almost every passage of scripture from ,genesis to ,revelation in support of each of the ,twenty-five ,articles4 ,my only trouble was when ,i would occasionally run across some sceptic who would question my authority1--the ,bible4 ,of course ,i would tell him the ,bible was the word of ,god2 and he would demand proof1 detailed facts1 in support of my assertion4 ,while perfectly satisfied in my own mind1 these detailed facts were not in my possession4 ,but now ,i was going to get them4 ,in the last year of my conference course of study1 one of the books prescribed was ,harman's ,introduction to the ,study of the ,holy ,scriptures4 ,dr4 ,harman was ,professor of ,greek and ,hebrew in ,dickinson ,college4 ,i was told that in this book ,i would find completely detailed1 uncontrovertible proofs of the divine authenticity1 inspiration1 and infallible truth of the ,bible4 ,this was just what ,i had long been looking for1 and just how ,i found it will soon appear4 ,,approaching ,,the ,,crisis ,the first one-third of this book of #ggj pages is devoted to proving the ,mosaic authorship of the ,pentateuch1 its inspiration and infallible truth4 ,on the subject of inspiration generally the author follows the ideal rather than the verbal theory4 ,his theory of the necessity of inspiration is based upon the idea that the ,bible contains records that could not otherwise have been known at the time they were written2 for example1 the account of ,creation must have been divinely revealed to ,moses1 as he could not otherwise have known it4 ,the extent of inspiration he limits to those matters that were not otherwise known to the writers4 ,things of which they had personal knowledge were therefore not the subjects of inspiration4 ,for example1 the advice of ,jethro1 concerning the division in the burdens of the government1 was not inspired1 because ,moses got it directly from the mouth of ,jethro himself4 ,nevertheless the author was divinely guided in writing of matters of his personal knowledge1 in order that the sacred record might be preserved from error4 ,as to the proofs of inspiration1 ,i quote verbatim3 ,the inspiration of the ,bible is evident from its sublime doctrines concerning ,god1 the purity of its moral precepts1 and from the wonderful fulfillment of its prophecies4 ,when ,i read this ,i confess ,i felt a little disappointed4 ,i had understood this before4 ,i wanted something more specific1 material1 tangible4 ,then follows a lengthy treatise on the ,hebrew language1 the original characters in which the ,pentateuch was written1 without vowels or punctuation marks2 how it was preserved by copying from generation to generation2 how errors crept into various copies2 an account of the ,samaritan ,pentateuch1 and the ,septuagint2 how these all differ the one from the other in many details2 of the ancient manuscripts that are still extant1 and how these all differ more or less from each other1--not in anything fundamental1 but in many minor details2 and finally winds up with the statement that the original text is uncertain6 ,this was all new to me4 ,i had naturally supposed that not only the original text was divinely inspired and infallibly correct1 but that by some sort of divine supervision1 it had been so preserved and kept down thru the ages4 ,and now ,i was not only disappointed1 but alarmed4 ,i wondered what would come next4 ,and ,i soon learned4 ,before this ,i had never discovered1 nor had any one pointed them out to me1 the many discrepancies and contradictions in the early ,biblical records1--the two stories of creation1 the two accounts of the flood that are so intricately woven together1 the changes in the law in ,deuteronomy from those in ,exodus and ,leviticus2 and others4 ,my simple1 blind faith had completely obscured all these until now4 ,it is true the author pointed them out only to explain or reconcile them4 ,but in practically every instance1 the explanation failed to explain1 or reconcile1 and was only an apology or an excuse2 and ,i was left with a clear vision of the discrepancy1 and with no adequate explanation4 ,the differences between some parts of the law1 as recorded in ,deuteronomy and in the earlier books1 was explained as a progressive development according to the changing conditions and needs of the ,hebrews4 ,from a purely human viewpoint1 ,i considered this explanation satisfactory4 ,but from that of divine revelation1 ,i wondered why ,god did not reveal it correctly at the first2 or why he found it necessary to change his own law4 ,concerning the ritual law of the tabernacle and the priesthood1 the author confesses that1 in all probability1 ,moses was educated at ,heliopolis1 in ,egypt1 for the ,egyptian priesthood1 and was therefore perfectly familiar with all the priestly regulations of the religion of ,egypt2 and that the tabernacle service1 its priesthood1 their dress1 sacred utensils1 etc41 were doubtless all patterned after ,egyptian models1 but devoted to ,jehovah instead of the gods of ,egypt2 and he cites this as a proof of the ,mosaic authorship of the ,pentateuch4 ,and in support of this view1 he quotes the opinion of the ,abb ,victor ,ancessi6 ,and ,i had always been taught that the tabernacle1 the priesthood1 and all that pertained to both1 were divinely revealed to ,moses on ,mt4 ,sinai6 ,according to the pattern shown thee in the mount4 ,then on the question of interpolations1 our author confesses that there are many of them in the ,pentateuch1 most of them showing that they belong to a much later age than ,moses2 yet he denies that any of them are material1 or in any way change the original meaning or sense of the text4 ,thus ,i went thru over #bej pages1 devoted1 not so much to the questions of divine inspiration and supernatural revelation1 as these seemed to be very largely taken for granted2 but to the defense of the ,mosaic authorship of the ,pentateuch upon which seemed to hinge the whole question of its authenticity and infallible authority4 ,as the author puts it1 ,if the ,pentateuch was not written by ,moses it is a forgery4 ,to do this he quotes quite elaborately from the higher critics1 ,bauer1 ,davidson1 ,bleek1 ,ewald1 ,kuenen1 ,wellhausen1 and others1 for the ostensible purpose of answering and refuting them4 ,now ,i had1 up to this time1 never read a line of such ,biblical criticism1 except that quoted by this author4 ,naturally1 ,i not only had no sympathy with it1 but was strongly prejudiced against it4 ,but ,i could not fail to note that the refutations and explanations of my author very often failed to either refute or explain4 ,to sum the whole thing up1 when ,i had gone thus far1 ,i could not avoid the impression that from the standpoint of logical argument1 based upon any known facts1 the whole thing was a failure4 ,it was simply a continued series of apologetics2 in legal parlance1 a sort of confession and avoidance4 ,i began in the firm belief that ,moses wrote the ,pentateuch1 and that he was divinely inspired in doing it4 ,i expected to find the definite proofs that this was true4 ,when ,i got thru ,i didn't know who wrote it4 ,i was equally certain the author ,i was reading didn't know2 and ,i doubted if any one else did4 ,i felt the incipient doubts of my school days returning1 only in much larger volume and greater force4 ,if the reader will pardon the phrase3 ,i felt myself slipping4 ,then followed a study of the authorship1 origin1 character1 and purpose of the remaining canonical books of the ,old ,testament4 ,these may all be grouped into two or three divisions4 ,of the historical books of ,joshua1 ,judges1 ,first and ,second ,samuel1 ,first and ,second ,kings and ,first and ,second ,chronicles1 ,i found to my surprise1 that nobody knows who wrote any of them2 nor anything definite about the time1 or circumstances under which they were written4 ,joshua was merely believed to have been written not later than twenty-five years after the death of ,joshua1 by some person or persons who were personally familiar with the events therein narrated4 ,as the book is clearly divided into two distinct parts1 the first ending with the twelfth chapter and the second beginning with the thirteenth1 it is supposed that it was written by ,eleazar and ,phinehas4 ,but this is admitted to be mere conjecture4 ,the ,book of ,judges is placed after that of ,joshua1 because it takes up the narrative where ,joshua closes4 ,it is assumed that it must have been written sometime before the close of ,david's reign4 ,respecting the ,authorship of ,judges1 nothing is known4 ,the date of both books of ,samuel--originally one book--is wholly unknown1 as is also that of the ,kings and ,chronicles4 ,it is conjectured from internal evidence1 that ,chronicles was probably compiled by ,ezra1 from ,samuel1 ,kings1 and possibly other documents1 sometime after the return from the exile4 ,as to the ,book of ,ezra1 it was shown that it is probably one of the most authentic books of the ,old ,testament1 and written by the man whose name it bears4 ,nehemiah was also placed in the thoroly authentic class1 with the admission that about one-fourth of the total contents of the book1 appearing in the middle of it1 is very probably an interpolation by a later1 and unknown author4 ,but this1 he insists1 does not detract from the divine inspiration and authenticity of the book as a whole4 ,ruth and ,esther also belong to the class of the unknown4 ,nobody knows who wrote either1 nor when1 nor where4 ,ruth is placed probably sometime during the reign of ,david4 ,esther is much later2 in fact it is one of the latest books in the ,old ,testament ,canon1 from which it was long excluded because the name of ,god nowhere appears in it4 ,the historical events narrated in it are admitted to be of very doubtful authenticity1 as they are nowhere else mentioned in the ,bible1 and are wholly unknown to secular history2 and such events1 if they occurred at all1 were of such transcendent importance to the ,jewish nation1 that mention of them in the ,chronicles1 or by some of the prophets1 could hardly have been omitted4 ,but our author gets around all these difficulties by the ,feast of ,purim4 ,he insists that such a memorial as this1 that has been and still is celebrated annually by the ,jews in all parts of the world1 since the memory of man runneth not to the contrary1 could not possibly have originated in a mere fiction1 and been perpetuated so long4 ,therefore1 the ,book of ,esther must be true1 and divinely inspired6 ,when ,i had read thus far1 in spite of my former simple faith in the divine inspiration and infallible truth of the ,bible1 ,i found myself clearly on the toboggan2 and ,i was deeply disturbed in mind4 ,i was studying a thoroly orthodox author1 a distinguished professor in one of our leading colleges1 whose book was approved by the bishops of my church2 a book clearly written for the purpose of defending the traditional position of the church concerning the ,bible1 on almost every page of which that ,i had thus far read1 ,i found a series of apologetics rather than arguments2 with constant admissions of the world's total ignorance of the origin1 authorship and date of most of the books of the ,bible thus far reviewed4 ,i began to wonder1 if this was what ,i was getting from such a source1 inspired by such a motive1 what might ,i expect from a ,biblical scholar and critic who was in search only of abstract truth1 with no preconceived opinions to support or defend8 ,i felt an incipient revolution brewing in my mind4 ,but ,i was yet to learn more4 ,concerning the poetical books1 ,i found that the ,book of ,job was not written by ,job2 that nobody knows who wrote it1 nor when nor where4 ,i found that conjecture by different scholars placed it all the way from before ,moses to after the exile4 ,nobody knows whether it purports to record1 in poetic form1 a series of actual historic facts and events2 or whether it is merely a dramatic allegory1 entirely fictitious1 or founded upon some substratum of fact4 ,we do not know who ,job was1 whether a ,hebrew1 an ,arab1 or ,chaldean2--nor just where the land of ,uz was4 ,concerning the ,psalms1 which ,i had always been taught were written by ,david1 the sweet singer of ,israel1 ,i found to be the ,jewish hymn book1 compiled by an unknown hand1 or hands1 at an unknown date2 but in its present form1 perhaps as late as the third century ,b4,c42 that the authorship of very few of them is known2 that ,david wrote but few of them1 if any2 but that they were written by various authors1 mostly unknown1 ranging all the way from the time of ,moses to that of ,ezra1 or later2 that collections and revisions were probably made from time to time as new compositions appeared2 until its present form was attained4 ,i found that the ,book of ,proverbs was not written by ,solomon1 but that it was probably compiled in the time of ,king ,hezekiah1 by unknown persons4 ,however1 our author insists that most of the proverbs in the collection are ,solomonic in origin2 and therefore we may very correctly speak of the collection as the ,proverbs of ,solomon4 ,the ,book of ,ecclesiastes1 from the superscription in ,chapter ,i1 verses #a and #ab1 always attributed to ,solomon1 ,i found was not written by ,solomon1 at all1 nor until more than five hundred years after his death4 ,our author concedes it to be the latest book of the ,canon2 that it could not have been written before ,malachi1 and possibly much later1 and who wrote it1 nobody knows4 ,likewise ,i found that the ,song of ,solomon was not written by ,solomon1 nor by anyone else until centuries after his death2 and nobody knows who wrote it1 nor what its real meaning or purport is1 whether fact or fiction1 spiritual or sensual4 ,it is admitted that its real meaning and purport is the most obscure and mysterious of any book in the ,old ,testament1 yet1 as it is in the ,bible it must be the divinely inspired1 infallible word of ,god6 ,so our author thinks4 ,coming now to the ,prophetic ,books1 ,i learned from our author that the ,book of ,isaiah1 as it now appears1 is a collection and compilation of various writings of this great prophet1 written piece-meal over a period of some fifty years1 and after his death collected and arranged in its present form by some unknown hand2 and that the present arrangement was made without any reference to the chronological order of the original writings1 or the subject matter treated4 ,he admits the radical difference in style1 manner and subject matter of the two parts of this book1 upon which modern critics have based their theory of two ,isaiahs1 one living before and the other during the captivity1 and reconciles these discrepancies by asserting the power of ,god to miraculously change the literary style of his servants at will4 ,about the same thing is said of the ,book of ,jeremiah what was said of ,isaiah2 that it is a collection of the writings of the prophet1 made after his death1 by some unknown person1 but more probably by ,baruch2 and that like ,isaiah the contents of this book are arranged without reference to their chronological order4 ,great differences are admitted to exist between the ,hebrew and ,septuagint versions of this book1 which our author does not try to explain or reconcile4 ,he frankly admits that the last chapter of this book1 which is identical with #b ,kings xxiv1 #ah1 and xxv1 was added by a later1 and unknown hand4 ,the ,book of ,ezekiel is treated briefly and considered one of the most authentic and unquestioned of any book in the ,canon4 ,but the author devotes twenty-six pages to the ,book of ,daniel1 almost entirely to prove that the book was written by the prophet of that name in ,babylon1 during the exile4 ,he quotes elaborately from the critics who hold to a later date and a different author1 and tries to refute them4 ,about the only effect produced on my mind was that neither party knew anything definite about it2 and of course my faith in the authenticity of the book was greatly weakened4 ,coming to the ,minor ,prophets1 twelve in number1 the author holds that ,hosea1 ,joel1 ,amos1 ,micah1 ,haggai1 ,zephaniah and ,zechariah were well known prophets1 concerning the date and authorship of whose books there is no grave doubt4 ,yet1 he admits that there are manifest interpolations and additions to the ,book of ,zechariah4 ,of ,nahum1 ,habakkuk1 ,malachi and ,obadiah he admits that we know absolutely nothing1 except what is written in their respective books1 and the dates they were written can only be conjectured from their contents4 ,obadiah is composed of but one chapter of twenty-one verses1 and almost identically the same thing is contained in ,jeremiah xlix1 #g-bb4 ,the identity is so great that our author assumes that one of them copied from the other1 but which1 he does not say4 ,of the ,book of ,jonah1 he admits that it was not written by the prophet of that name mentioned in #b ,kings xiv1 #be1 nor for at least three hundred years after his time1 notwithstanding he is evidently the same as that in the book4 ,he insists1 however1 that no matter who wrote it1 or when1 the book is authentic and the story true2 and as one of the principal proofs of this fact1 he quotes ,matt1 xii1 #ci1 #dj4 ,thus ,i finished the ,old ,testament1 considerably shaken in faith2 but as the ,old ,testament belonged to a long past dispensation1 ,i considered it of little value anyway1 and approached the study of the ,new with the hope that all difficulties would be removed and all doubts made clear4 ,if the ,new ,testament was truly inspired of ,god and infallibly true1 what difference did it make if the ,old was doubtful and uncertain8 ,it was out of date anyway4 ,,chapter ,,iv ,,nearer ,,the ,,crisis ,our author begins his ,introduction to the ,study of the ,new ,testament with an account of the language and characters in which most of it was originally written1 as he did the ,old4 ,these were ,greek ,uncials1 all capital letters1 without any space divisions between the words1 and neither accent nor punctuation marks2 that from these original manuscripts1 down to the invention of printing1 all copies were made by hand copying4 ,the oldest existing manuscripts were made in the fourth and fifth centuries of the ,christian era1 and no two of these are exactly alike4 ,during the succeeding centuries several thousand manuscript copies of all or parts of the ,new ,testament were made that are still extant1 and no two exactly alike6 ,i also learned that there are still extant quite a number of ancient ,versions of the ,new ,testament1 translated into different languages1 all of which are more or less different from each other1 not alone in the text1 but in the books recognized as authentic and canonical4 ,here the author gives a brief history of the formation of the ,new ,testament ,canon1 which so surprised1 and even startled me1 that ,i must make some mention of it4 7,in his treatment of the ,old ,testament the author gives but a few pages to the formation of the ,old ,testament ,canon47 ,in the fifth ,article of ,religion in the ,methodist ,discipline it says3 ,in the name of the ,holy ,scriptures we do understand those canonical books of the ,old and ,new ,testaments of whose authority was never any doubt in the ,church4 7,italics mine47 ,but here ,i was to learn that for over three hundred years there was more or less controversy1 and sometimes very bitter1 over what books of the ,new ,testament were1 or were not1 authentic and authoritative2 that as a matter of fact there never was complete agreement among the ,church ,fathers2 and that there never was any authoritative declaration on the subject by any ,church ,council until the ,council of ,trent 7,roman ,catholic7 in #aede1 which included in its canon all of our present recognized books of both the ,old and ,new ,testaments1 and in addition thereto1 included as canonical the ,old ,testament ,apocrypha1 which is universally excluded from the ,protestant ,bibles4 ,as this work is designed1 at least partly1 to stimulate additional study in others it may be well to cite a few examples1 as ,i learned them from this book1 designed to prove conclusively the authenticity1 divine inspiration and infallible truth of the ,holy ,scriptures4 ,the canon of ,muratori1 about ,a4,d4 #afj1 omits ,hebrews1 both epistles of ,peter1 ,james and ,jude1 as uncanonical1 and expresses doubts as to the ,revelation4 ,the ,peshito ,syriac1 about ,a4,d4 #bjj1 omits ,second ,peter1 ,jude1 ,second and ,third ,john and ,revelation4 ,the ,latin ,version ,itala1 about the middle of the second century1 omits ,james and ,second ,peter4 ,the ,version of ,clemens1 about ,a4,d4 #bjb1 omits ,second ,peter1 ,james1 ,second and ,third ,john and ,philemon4 ,that of ,cyprian of ,carthage1 about ,a4,d4 #bej1 omits ,hebrews1 ,second ,peter1 ,second and ,third ,john1 and ,jude4 ,eusebius1 the great church historian1 about ,a4,d4 #cdj1 disputes the authenticity of ,james1 and omits ,jude1 ,second ,peter1 second and ,third ,john1 and doubts the ,revelation4 ,he also gives a list of ,spurious writings at that time1 a number of which are still extant4 7,it was years after this before ,i saw ,the ,apocryphal ,new ,testament47 ,ambrose of ,milan1 late in the fourth century1 rejects ,hebrews1 ,second and ,third ,john1 ,jude1 ,james1 and ,philemon4 ,chrysostom1 of ,antioch1 about ,a4,d4 #djj1 omits ,second ,peter1 ,jude1 ,second and ,third ,john1 and ,revelation4 ,jerome1 about ,a4,d4 #dbj1 rejects ,hebrews1 doubts ,james and ,jude1 and attributes ,second and ,third ,john to ,john1 a ,presbyter of ,ephesus1 and not the ,apostle ,john4 ,i have only cited the names of those who did not accept the present canon4 ,that many of the ,church ,fathers1 perhaps a majority of them1 did accept it is not questioned4 ,i have cited these instances--and not near all our author gives--to show that opinion on this subject was by no means unanimous in this early day2 nor was all the intelligence1 ability and character on one side4 ,i quote it also to show that the teachings of my church concerning those books1 that there was never any doubt in the church was not correct4 ,it must however be said in all fairness1 according to our author1 that from about the close of the second or the beginning of the third century1 there was practical unanimity in the church as to the authenticity of all the books in our present ,new ,testament except these seven3 ,hebrews1 ,jude1 ,second ,peter1 ,second and ,third ,john1 ,james and ,revelation4 ,over these the controversy continued until the ,roman ,hierarchy overshadowed the ,church and suppressed all liberty of thought or expression4 ,we now come to the detailed study of the origin1 authorship1 date and character of the different books of the ,new ,testament4 ,the first shock ,i got was learning that ,the ,gospel ,according to ,matthew1 was not written in its present form by the ,apostle of that name4 ,nor is the author or date definitely known4 ,the substance of a long article on the subject is to the effect that ,matthew the ,apostle1 about ,a4,d4 #fh1 wrote an account of the doings and sayings of ,jesus1 in the ,syro-,chaldee language1 the vernacular of ,palestine at the time1 for the benefit of the ,hebrew ,christians4 ,from this basis some later hand1 unknown1 translated into ,greek1 and elaborated it into substantially our present version4 ,the earliest known ,hebrew1 or ,syro-,chaldee version was that used by the ,ebionites1 which materially differed from our present ,greek version2 but which is the original and which the recession has never been settled4 ,the early ,ebionite version did not contain the first two chapters1 giving the account of the miraculous birth2 but our author insists that these were cut off from the original1 rather than added on1 tho nobody knows which4 ,concerning the ,gospel of ,mark1 he insists that it was also written as was the original of ,matthew1 before the destruction of ,jerusalem1 but after ,matthew2 that the material in it was learned from ,peter1 whose companion ,mark was 7how does this comport with divine inspiration87 as ,mark was not an apostle and could not have known these facts at first hand4 ,he admits the last twelve verses to be spurious and added by a later hand4 ,concerning ,luke he says that he derived his information from ,paul 7another case of doubtful inspiration71 admits the date and place he wrote are unknown2 admits the discrepancies between him and ,matthew1 in regard to the circumstances of the miraculous birth and the genealogy of ,jesus--something ,i had never noticed before6--and undertakes to reconcile them4 ,when ,i turned to the records and read them in this new light1 his attempted reconciliation1 to my mind1 was an utter failure4 ,like every attempted reconciliation ,i have ever read since1 it was done by reading into the record1 not only what was not there1 but what was wholly inconsistent with the record that is there4 ,if any candid reader will first read carefully the first two chapters of ,matthew1 noting all the details1 and then likewise the first two chapters of ,luke1 he will see that they are wholly irreconcilable in their details4 ,they agree in but two points3 ,that ,jesus was miraculously begotten1 and born at ,bethlehem4 ,but in every detail of what went before and after1 they are wholly at variance4 ,my belief in divine and infallible inspiration was here materially weakened4 ,how could the ,holy ,spirit inspire in two different men1 writing upon the same subject1 such varying and irreconcilable accounts of the same event8 ,besides1 our author had practically abandoned the idea of inspiration by attributing ,mark's knowledge of the life of ,jesus to ,peter and ,luke's to ,paul4 ,but1 on the other hand1 as ,i learned a little later1 in all the writings attributed to ,paul1 there is not a single reference1 even most remotely1 to the miraculous birth of ,jesus2 but on the other hand there is much evidence in his writings to lead to the conclusion that he knew nothing about it4 ,then where did ,luke get this information8 ,concerning the ,gospel according to ,john1 our author devotes forty-eight pages to an effort to support its authorship in the ,apostle ,john1 and to try to reconcile it with the other ,gospels4 ,like the differences between ,matthew and ,luke concerning the birth of ,jesus1 this was the first knowledge ,i had that there were any discrepancies between them1 or that there was any doubt about its authorship4 ,he quotes elaborately from the ,church ,fathers in its favor1 as well as from the modern critics both for and against4 ,he admits that chapter xxi is a later addition to the book1 but insists that ,john wrote it himself1 except the last two verses1 which were added by the church at ,ephesus4 ,he also admits that v1 #b1 #c1 and viii1 #a-aa1 are both spurious and added by a later and unknown hand4 ,when ,i had read it all ,i knew less about the authorship of the book than when ,i began4 ,but the discrepancies between it and the synoptics loomed large and menacing4 ,i will not go into details concerning these4 ,the reader can easily see them for himself4 ,but on the question of inspiration ,i was about at my wits' end4 ,here ,i was at the very vital part of the ,christian religion1 as ,i had been taught it and was trying to teach it to others4 ,i have already told how ,i passed up the matter of the inspiration of the ,old ,testament as being of little importance under the ,christian dispensation4 ,and now every prop was falling from under me in regard to the inspiration of the ,new4 ,if the very records of the life and teachings of the ,christ himself1 upon which the whole fabric of ,christianity rested1 were now shown to be discordant and irreconcilable in their contents1 and some of them very doubtful in their authorship2 with it the whole doctrine of a divine and infallible revelation would have to go4 ,i was dumfounded4 ,was it possible that all this upon which ,i had staked my whole life1 and had been preaching for years1 was a mere fiction8 ,it seemed to be so1 if the ,bible was not divinely inspired1 a true revelation from ,god1 and infallibly correct4 ,but how could it all be true1 when it told so many different and conflicting stories about the same thing8 ,was not ,god the very essence of truth8 ,then how could ,he miraculously reveal one thing to ,matthew1 another and entirely different one to ,luke1 and still another and different one to ,john1 all about the same thing8 ,and yet1 that in many instances this was true1 ,i could no longer doubt4 ,even tho these discrepancies might not go to the essence of ,christianity as a system of religion2 nor materially affect its fundamental doctrines2 yet they did go to the very foundations upon which it was based1--a divine and infallible revelation from heaven4 ,take this away and orthodox ,christianity is not left a leg to stand on2 and ,i knew it4 ,but we will hurry on thru this subject4 ,the authorship of the ,acts of the ,apostles was attributed without serious question to ,luke4 ,all the ,epistles usually attributed to ,paul are conceded to him by our author1 except that to the ,hebrews1 while some critics reject the ,pauline authorship of any of the ,pastoral ,epistles1--those to ,timothy1 ,titus and ,philemon4 ,the author of the ,epistle to the ,hebrews is admitted to be unknown1 and its date uncertain1 tho it existed in the church quite early4 ,the ,epistle of ,james is admitted to be doubtful2 and especially as to which of several men of this name might have written it4 ,it is admitted that it could not have been written by the ,apostle ,james1 as he was put to death at ,jerusalem long before the epistle was known4 ,as has already been seen1 it was rejected by many of the ,fathers2 and even ,martin ,luther dubbed it an epistle of straw4 ,first ,peter is considered genuine1 and written by the ,apostle2 but ,second ,peter is admitted to have been unknown in the church before the third century1 and consequently spurious4 ,the ,first ,epistle of ,john is believed by our author to have been written by the same hand that wrote the ,fourth ,gospel1 the ,apostle ,john4 ,second and ,third ,john are admitted to be doubtful1 probably written by some other ,john1 and by later tradition1 because of the identity of the names1 attributed to the ,apostle4 ,third ,john was unknown in the church before the third century4 ,the ,epistle of ,jude is admitted to be a mystery4 ,nobody knows even who ,jude was1 or what he was1 or when the epistle was written4 ,it was known to exist early in the second century4 ,it was generally rejected by the early church1 but somehow got into the canon4 ,the ,book of ,revelation is admitted to be the most mysterious book in the whole ,bible4 ,by whom and when written are both unknown4 ,tradition and its internal content is the only evidence that the ,apostle ,john wrote it1 and this would apply to any other ,john as well4 ,it is evident that the same person did not write it and the ,fourth ,gospel4 ,it was unknown in the church until near the middle of the second century2 tho it bears internal evidence of having been written before the fall of ,jerusalem4 ,most of the early ,church ,fathers rejected it1 but it got into the canon2--and is therefore divinely inspired6 ,my study of ,harman's ,introduction of the ,study of the ,holy ,scriptures was here finished4 ,i have elaborated somewhat on these studies for two reasons3 ,first1 because the results that these studies produced in me1 that ,i shall presently sum up1 were the results of the whole1 rather than any particular part of it1 except those portions which ,i have already specially noted4 ,second1 ,i desire to arouse a similar spirit of study and investigation in my readers2 and ,i thus give this outline of study in detail1 as a sort of basis from or upon which to work4 ,i have already indicated in part my feelings at this time4 ,i summed the whole thing up briefly4 ,the one great question around which it all hinged was this3 ,if the authorship of the books of the greater portion of the ,old ,testament are wholly unknown1 as well as the dates when they were written1 and the same is true of several of the books of the ,new ,testament1 how are we to know these same books are divinely inspired1 the infallible truth1 the word of ,god8 ,this is a fair question and a reasonable one4 ,i had set out in earnest and good faith to find the proofs of inspiration1 in which ,i had always believed1 and only found them wanting4 ,add to this the manifold discrepancies and direct contradictions which ,i now began to discover running thru the whole ,bible1 both ,old and ,new ,testaments1 and ,i found them wholly irreconcilable with any idea of divine revelation and infallible truth4 ,i here recalled a small book ,i had read some years before on ,inspiration1--the author ,i have forgotten1--but ,i remember the three leading reasons for the inspiration of the ,bible which he gave1 and which1 with my limited knowledge at the time1 seemed satisfactory4 ,these were3 ,tradition1 ,necessity and ,success4 ,the tradition of the ,jews as to the authenticity and inspiration of the books of the ,old ,testament3 it was argued1 that whatever may at this time be the limits of our knowledge concerning these books1 the ancient ,jewish ,rabbis knew just what they were1 and if they had not every one been the word of ,god1 these ,rabbis would have known it1 and they never would have been in the canon4 ,the same doctrine of tradition was applied to the ,church ,fathers concerning the books of the ,new ,testament4 ,but ,i had here learned that these ,church ,fathers were by no means agreed as to these books4 ,i began to see now that the same argument might be applied with equal force to the ,vedas1 the ,zend ,avesta1 or the ,koran4 ,the argument from necessity was based upon the assumption that man in his fallen and sinful state was by nature wholly unable to discover anything about ,god1 or the means of his redemption4 ,therefore a divine revelation was necessary to meet man's needs in this case2 and the ,bible meets this necessity4 ,therefore the ,bible is a divine revelation4 ,but ,i here recalled that the only evidence we have of man's original perfection and fall is in the ,bible itself2 and that this line of argument must ultimately drive us back to the mere assumption of the facts upon which this supposed divine necessity was based4 ,the argument based upon success was that ,christ and ,christianity were not only the fulfillment of ,old ,testament promise and prophecy2 but that it never could have made the success in the world that it has if it had not been of divine origin1 the result of divine revelation4 ,i was prepared at this time to look with some favor on the argument drawn from promise and prophecy2 but if success was a true test ,i wondered if the same argument would not apply with equal force to ,buddhism1 with a third more followers than ,christianity1 or to ,mohammedanism with half as many in a much shorter time4 ,these arguments could satisfy me no longer1 in the light of the new facts ,i had learned4 ,but ,i was not yet ready to give up religion and ,christianity4 ,i began to look for some new basis of interpretation4 ,i asked myself the questions3 ,may not ,christianity be substantially true after all8 ,is not man a sinner8 ,and as such does he not need a ,savior8 ,does not ,christianity meet this necessity8 ,is not the ,bible after all1 tho of purely human origin as ,i now conceived1 a valuable book8 ,may we not yet find much valuable truth in it1 tho neither inspired nor infallible8 ,may not the great plan of salvation be true after all8 ,is it not of vital importance to know8 ,but if the ,bible in which we find it cannot be relied upon infallibly1 how are we to know8 ,in thus questioning myself ,i took into consideration my own personal experiences1 those emotional impressions and manifestation which ,i had always been taught were the supernatural manifestations of the ,holy ,spirit on my life and consciousness4 ,i could not deny them1 nor get away from them4 ,they were real4 ,it was years later before ,i learned to interpret them from the scientific standpoint of psychology4 ,i determined to take a new course--a course ,i had never taken before4 ,i had heretofore taken my religion on authority4 ,this authority had now failed4 ,i determined to apply the test of reason1 with a firm conviction that in doing so ,god would guide me aright4 ,if any man will do his will he shall know of the doctrine4 ,i may say just here that ,i have never yet met a person who undertook to defend the ,christian ,system1 or doctrine of sin and salvation1 from the standpoint of its own intrinsic reasonableness4 ,the only manner in which reason has been applied to its defence is1 that it is a reasonable deduction from the divine revelation upon which it is based2 which revelation must be accepted as true without question or equivocation4 ,to doubt is to be damned4 ,in fact1 its unreasonableness1 from any natural human viewpoint1 was quite freely admitted4 ,but it was argued that man in his fallen state was quite incapable of perceiving1 or understanding1 any of the great mysteries of ,god4 ,great is the mystery of ,godliness was often quoted to me2 as well as1 ,for my thoughts are not your thoughts1 neither are your ways my ways1 saith ,jehovah4 ,for as the heavens are higher than the earth1 so are my ways higher than your ways1 and my thoughts than your thoughts4 ,this was the court of last resort and must be accepted1 and to ask further questions was to blaspheme4 ,perhaps it may be well to give here a quotation which ,i came across years afterwards1 as illustrating this process of reasoning from the assumed hypothesis of a divine and infallible revelation1 that must be taken as the starting point4 ,it is from ,dr4 ,albert ,barnes1 a distinguished ,presbyterian minister of ,philadelphia1 about the middle of the last century4 ,i quote him because of his high character and representative position2 and his dilemma is substantially the same with practically all others with whom ,i have conversed on the subject4 ,here is what he says3 ,that the immortal mind should be allowed to jeopard its infinite welfare1 and that trifles should be allowed to draw it away from ,god and virtue and heaven2 that any should suffer forever1--lingering on in hopeless despair and rolling amidst infinite torments1 without the possibility of alleviation and without end2 that since ,god can save men1 and will save a part1 ,he has not purposed to save all2 that1 on the supposition that the atonement is ample1 and that the blood of ,christ can cleanse from all and every sin1 it is not in fact applied to all2 that1 in a word1 a ,god who claims to be worthy of the confidence of the universe1 and to be a being of infinite benevolence1 should make such a world as this1 full of sinners and sufferers2 and that1 when an atonement had been made1 ,he did not save all the race1 and put an end to sin and woe forever1--these1 and kindred difficulties1 meet the mind when we think on this great subject2 and they meet us when we endeavor to urge our fellow-sinners to be reconciled to ,god1 and to put confidence in him4 ,on this ground they hesitate4 ,these are real1 not imaginary difficulties4 ,they are probably felt by every mind that has ever reflected on the subject2 and they are unexplained1 unmitigated1 unremoved4 ,i confess1 for one1 that ,i feel them more sensibly and powerfully the more ,i look at them1 and the longer ,i live4 ,i do not understand these facts2 and ,i make no advances towards understanding them4 ,i do not know that ,i have a ray of light on the subject1 which ,i had not when the subject first flashed across my soul4 ,i have read1 to some extent1 what wise and good men have written2 ,i have looked at their theories and explanations2 ,i have endeavored to weigh their arguments2 for my whole soul pants for light and relief on these questions4 ,but ,i get neither2 and1 in the distress and anguish of my own spirit1 ,i confess that ,i see no light whatever1 ,i see not one ray to disclose to me the reason why sin came into the world1 why the earth is strewed with the dying and the dead1 and why man must suffer to all eternity4 ,i have never yet seen a particle of light thrown on these subjects that has given a moment's ease to my tortured mind2 but ,i confess1 when ,i look on a world of sinners and sufferers1 upon death-beds and graveyards1 upon the world of woe1 filled with hosts to suffer forever2 when ,i see my parents1 my friends1 my family1 my people1 my fellow-citizens1--when ,i look upon a whole race1 all involved in this sin and danger2 and when ,i feel that ,god only can save them1 and yet he does not do it1--,i am struck dumb4 ,it is all dark1 dark1 dark to my soul1 and ,i cannot disguise it4 ,i think the conclusions ,dr4 ,barnes reached are about the only conclusions any honest1 intelligent man can reach1 starting from his hypothesis1 that a certain book is a divine and infallible revelation from ,god1 which no one dare question1 or go behind4 ,but1 as has been seen1 this foundation had now entirely slipped from under me4 ,my only course was to proceed just as tho no such book were known2 or at least1 that it was completely shorn of all claim to being a divine revelation1 or infallible truth4 ,i proposed to analyze every element that entered into the whole ,christian system1 creation1 sin1 redemption1 atonement1 salvation1 immortality1 heaven and hell1 going back to original sources so far as possible1 without any preconceived hypothesis whatever1 in search of abstract truth4 ,i felt that since ,god had left me without any conclusive and indisputable proofs of the truth of those things which ,i had always believed to be of the most supreme importance to mankind for time and eternity1 that this supreme1 distinguishing feature of man that lifts him above all known forms of creation could1 and should be1 appealed to as the final authority and last test in all things4 ,and since reason was universally recognized as the court of last resort in all other things outside of religion1 why should it not be applied to this also8 ,i felt that if ,i thus honestly and sincerely followed the last and only light ,i had1 that ,god could not be just and everlastingly damn me for some possible error in my conclusions4 ,the process ,i followed and the results ,i reached will be told in the next chapter4 ,,chapter ,v ,,the ,,crisis ,i went back to the beginning4 ,god was certainly good4 ,he was all-wise1 infinite4 ,he must have known all things---the end from the beginning4 ,if ,he thus knew all things ,he must have known the whole destiny of man before ,he created him4 ,he must have known that he would yield to temptation and fall1 and that all the direful consequences would follow it that orthodoxy has pictured for centuries4 ,i began to wonder how ,god could be just and make a creature1 whom ,he knew in advance would do what ,adam is alleged to have done1 and knew in advance the dreadful consequences that would follow it1 not only to ,adam himself1 but to all the unborn generations yet to people the world4 ,especially was ,i perplexed to understand how ,god could be just and visit all the consequences of ,adam's sin on his entire posterity for uncounted generations when they were and could be in no way responsible for it and could not help it4 ,yet ,i believed ,god to be just4 ,he could not be ,god and be otherwise4 ,since the whole purpose of religion1 and ,christianity in particular1 was to save mankind from hell hereafter1 ,i first directed my inquiries to the question of hell4 ,who made hell8 and whence came the devil8 ,the ,bible is silent as to their origin1 except the vague reference in the ,book of ,revelation to the war in heaven and the casting out of ,lucifer with a third part of the angels with him into the bottomless pit so graphically portrayed by ,milton in ,paradise ,lost4 ,but this only carried me back farther4 ,who created the angels1 or were they co-eternal with ,god8 ,if they are co-eternal with ,god then there are other eternal beings in the universe over whom ,god has little or no control4 ,if so ,god is not omnipotent4 ,the devil is his rival in the spiritual world and1 according to the current doctrine1 his equal in omniscience and omnipresence1 and a close and terrible antagonist in the contest for omnipotence4 ,take the other horn of the dilemma4 ,then angels and the devil are created beings1 creatures of ,god1 and not eternal4 ,then ,god must have made the devil4 ,if ,he created him a holy angel1 yea1 an archangel1 as is claimed1 ,god certainly knew in advance that this archangel would sometime lead a rebellion in heaven and lead one-third of the angels into the conspiracy6 ,would an all-wise1 a just and good ,god create such beings1 knowing in advance what they would do and what the consequences of it would be8 ,this forced ,god to create a hell in which to put and punish these rebellious angels whom ,he knew before ,he created them would rebel against him and thus have to be punished4 ,if ,god needed angels to glorify him was it not just as easy to create good ones1 that would not rebel against him6 ,he created some that way1 why not all8 ,and if rebellious angels had to be punished why not do it by annihilation instead of making this burning hell for them8 ,if annihilation be considered too merciful and this hell the only adequate punishment1 all very well for rebellious and sinful angels2 but why should this yawning gulf of eternal woe open its throat to receive the future being to be made in ,god's own image and called man8 ,we are told that hell was not created for man1 but for the devil and his angels4 ,nevertheless1 if the story of ,eden and the doctrines of modern orthodoxy be true1 it is now and will ultimately become the eternal abode of about ninety-eight per cent of the entire human race4 ,i could never again reconcile the old views of hell with any rational conception of a just and merciful ,god4 ,the story of ,eden itself ,i took up for analysis4 ,man was alleged to have been framed up out of dust1 yet made in the image and likeness of ,god1--and consequently perfect4 ,at least this is the universal teaching4 ,he was alone4 ,a companion was made for him from a rib4 ,they are happy in a garden4 ,god walks and talks with them like a man4 ,everything is going smoothly until one day ,god comes in and points out a certain tree1 hitherto unnoticed and unknown1 and informs ,adam that he must not eat of the fruit of this particular tree on penalty of death4 ,then comes the serpent1 talking like a man1 and tells the woman that what ,god said was not true2 but if they would eat of the fruit of that tree they would be as ,gods1 knowing good and evil4 ,and when the woman saw that the tree was good for food1 and that it was pleasant to the eyes1 and a tree to be desired to make one wise1 she took of the fruit thereof1 and did eat1 and gave also unto her husband with her1 and he did eat4 ,gen4 iii1 #f4 ,now1 was the first sin that eternally damned the whole human race a mere matter of eating from a forbidden tree8 ,it seems so from the natural import of the language used4 ,when the woman saw that the tree was good for food 444 ,could a just ,god inflict such an awful punishment as orthodox ,christianity teaches1 not only upon this simple1 ignorant couple1 but upon the entire human race for all time and eternity for such a trifling incident8 ,i trow not4 ,besides1 ,i have often thought that if that particular tree had not been specifically pointed out and forbidden1 probably neither ,adam nor ,eve would ever have had any desire to eat of it4 ,it is the forbidden that always draws the strongest4 ,let us examine this story closely and see whether the serpent or ,god told the truth4 ,don't be alarmed and accuse me of blasphemy or sacrilege4 ,we set out in search of truth2 let us try to find it4 ,god is alleged to have said1 of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil1 thou shalt not eat of it3 for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die4 ,gen4 ii1 #ag4 ,but he did not die1 according to the subsequent story1 for over nine hundred years thereafter4 ,the fact that the penalty3 ,for dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return1 was pronounced after the transgression1 does not fulfill the statement in the day thou eatest thereof4 ,but we shall refer to this again4 ,the serpent is alleged to have said3 ,ye shall not surely die3 for ,god doth know that in the day ye eat thereof1 then your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as ,god1 knowing good and evil4 ,gen4 iii1 #d1 #e4 ,and verse #g says3 ,and the eyes of them both were opened1 and they knew that they were naked4 ,and verse #bb says3 ,and ,jehovah ,god said1 ',behold1 the man is become as one of us1 to know good and evil4' ,does not this confirm that what the serpent said was true8 ,the temptation is very great here to digress far enough to offer a rational interpretation of this beautiful poetic allegory of the ,fall of ,man4 ,but it is outside the scope and purpose of this work1 and ,i leave it with the simple question3 ,was not that which we call the first sin only the expression of man's natural aspirations onward and upward1 in search of knowledge and a higher and better and broader and larger life1 that always entails its penalties of trial1 suffering1 toil1 and more or less disappointment8 ,when ,god comes to call them to account1 ,adam puts the blame on his wife1 and she shifts it to the serpent4 ,note what follows3 ,the serpent is cursed to crawl upon his belly1 just as we see him now4 ,did he walk uprightly before1 and did he have legs and feet8 ,and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life4 ,what did he eat before8 ,as a matter of fact1 serpents do not eat dust now4 ,remember1 this sentence was pronounced to the serpent himself3 ,and ,jehovah ,god said unto the serpent1--not to ,adam and ,eve4 ,we shall have occasion to recall this again4 ,unto the woman he said1 ,i will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception2 in pain thou shalt bring forth children444 ,this was the penalty pronounced upon ,eve for her part in the tragedy4 ,the question arises3 ,was ,eve never to be a mother but for this transaction8 ,this1 if not the only1 is at least the most natural inference4 ,then how was the race to be propagated8 or was it to be propagated at all8 ,adam for his part was condemned to hard labor1 and altho creation was supposed to have been finished and complete1 the ground was cursed so as to make it produce thorns and thistles to annoy and tantalize him and increase his labor4 ,were none of these things on the earth before8 ,were the rose bushes in the ,garden of ,eden thornless8 ,in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread1 till thou return unto the ground3 for out of it wast thou taken3 for dust thou art1 and unto dust shalt thou return4 ,several questions arise here4 ,was ,adam to be immortal in the flesh if he had not eaten of the forbidden fruit8 ,did death enter the world1 as we have always been taught1 because of this sin8 ,and if ,adam had not sinned would he and ,eve still be living in the ,garden of ,eden1 without the knowledge of good and evil1 naked and unashamed to this day8 ,if ,eve was never to become a mother if she had not sinned1 would she and ,adam still be there alone1 with nothing but the animal world about them for companions8 ,and if death only entered the world because of sin1 why does all nature die8 ,man alone was capable of sin1 and according to the story1 man alone sinned1--unless we include the serpent4 ,yet1 not a beast of the field1 a fowl of the air1 a fish of the deep1 nor a reptile or creeping thing of all the earth has ever lived but that it died1 or will die4 ,not a tree has ever grown1 not a plant has ever opened its leaves1 blades or petals to the sun2 not a seed has ever germinated1 nor a flower ever bloomed that was not doomed to die4 ,did all this come upon all nature because ,adam ate an apple8 ,would all the beasts of the field and the birds of the air1 paraded before ,adam that he might name them1 be still living with him in the ,garden of ,eden1 if he had not sinned8 ,would all the plants and trees and flowers that grew and bloomed in the ,garden of ,eden in the days of ,adam and ,eve's innocence be still there1 with the same leaves and blooms1 just as they were1 if man had not sinned8 ,these questions ,i know look silly4 ,but if we are forced to accept the premise1 we must be prepared to accept the natural conclusion to which it leads4 ,and if death--physical death--as orthodoxy has always taught1 entered the world only because of ,adam's sin1 it naturally and inevitably leads to the conclusions ,i have indicated4 ,another question presents itself4 ,can perfection1 or that which is perfect1 fall8 ,if either man or angels were created pure1 perfect1 holy1 and in the image and likeness of ,god1 how can such a being fall8 ,it seems to me that it would be just as possible for ,god himself to fall4 ,the very fact of the fall1--if such a fact exists or ever existed1--of either man or angel1 is in itself conclusive proof of some moral imperfection or weakness somewhere4 ,that man is morally imperfect is freely conceded4 ,in plain words1 he is a sinner4 ,but was he ever otherwise8 ,the farther back we trace him the worse he appears on the general average4 ,all the ,bible outside of this one story in ,genesis1 as well as all history attests this fact4 ,then may it not be a fact1 that while man is a sinner1 he always has been so2 that he never fell1 for he had been nowhere 7morally7 to fall from but always has been and still is morally imperfect and incomplete1 but ever striving onward and upward8 ,but supposing this story of the fall to be true1 what was the penalty for it1--physical death1 as we have seen1 or eternal spiritual death1 or both8 ,after all the preaching and writing about eternal death1 damnation1 hell-fire and brimstone as a result of ,adam's sin1 ,i could not find any such doctrine taught in the story of the fall1 nor anywhere else in the ,old ,testament1 and but very vaguely1 if at all1 in the ,new4 ,the story in ,genesis cannot be construed by any reasonable rules of interpretation to mean or involve any other punishment on ,adam or his posterity1 for his sin1 beyond physical death4 ,dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return is the final climax of the penalty4 ,there is no hint1 so far as ,i can understand it1 of immortality or any future life4 ,there is not the remotest hint of it in this story4 ,all the punishments for sin from ,adam to ,noah1 and long afterwards1 culminated and ended1 so far as ,genesis is concerned1 in physical death4 ,the ,hebrew ,hades1 ,sheol and ,gehena1 were creations of a much later period4 ,and who1 or what was the serpent8 ,a real snake1 or the devil8 ,i know the current belief is that the serpent is a mere figure for the devil1 or that at least the spirit of the devil was incarnated in the serpent4 ,but there is not a line of ,scripture to support either assumption4 ,in the story itself it is stated only that the serpent was more subtle than all the beasts of the field4 ,he is classed with them1 not above them1 except in subtlety4 ,the whole fabric upon which this idea of the identity of the serpent of ,eden and the devil is based seems to be a single verse in ,revelation 7xii1 #i73 ,and the great dragon was cast down1 the old serpent1 he that is called the devil and ,satan1 the deceiver of the whole world2 he was cast down to the earth1 and his angels were cast down with him4 ,there are one or two other passages in the same book that speak of that old serpent1 which is the devil and ,satan1 but they have no more connection with or relation to the story of ,eden1 than ,homer's ,iliad has to the nebular hypothesis4 ,and yet upon these few passages is built up the whole fabric of the identity of the serpent of ,eden and the temptation1 with the devil1 ,satan or ,lucifer1 that is so graphically portrayed in ,paradise ,lost4 ,this whole story of the serpent in ,eden is very likely but an adaptation1 in another form1 of the old ,babylonian myth of ,marduk and the ,dragon4 ,all this shifting of the penalty for ,adam's sin from physical to spiritual death and identifying the serpent with ,satan1 was an after-invention1 to try to make it harmonize with later developed doctrines of immortality4 ,any candid reader can see that no such interpretation can be placed upon the natural and simple language of the story itself4 ,in fact immortality for man1 according to the story1 is forever inhibited1 according to verses #bb-bd4 ,after eating the forbidden fruit the only way to immortality was to eat of the tree of life4 ,and to keep ,adam from the tree of life1 of which he might eat and live forever1 ,god drove him out of the garden and placed the cherubim over it with a flaming sword which turned every way1 to keep the way of the tree of life4 ,according to this story1 man is not immortal at all1 and the only way to attain it is to get by the cherubim1 or scale the walls of the garden of ,eden and get to that tree4 ,i was now ready to determine for myself that this whole story of the ,garden of ,eden was a myth1 legend1 or some oriental allegory1 the true purport and meaning of which is now wholly unknown2 beyond the reasonable conjecture that it originated with some very ancient oriental philosopher1 in the childhood of the human race1 and is an allegorical portrayal of his attempt to solve the problem of the origin of evil1 of suffering and death in the human race4 ,,the ,,flood ,but ,i pursued my course of reasoning and investigation further4 ,i approached the period of the flood4 ,the infinite and omniscient ,god is revealed as disappointed with this creature that ,he had made in his own image and likeness4 ,he gets angry with him for his perversity1 declares ,he is sorry ,he made him1 and resolves to destroy the whole race1 except one family whom ,he proposes to preserve for seed for a new start2 together with every beast1 fowl and creeping thing of the earth1 except one pair of each for seed4 ,think of an infinite and omniscient ,god1 who knew all things from the beginning1 all that man would ever do1 before ,he created him1 now looking down from heaven on his work1 confessing it to be a stupendous failure1 getting angry and repenting that ,he had made man or beast2 and now resolving to take vengeance by drowning the whole outfit6 ,if man was so perverse that he needed to be destroyed1 why wreak vengeance also on the animal creation that had not sinned8 ,and if the animal creation must be included in the universal destruction1 why do it by a process thru which all marine life naturally escaped1 while all terrestrial life was destroyed8 ,then why save any seed of such perverse stock8 ,was not ,god acquainted with the laws of heredity that had worked so perfectly in transmitting the sin of ,adam down thru all the generations thus far2 and did ,he not know the same thing would continue in the seed of the race after the flood8 ,if ,he really desired to correct the mistake ,he had made1 why did ,he not destroy the whole race1 root and branch1 while ,he was at it1 renovate the earth and start with a new creation of better stock8 ,this flood story must be noticed a little closer4 ,noah is commanded to build an ark1 as his family is chosen especially to preserve the race for a new start4 ,he is also to save in pairs1 male and female1 specimens of every beast of the field1 fowl of the air1 and creeping things of all the earth to preserve the species4 ,and now when the ark was ready1 these beasts of the field1 fowls of the air1 and creeping things of all the earth1 polar bears1 moose1 reindeer1 and the thousand varieties of fur-bearing animals from the arctic north1 together with those of the torrid deserts and jungles of the south1 lions1 tigers1 hyenas1 elephants1 leopards1 antelope1 giraffes1 ants1 mice1 hawks1 doves1 wolves1 lambs1 serpents of all varieties1 of birds1 beetles1 flies1 bugs and insects1 all came of their own accord1 in the exact number prescribed1 quietly walked into the ark and lay down to rest until the deluge was over6 ,the deluge over1 the new race started was as bad as ever4 ,even righteous ,noah got drunk from the first crop of grapes he raised1 and cursed one of his son's posterity to perpetual servitude4 ,the race soon tried to outwit ,god by building a tower by which to reach heaven1 and ,god's only way to prevent its success was to confuse their tongues so they could no longer work together1 and the scheme had to be abandoned4 ,the race grew continually worse1 drifted into idolatry1 and ,god resolved to try a new scheme to ultimately save the race4 ,we come now to3 ,,the ,,call ,,of ,,abraham ,abraham is called to leave the land of his fathers1 go to a new country and start a new race1 through whom ,god would yet save the world1 as all his previous efforts had proven failures4 ,here we have the beginning of the ,jewish nation1 whose history ,i have not space to even outline1 much less to follow in detail4 ,study it for yourself in its fullness1 because it has a vital relation to modern orthodoxy as now represented and taught in most of the churches4 ,a few points1 however1 must be noted4 ,the story tells us that the great ,god of the universe selects this one man1 one family and one nation to be supremely blessed above all the balance of mankind1 and to whom ,he committed his revelation and plans for their ultimate salvation1 and denied these blessings to all the rest of his creatures4 ,could such a ,god be just8 ,when the ,israelites were trying to get out of ,egypt1 while ,moses and ,aaron were to go and beg ,pharaoh to let them go1 ,god is said to have hardened ,pharaoh's heart not to do so1 only to have an excuse to plague ,egypt1 kill the first born in every house and then overwhelm ,pharaoh and his whole army in the ,red ,sea6 ,can a just ,god do that8 ,when they finally arrive at the borders of the promised land they are commanded to literally exterminate the inhabitants and neighboring tribes1 root and branch1 men1 women and children indiscriminately and unsparingly4 ,god is described as resorting to lying1 deceit and intrigue to lure the enemies of ,israel to their destruction4 ,time fails me to pursue this horrible record in its details4 ,it begins with ,abraham and ends only with the close of the ,old ,testament ,canon4 ,study it for yourself4 ,could a just ,god be guilty of such outrageous conduct8 ,i think not4 ,as is well known1 the doctrine is that ,god thus called ,abraham and the ,jewish nation apart from all the balance of the human race1 that thru them ,he might ultimately send his son into the world to save the race from sin and hell4 ,to this end promises and prophecies are said to point1 thruout the entire ,old ,testament from ,abraham to its close1 and even as far back as the ,garden of ,eden and the first sin4 ,when ,jesus of ,nazareth appeared he was accepted by his followers as this promised ,savior1 the ,messiah of promise and prophecy1 and has been so accepted by the ,christian world ever since4 ,to him was attributed a miraculous birth as the ,son of ,god2 and in the opinion of his followers he was soon considered1 not only the ,son of ,god1 but ,god ,himself incarnated bodily in the son4 ,in other words1 that ,god ,himself came down from heaven in the form of human flesh1 to save the world by making an atoning sacrifice of ,himself for the sins of humanity4 ,and when ,jesus came1 suffered and died on the ,cross1 we are told that the scheme of redemption was completed4 ,and what is this scheme of redemption1 or plan of salvation8 ,this was the crucial point to me4 ,i thought man was certainly a sinner and needed a ,redeemer4 ,i looked it over with scrutinizing care4 ,here is one ,god who is three ,gods4 ,a part of ,god left heaven1 came to earth as a man1 died on the ,cross to satisfy the other part of himself for sins somebody else committed6 ,i know this sounds to the orthodox like sacrilege1 but ,i mean it seriously4 ,think of it for a moment6 ,god dividing himself1 one part in heaven1 one part on earth and the third part1 the ,holy ,ghost1 a go-between6 ,boil it down to its last analysis and this is what it means4 ,either this1 or three separate gods1 one of whom comes to earth to die in order to appease the wrath of the other1 the third remaining in heaven with the first until the second returns1 when ,he would come to earth to continue the work begun by the second4 ,there would thus be always two gods in heaven and one on earth4 ,this is1 in a nutshell1 the sum and substance of ,trinitarian orthodox ,christianity4 ,we are told seriously that there is no other name given under heaven1 nor among men1 whereby we may be saved except ,jesus ,christ4 ,and that in order to be saved1 we must believe in him as the only begotten ,son of ,god1 and in the atoning sacrifice of his death for our sins4 ,here ,i seriously inquired3 ,if the salvation of the human race is entirely and exclusively dependent upon faith in the merits of the death of ,jesus as an atoning sacrifice1 what became of all the people who died before his coming8 ,orthodoxy answers that they were saved by faith in the ,promised ,savior to come1 as given to ,abraham1 ,moses1 and the prophets4 ,if so1 how many were saved8 ,the ,jewish nation never looked for a spiritual ,messiah4 ,it was always a temporal one4 ,there is no evidence that they ever had the remotest conception of a ,messiah that was to make a vicarious atoning sacrifice of himself for them4 ,hence their faith in this promise was in vain4 ,it was not the kind that saves1 according to orthodoxy4 ,an occasional prophet1 like ,isaiah or ,jeremiah1 or some others1 might have so understood and believed it4 ,but very few1 if any1 others did4 ,then the great mass of ,god's chosen people are now in hell2 for they did not believe rightly2 and all the balance of the world is there because they never heard of such a promise and hence did not believe at all6 ,but the question here arises1 ,if salvation from ,abraham to ,christ was secured by faith in the promised ,messiah to come2 and which1 as we have just seen1 according to orthodox definitions1 was practically a complete failure2 how were they saved from the time of ,adam until the promise made to ,abraham8 ,the answer of orthodoxy is1 ,by the promise made to ,adam and ,eve in the ,garden of ,eden1 that the seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head4 ,this is not the exact language of ,genesis1 but of the creed4 ,the substance is correct4 ,but according to ,genesis this was not a promise to ,adam and ,eve at all2 but a part of the curse pronounced on the serpent6 ,there is nothing in the record to indicate that either ,adam or ,eve even heard it1 or ever knew anything about it4 ,there is nothing in the record to indicate that the serpent was present when ,god accosted ,adam and ,eve about their transgression4 ,besides1 the incident is never referred to again in the whole ,bible1 by either prophet1 priest1 ,christ or apostle4 ,it is simply an example of that far-fetched method of interpretation ,i have before referred to1 to establish a preconceived opinion and satisfy the demands of such a necessity4 ,there is not a single line in the whole ,bible to justify such an interpretation of this incident4 ,the only possible cross reference that might indicate it is in ,rom4 xvi1 #bj3 ,and the ,god of peace shall bruise ,satan under your feet shortly4 ,and this can have no reference to the incident in ,eden4 ,besides1 if this sentence on the serpent was a promise of the victory of ,christ over him1 it was already accomplished before ,paul wrote these words4 ,and if such a promise had been made1 with the meaning attached to it that is claimed1 ,god certainly knew that the race would soon forget it1 and thus render it futile and give him additional excuse to vent his wrath and wreak his vengeance against his helpless creatures4 ,if faith in such a promise was the only way of salvation from ,adam to ,abraham then practically all the world up to that time is now in hell6 ,who can believe such a caricature of ,god8 ,but after all1 what about the salvation of the race since the death of ,christ8 ,if salvation since his coming is only attainable thru personal faith in him as the miraculously begotten ,son of ,god1 and in his death as a vicarious atonement for sin2 and that all are lost except those who have thus believed1 how many are saved8 ,certainly very few4 ,take a mere glance at the world since the time of ,christ4 ,leaving out of consideration the countless millions who never heard of him1 and confining ourselves to those who have1 how many of them fully met exactly these conditions8 ,if such a doctrine is true1 there are but few people in heaven except infants2 and it is only in recent years that some of the orthodox have admitted infants indiscriminately into heaven6 ,i could comprehend to some extent how1 if ,god had offered salvation and a home in heaven forever to all mankind on such easy terms as faith in the merits of the death of ,jesus1 ,he could visit condign punishment on such as knew it and wilfully rejected it4 ,but ,i could not see the justice of such a punishment being inflicted on the countless millions of people who never heard of it1 had no means of knowing it1 and could not be justly blamed for not knowing it4 ,another thing that ,i now put the test of reason to1 was the doctrine of salvation by faith itself4 ,was faith the only thing that could merit the favor of ,god8 ,was character of no avail8 ,was all moral purity1 goodness and brotherly love but filthy rags in the sight of ,god1 unless buttressed by belief in the ,deity of ,jesus and the vicarious atonement8 ,was salvation after all as arbitrary as that described in ,holy ,willie's ,prayer8 ,o1 ,thou who in the heavens dost dwell1 ,who as it pleases best thysel' ,sends one to heaven and ten to hell1 ,a' for ,thy glory1 ,and not for any good or ill ,they've done afore ,thee4 ,i thought of such moralists and philosophers as ,zoroaster1 ,buddha1 ,confucius1 ,socrates1 ,plato1 and thousands of others who have lived in the past1 and left a lasting impression in the world for the good of mankind that continues to this day1 some of them but little less than ,jesus himself1 in the moral sublimity of their lives and teachings1 and wondered if these men were all in hell to roast and fry and burn forever because they had not exercised faith in the merits of a dying ,god of whom they had never known or even heard6 ,and every nobler sentiment of my human nature rebelled against such an idea4 ,to attribute such a character and proceeding to ,god is to make him1 in cruelty and injustice1 below the level of the most ferocious beast of the jungle4 ,this was not all4 ,i beheld the divisions in the church itself4 ,some hundreds of different denominations1 all bearing the name ,christian1 each claiming to be right and all the balance wrong1 each claiming to expound the only truth1 and all the balance error2 each claiming to direct to the only true and infallible way of eternal life and all the balance only deadly heresies4 ,i found the history of the ,christian ,church written in blood4 ,for fifteen hundred years ,christian had slain ,christian as a part of his religious duty4 ,fire and fagot1 sword and rack and all the instruments of torture known to the ingenuity of mankind were employed for the torture and death of heretics--all in the name of ,christ and for the salvation of the world4 ,catholics tortured and burned ,protestants and ,protestants murdered each other4 ,calvin consented to the burning of ,servetus and the ,new ,england ,puritans hung witches and persecuted ,quakers and ,baptists by burning holes in their tongues with hot irons1 and driving them from their midst as they would the pestilence4 ,i wondered how1 if ,god ever takes any interest in affairs on earth and hears the prayers of his children1 he could sit supinely by on his throne and permit such things to be done in his name and for his glory6 ,if his spirit could enter into the hearts of men and direct their thoughts and minds1 why did ,he not do it and stop this useless slaughter8 ,again ,i turned back to the beginning of things4 ,if ,god foresaw what ,adam would do and the dreadful consequences of it1 why did ,he not make him different so he would not fall8 ,was it not just as easy8 ,but if ,god can be better glorified by saving a fallen creature than by keeping him from falling1 then why did ,he not make this plan of salvation so plain and clear that there could be no possibility of misunderstanding or misconstruing it8 ,if ,god was to be ultimately glorified in the sacrifice of his son as a means of salvation for the world1 and this salvation was to come simply by faith in this promise1 why did ,he not make this promise so specific and clear that the most ignorant and benighted could not misunderstand and fail to accept it8 ,why did not ,god reveal this promise to all mankind alike1 so that all might be saved1 instead of to one family and one nation8 ,and when this son came and died for the world why did not ,god make it known to the entire world instead of a handful of ,jews in an obscure corner of the earth8 ,and when this plan was completed1 why was it not heralded in every nook and corner of the earth1 wherever man was found1 instead of being confined for centuries around the shores of the ,mediterranean8 ,then again1 ,i say1 why was not this plan made so plain and unequivocal that no man1 however ignorant1 could possibly fail to comprehend it1 and all men understand it exactly alike1 and thus live in the bonds of a true brotherhood1 the sons of the one great ,god1 instead of butchering each other for fifteen hundred years in the name of religion1 each sect claiming to be the only true followers of the ,son of ,god1 and all the balance reprobates and devils8 ,but the most inconsistent and unreasonable phase of the whole thing is yet to come4 ,if salvation is attainable only through the merits of the death on the ,cross of ,jesus ,christ1 then ,jesus had to be crucified4 ,it was a part of the eternal plan4 ,no other death would do4 ,if ,jesus had died a natural death there could have been no salvation4 ,he must needs be punished1 killed for the sins of ,adam and all mankind4 ,he was the ,lamb slain from the foundation of the world4 ,to carry out this divine purpose somebody had to crucify him4 ,every actor in this great drama of redemption was a necessary factor4 ,no one was either unnecessary or unimportant4 ,judas was necessary to betray him into the hands of his enemies4 ,he and the part he performed were necessarily as much a fore-ordained and eternally predestinated factor in the scheme of redemption as that of ,jesus himself4 ,the ,jewish priests who prosecuted him before ,pilate were as equally necessary as the subject of the prosecution4 ,the ,jewish nation whom they represented1 or some other nation1 was equally necessary as a background for this prosecution1 in whose name it was conducted4 ,pilate or some other was necessary as the judge to hear the trial and pronounce the sentence of death before it could be carried out4 ,and finally1 the ,roman soldiers were necessary to execute the sentence4 ,all these1 ,jesus1 ,judas1 the priests1 the ,jewish nation1 ,pilate and the ,roman soldiers1 were necessary links in the one great chain of the scheme of redemption1 or plan of salvation by the vicarious atonement of the ,son of ,god on the ,cross4 ,if either one of them had failed1 the chain would have been broken1 ,god's eternal plans and purposes thwarted1 and man left without redemption to eternally perish6 ,and yet poor ,judas was driven by remorse to a suicide's grave1 and according to the doctrines of the ,church1 for these nineteen hundred years has been justly writhing1 frying and burning in the bottomless pit of eternal torments1 and will continue so to suffer forever1--and for what8 ,for faithfully performing and fulfilling that part in the scheme of redemption which he was1 by the eternal decrees of ,god1 foreordained and predestinated from before the foundation of the world to perform2 and which he could neither escape nor avoid1 without breaking the chain1 and thus defeating the eternal purposes of ,god in the redemption of mankind6 ,for nineteen hundred years the ,church has thus execrated and anathematised ,judas ,iscariot1 ,pontius ,pilate1 the ,high ,priests1 the whole ,jewish nation and the ,roman ,empire1 and consigned them to eternal perdition1 the tormenting flames of an eternal hell1 and scattered the ,jews to the four quarters of the earth1 never ceasing its horrid persecutions1 in many places even to this day2 and all for what8 ,for crucifying ,christ2 for carrying out the divine purpose planned from before the foundation of the world2 for obeying the ,eternal ,will2 for doing only what they were compelled by the eternal fates to do in order that mankind might be saved from the eternal burning6 ,our author that ,i had been studying says on page #beg1 ,no man can read the ,bible with any faith in its teachings1 and deny that this terrible calamity 7the destruction of ,jerusalem and the ,jewish nation7 overtook the ,jews on account of their great sins1 especially their rejection of the ,son of ,god4 7,italics mine47 ,suppose they had not rejected him4 ,suppose they had accepted him as the ,messiah of prophecy1 as the ,church insists he was1 and had set about to make him their king and succeeded2 and he had lived on a normal life and died a natural death1 what would have become of the scheme of redemption by vicarious atonement8 ,what about the plan of salvation1 the remission of sins only thru the power of the blood8 ,apart from the shedding of blood there is no remission4 ,then if the ,jews had not rejected ,jesus and thereby caused his blood to be shed1 what would have been the eternal destiny of the whole human race8 ,according to orthodox ,christianity1 the whole plan would have failed1 and the whole human race would have been irretrievably lost and plunged forever and ever into eternal torments1 where the worm dieth not1 and the fire is not quenched6 ,i had now reached the crisis4 ,after pursuing this course of study and this line of reasoning for a period of about three years after finishing the book ,i have herein described1 does any one wonder that ,i threw the whole thing overboard1 ,bible1 inspiration1 revelation1 church and religion1 into the scrap heap of superstition1 legend1 fable and mythology8 ,i gave up the whole thing as a farce and a delusion1 as sounding brass and tinkling cymbals4 ,i could no longer honestly preach such a gospel2 ,i could not be a hypocrite4 ,i withdrew from the church and ministry and turned my attention to secular pursuits4 ,and having nowhere else to go1 ,i naturally drifted into that state of mind which the world calls agnosticism4 ,,chapter ,,vi ,,the ,,reaction3 ,a ,,new ,,confession ,,of ,,faith ,at this time ,i knew nothing of a liberal church4 ,if ,i had1 ,i doubt if ,i was in a condition of mind to consider it4 ,i was so utterly disgusted with ecclesiasticism as ,i knew it that ,i was but little prepared if at all1 to give anything of the kind fair consideration4 ,the pendulum had swung to the opposite extreme4 ,i abandoned everything but ,god4 ,i never doubted for a moment the existence of a ,supreme ,being4 ,nature and instinct taught me this4 ,but who1 or what1 or where1 this ,supreme ,being was1 or what his attributes or characteristics were1 ,i did not pretend to know1 or care4 ,i relegated it all to the realm of the unknown and unknowable4 ,for a while ,i went to church occasionally1 merely for the sake of respectability1 and not because ,i took any interest in common with it4 ,i listened to the preaching with such patience and fortitude as ,i could command4 ,i heard only the same old platitudes about a dying ,christ and the flames of perdition ,i had heard all my life and preached for eight years myself4 ,i often felt as if ,i would like to help the preacher out in his struggle to divest himself of his thoughts4 ,i finally quit going to church altogether1 until ,i located where ,i had an opportunity to attend a ,reformed ,jewish synagogue1 which ,i did quite often1 and always heard broad-gauged1 intellectual discourses4 ,as ,i have before said1 up to this time1 and for years thereafter1 ,i had never read a distinctively infidel book1 nor even a liberal religious one4 ,my change of opinions had all come from an honest effort to seek proofs for the faith of my fathers1 which ,i inherited4 ,but ,i never ceased to be a student4 ,my temporary antagonism to the church soon vanished4 ,i simply viewed it with utter indifference1 and somewhat of sympathy4 ,i had no more creed to defend1 and none to condemn4 ,i had no desire whatever to propagate my own ideas or disturb any one else in theirs4 ,i felt that if any one got any satisfaction out of his religious beliefs he was welcome to it4 ,i would not disturb him for anything4 ,i looked upon it as a harmless delusion1 and if it made one any better1 society was so much the gainer4 ,but to me it was as sounding brass and tinkling cymbals4 ,but ,i cannot say that ,i was satisfied with my position4 ,man is a social as well as an emotional animal4 ,agnosticism is neither social nor emotional4 ,it is cold-blooded and indifferent at its best4 ,it is simply a bundle of doubts and negations4 ,men are bound together in social and fraternal ties by what they affirm and believe in common4 ,but they care nothing for what they deny4 ,but having no creed to defend and no preconceived opinions to prove1 and being of studious habits1 ,i was now prepared to study in search of abstract truth for truth's own sake1 ready to accept it from whatever source it might come1 and follow it wherever it might lead4 ,without arrogating to myself any special merit or credit for taking this course1 ,i wish that all people would do the same4 ,as ,i said in the very beginning of this book1 most people inherit their religious beliefs1 and there they stop4 ,we are ,baptists1 or ,methodists1 or ,presbyterians1 or ,catholics1 because we were born so4 ,we transmit our beliefs to our children1 from generation to generation1 each following the faith of his ancestors1 without ever stopping to inquire why1 or seek a reason4 ,and if a thought is ever given to it1 or any search made1 it is but rarely for abstract truth1 but for the proofs that support the inherited faith1 the preconceived opinion4 ,it is like one going into his house and bolting the door on the inside4 ,nothing is ever given out and nothing ever permitted to come in4 ,this is exactly why for centuries the world was drenched in ,christian blood1 shed by ,christian hands4 ,each had its infallible creed1 to which all the world must bow--or take the consequences4 ,it took me several years to get myself settled with anything like a definite creed of my own1 tho ,i was never in the least disturbed about it1 and only gave it such time as ,i could spare from a busy business and professional life4 ,by this time ,i had reached such definite conclusions as satisfied my own mind1 tho ,i never1--after my crisis1--held any opinion1 and do not now1 that ,i am not willing to change at any time that evidence is furnished to justify it4 ,in my search for truth ,i found myself confronted with certain facts that ,agnosticism did not satisfactorily explain4 ,these were facts of ,nature1 of ,man as a part of it1 of man's nature1 habits1 history1 thoughts1 conduct1 and social relations1--in fact1 all that pertains to the phenomena of ,nature and ,human ,life and ,relations4 ,the conclusions ,i reached constitute4 ,,my ,,new ,,confession ,,of ,,faith ,,the ,,universe ,,and ,,god ,the first of these was the physical universe4 ,i had accepted the theory of evolution in a general way2 yet ,i could not account for the marvelous organism of millions of worlds and suns and systems1 of which our earth is but a mere atom1 filling the infinity of space1 beyond all human comprehension1 revolving and whirling thru space1 each in its alloted orbit1 with such perfect order and regularity1 and all in the most perfect harmony1 governed by such immutable1 perfect and universal law1 upon the theory of the operation of blind1 unintelligent force upon inert matter4 ,here was an effect4 ,there must be a cause4 ,the effect cannot be greater than the cause4 ,here is an infinite universe2 there must be an infinite cause2 and that cause cannot be less than ,infinite ,eternal ,intelligence4 ,this cause1 for the want of a better name1 we call ,god4 ,i could thus easily account for the universe thru the processes of evolution1 directed by eternal1 intelligent will1 operating thru eternal immutable and perfect law1 upon eternal and indestructible matter4 ,whether correct or not1 this satisfied my mind as to ,god and the universe4 ,i could sing with the ,psalmist3 ,the heavens declare the glory of ,god1 and the firmament showeth his handiwork4 ,day unto day uttereth speech and night unto night showeth knowledge4 ,their line is gone out thru all the earth and their words to the end of the world4 ,there is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard4 ,as ,i have before said1 ,i never had any doubt about the existence of a ,supreme ,being1 and that the universe was in some way the product of his creative energy4 ,i think the doctrine of evolution satisfactorily solves the riddle of the universe1 if it recognizes ,infinite ,spirit as well as ,eternal ,matter2 and that this ,infinite ,spirit is in some way1 tho beyond our comprehension1 the real ,force or ,energy1 both the ,intelligence and ,life1 the ,great ,uncaused ,first ,cause behind all phenomena1 who1 for the want of a better name we call ,god4 ,perhaps it is impossible for any one to think of ,god without at the same time conceiving some sort of definition of him4 ,yet1 ,god cannot be defined4 ,he is infinite4 ,and infinity cannot be defined in terms of the finite4 ,any attempt to define ,god is to limit ,him4 ,our conceptions of ,god are at best limited1 tho ,god himself is not4 ,the finite mind cannot conceive unlimited space1 nor eternal duration4 ,we can conceive of them as existing2 but we cannot conceive what they are4 ,we can conceive of ,god as infinite2 but we cannot conceive what infinity is4 ,if we could1 it would not be infinite1 unless we are infinite4 ,so all attempts to define ,god in terms of the finite are futile4 ,and yet1 when we look back over the past history of the human race and see what ruin has been wrought by this very thing it becomes appalling6 ,all religious controversies1 wars and bloodshed have had their ultimate source just here4 ,certain men have formed certain conceptions of ,god1 of his character1 his attributes1 his will1 and his purposes concerning mankind4 ,these they have labelled1 patented1 copyrighted1 and declared to the world to be correct1 final and infallible1 and demanded that all the world accept them on penalty of death6 ,to quote1 in substance1 from a recent author1 we might as well try to make a meal of the stars and contain them all in our stomach at once as to comprehend ,god in his fullness4 ,god is what ,he is1 no matter what our opinions may be of him4 ,but what any one of us thinks ,god is1 that is what ,god is to him4 ,this is all the definition of ,god that need be given4 ,god is his own revelation4 ,the heavens declare the glory of ,god4 ,nature reveals ,god in greater power and splendor than any book4 ,what is my conception of ,god8 ,only this3 ,god is the ,life of the universe2 and this includes the ,,all4 ,as what we call the spirit is the life in my body1 and permeates the whole of it from the most central vital organs to the utmost extremities of nails and hair2 so ,god--and ,he is ,spirit--permeates the whole universe1 and is the life of1 or in it1 as you please4 ',all are but parts of one stupendous whole1 ,whose body ,nature is1 and ,god the ,soul4' ,he is manifest in the majesty of the universe and is seen in the beauties of the flowers4 ,he is reflected in the painted wings of the birds1 in the rippling leaf1 in the blade of grass1 in the dewdrop1 in the snowflake1 in all nature2 and above all in man himself1 in whom ,he dwells and lives4 ,how noble and inspiring the thought that ,i1 even ,i1 am a part of the life of the infinite1 eternal ,god6 ,all this ,i take on trust--by faith--and confess freely that1 while believing it ,i cannot comprehend it4 ,but such a ,god must be eternally good4 ,he could not be the monster that ,jewish tradition and orthodox ,christianity paint him1 eternally hating his enemies1 all of whom were his own creatures1 and plunging into an eternal hell of fire and brimstone the larger part of his own children1 created in his own image and likeness4 ,while ,i cannot understand the problems of his providence1 ,i am sure that the ,judge of all the earth will do right4 ,as to the perplexities that have grown out of the ideas of ,god's foreknowledge1 foreordination1 etc41 my view is that no such a thing as foreknowledge can be attributed to ,god4 ,to do so is to attribute to him time limitations4 ,to the ,infinite ,god there can be no such thing as past or future4 ,all is the eternal present in which ,god is still at work1 as much as ever before4 ,i confess ,i cannot comprehend how this is2 but ,i can comprehend that it is4 ,deep in unfathomable mines ,of never failing skill1 ,he treasures up his bright designs1 ,and works his sovereign will4 ,,man ,what is man that thou art mindful of him8 ,so far as we know1 as a pure animal1 he is the highest product1 the climax of the processes of organic evolution4 ,in addition to this1 he is the only known creature on earth1 or elsewhere1 endowed with those ,god-like faculties of mind1 thought1 reason1 will1--soul4 ,as far as man's moral character and destiny are concerned1 it matters as little how he came to be here1 as it does who ,cain's wife was4 ,we are confronted with the serious fact that we are here2 and that we are endowed with these supreme faculties that differentiate us from the lower forms of life about us1 and consequently entail upon us1 not thru some supernatural revelation1 but by natural instinct1 certain moral and social responsibilities and obligations1 not only to our own kind1 but to all those myriad forms of life below us1--obligations and responsibilities which we cannot avoid or escape1 except at our peril4 ,and as to these responsibilities1 it is not material whether man is immortal or not4 ,i once had serious doubts of this4 ,but while ,i now believe it with a firm conviction that in my own mind amounts to moral certainty1 yet ,i recognize that it is beyond the pale of ocular proof or physical demonstration4 ,it pertains exclusively to the realm of faith4 ,strange is it not8 that of the myriads who1 ,before us passed the door of darkness thru1 ,not one returns1 to tell us of the road1 ,which to discover1 we must travel too8 ,and yet this faith is one of the most comforting and inspiring of all the objects of faith known to man4 ,but he that is governed in his life and conduct1 solely by the fear of some dire punishment in the after-life1 or some hope of bribing the ,infinite to give him a comfortable berth in heaven1 is at best but a little and weak soul4 ,no need to go into any argument here upon the question of whether1 ,if a man die shall he live again8 ,our social and moral obligations to live right with our fellowmen are none the less1 whether there is an after-life or not4 ,in fact no man can be right with ,god1--a part of whose life he is1--while wrong with his fellow-man4 ,,the ,,problem ,,of ,,evil ,this brings us to a consideration of the problem of evil4 ,ever since human intelligence became enlightened enough to grope for a meaning and purpose in human life1 this problem of the existence of evil has been the burden of man4 7,john ,fiske47 ,out of some attempt to solve it1 every religion on earth was born4 ,i do not offer to solve this problem2 but to try to take a rational view of it4 ,good and evil are relative terms4 ,how could we know anything about the one but thru its contrast with the other8 ,if there were no such thing as evil1 how could we be conscious of the good8 ,how could we know that it was good8 ,we cannot know anything except by its contrast with something else4 ,some element of unlikeness must appear before we can distinguish anything from something else4 ,to quote again from ,fiske3 ,if there were no color but red1 it would be exactly the same thing as if there were no color at all4 ,there could be no music except for variety and contrasts in sounds4 ,if we had never tasted anything but sugar1 could we know what bitterness is8 ,but having tasted the bitter we then know what sweetness means4 ,likewise1 if there was no such thing as moral evil in the world1 we could not possibly know what moral goodness is4 ,we could not know what happiness is if we did not have some knowledge of sorrow and pain4 ,just why this is so1 ,i do not pretend to know4 ,i am only stating facts as they are2 and the great ,creator1 who is the author of both1 if of either1 knows2 and we may know in proper time4 ,another pertinent question from ,fiske may be asked here3 ,what would have been the worth of that primitive innocence portrayed in the myth of the garden of ,eden8 ,what would have been the moral value or significance of a race of human beings ignorant of evil1 and doing beneficent acts with no more consciousness or volition than the deftly contrived machine that picks up raw material at one end1 and turns out some finished product at the other8 ,clearly for strong and resolute men and women an ,eden would be but a fool's paradise4 ,how could anything fit to be called character ever have been produced there8 ,but for tasting the forbidden fruit1 in what respect could man have become a being of higher order than the beast of the field8 ,the point is that the same law of evolution applies in the moral world as it does in the material4 ,as the highest types of life have been developed only thru the processes of struggle with adverse elements1 in which only the fittest1 strongest and best adapted to its environment survived1 so moral character is only developed thru the struggle with moral evil4 ,just as one cannot learn to swim on a parlor sofa1 but must get in the water and struggle1 so one must come in contact with1 combat1 struggle with1 and overcome moral evil in order to develop the highest and strongest type of moral character4 ,heaven is not reached by a single bound2 ,but we build the ladder by which we rise ,from the lowly earth to the vaulted skies1 ,and rise to its summit round by round4 ,the rise from a bestial to a moral plane involves the acquirement of a knowledge of both good and evil4 ,the moral conscience thus developed plays the same role in the moral world that the consciousness of pain does in the physical4 ,as this consciousness of pain is a monitor to warn us from physical danger1 so the moral conscience is our monitor to keep us from moral evil4 ,and the higher this moral conscience is developed1 the more sensitive it becomes1 the higher will its possessor rise in the moral scale4 ,this is the law which ,paul tells us is written in the hearts of all men1 their consciences meanwhile accusing or excusing them4 ,this may seem a strange philosophy4 ,but it comports with the facts of nature and life4 ,the mystery of evil is not solved4 ,but at least we have a rational1 working hypothesis upon which to deal with it1 as will further appear as we proceed4 ,,sin ,evil1 at least in the physical world1 exists separate and apart from sin4 ,we will not speculate upon the metaphysical differences that may1 or may not1 exist between moral evil and personal guilt4 ,but ,i wish to record briefly the views ,i ultimately arrived at concerning the nature and consequences of sin4 ,according to the orthodox doctrine1 altho sin is defined in the ,new ,testament as the transgression of the law1 it is something more than this2--a direct personal offence against ,god2 and that therefore its penalties are punitive and vindictive1 designed to vindicate the person of ,god against insult and injury by disobedience to his law4 ,punishment was therefore believed to be administered judicially1 according to the extent of the offense1 that the sinner might be made to suffer purely for suffering's sake1 measure for measure4 ,i long ago abandoned this doctrine4 ,i accept fully the ,new ,testament teaching that sin is the transgression of the law1--not the law of ,moses or any other penal code1--but the great universal1 immutable law of ,nature in the moral world4 ,that ,god is the author of this law does not make its violation any more a personal offense against ,god than the violation of a ,state statute is a personal offense against the ,governor1 or legislature1 or the judge that administers it4 ,god cannot be personally sinned against4 ,if so ,he is neither infinite nor immutable4 ,to constitute a personal offense the person offended must take cognizance of it1 which necessarily involves a change of mind toward the offender1--otherwise it is not an offense4 ,the same condition would be involved in a second change of mind toward the offender1 upon his repentance and forgiveness4 ,neither is consistent with any idea of infinity or immutability4 ,neither does ,god ever punish sin4 ,sin is its own punishment1 and it operates automatically4 ,no sin was ever committed that the sinner did not pay the penalty in full4 ,from this there is no more escape than there is from the law of gravitation4 ,if ,i put my hand into the fire ,i cannot avoid being burned4 ,if ,i take poison ,i cannot avoid the consequences4 ,the fact that there may be an antidote for the poison in no way destroys the truth of this fundamental law4 ,the moving finger writes1 and having writ ,moves on2 ,nor all your piety nor wit ,can lure it back to cancel half a line1 ,nor all your tears wash out a word of it4 ,jesus illustrated this law fully and beautifully in the parable of the ,prodigal ,son1 and ,i can do no better than quote its substance here4 ,this young man left his father's house4 ,this was not a personal offence against his father1 altho the father may well have conjectured what would be the result4 ,he was of age and had a right to go4 ,he spent his funds in riotous living1 and as a consequence was reduced to want and suffering1 his punishment for his sin4 ,to thus waste his funds was sin1 ,he punished himself by his own conduct4 ,his sufferings became so intense and severe that he resolved to abandon his present surroundings and return home at any cost1 even to becoming a menial servant in his father's house4 ,here we get a clear view of the purpose of punishment1 not as vindictive1 but remedial and corrective4 ,the young man suffered until his sufferings accomplished their end in correcting and changing his life4 ,as soon as this was done his punishment ended4 ,just so with all punishment for sin4 ,it will continue until its remedial and corrective purpose is completed and no longer1 whether in this life or some other4 ,when the young man returned home his father received him1 not as a servant1 but a son4 ,but remember1 his wasted fortune was not restored4 ,was he not freely forgiven8 ,yes2 but forgiveness does not blot out nor restore the past2 nor absolve one from the natural consequences of his own acts already committed4 ,it simply means a new opportunity and a new start1 but with the handicap of the consequences of the past life4 ,the returned prodigal was forgiven4 ,he had the opportunity to begin life anew as a son1 just as he was before4 ,but his material resources represented in his squandered fortune1 and the time he lost while squandering it1 were lost forever6 ,be as diligent and frugal as he might1 he could never1 thru time or eternity1 reach that attainment which he might have reached1 had he used the same diligence and frugality from the start1 in the use of his natural inheritance as his operating capital4 ,hence1 one sins1 not against ,god1 but most of all against himself1 by violating the law of his own being1 and of humanity4 ,and the consequences of sins committed can never be escaped1 in this world or any other4 ,if this kind of gospel had been preached to humanity during all these past centuries of ,christianity1--instead of a gospel that teaches that no matter how vile1 wicked and sinful one may be1 nor how long he may thus live in sin1 if1 in the last hour of life he will only believe in ,jesus1 at death he will go sweeping thru the gates of heaven into eternal glory on a complete equality with the noblest saints and purest characters that ever lived on earth1--this world would now be much better than it is4 ,whatsoever a man soweth1 that shall he also reap1 whether divinely inspired or not1 is as eternally true1 certain1 and unescapable in the moral world as are the stars in their courses4 ,man sins against society in transgressing those natural laws of social relations that bind society together4 ,but even in this1 while society suffers from his sins1 the sinner himself must ultimately suffer for his own sins above all others4 ,the question has often been asked me1 ,if a man cannot sin against ,god1 but only against himself and society1 by what standard1 gauge1 or measure am ,i to determine what is right or wrong8 ,i think the ,golden ,rule answers that question completely4 ,all sins are either personal or social or both4 ,a man may1 by some sort of self-indulgence or abuse or by his own secret thoughts sin against himself only1 from which he alone must suffer4 ,he may also sin against society by doing some evil to or against some one else or against society as a whole1 from which both he and others may suffer4 ,a simple rule of conduct may be this3 ,in view of any proposed course of conduct1 word or act1 these questions may be asked3 ,what may be the result8 ,will it in any way injure me1 or any one else8 ,is any possible evil consequence1 either to myself or any one else1 likely to come of it8 ,if the answer is in the affirmative1 it is wrong2 otherwise not4 ,these are my simple views of sin4 ,,salvation ,what is salvation8 ,almost the universal answer of ,christendom has been for eighteen centuries1 escape from hell hereafter and the assurance of heaven4 ,yet1 according to the record we have of him1 ,jesus never taught any such doctrine4 ,it is true that he refers several times to the ,gehena of the ,jews1 where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched1 but always as a natural consequence of some failure to do1 or perform certain things that they should do2 but never does he appeal to any one to do or perform anything for the purpose of escaping it4 ,did the reader ever notice that in all the record we have of the sayings of ,jesus1 he is nowhere quoted as having ever said one word about the great1 fundamental doctrines of ,christianity1 over which pagans and ,christians wrangled for four centuries2 and over which ,christians have wrangled and fought with each other for fourteen centuries8 ,do we find where ,jesus ever said one word about the ,garden of ,eden1 the fall of ,adam1 original sin1 total depravity1 vicarious atonement1 the mode of baptism1 the ,trinity1 the possession of the ,holy ,spirit1 or any form of ecclesiastical organization or church polity8 ,salvation1 and ,jesus so taught1 pertains to this life exclusively4 ,it simply means to save this life1--not from physical death1 nor hell hereafter1--but to its proper function1 use and purpose1 according to the will of ,god1 as revealed in nature and human experience4 ,in simpler words1 it is to save this life from sin1 wrong doing of every kind1 and making of it the highest1 noblest and best it is capable of4 ,this is what ,jesus taught2 and ,jesus is the savior of mankind only in that he has taught mankind how to live1--not by dying for it4 ,thus to save this life to the highest1 noblest and best of which it is capable1 is to save it from sin unto righteousness2 and this is to save it both here and hereafter4 ,he that continually lives right cannot die wrong4 ,and whatever the next life may be1 it is but a continuation1 a larger unfolding and fruition of this4 ,salvation is here1 not hereafter4 ,,heaven ,,and ,,hell ,but do ,i not believe in heaven and hell8 ,yes1 and no4 ,i believe in both1 and neither4 ,i do not believe in either the kind of heaven or hell ,i was taught in the church4 ,yet1 ,i have already said that ,i did not believe any sin ever committed by man ever went unpunished1 either here or hereafter1 until the full penalty was paid1 and the punishment had completed its remedial and corrective purpose4 ,and ,i will say here that ,i do not believe any good deed or word ever performed or said by man ever went unrewarded up to the full value of its merit1 either here or hereafter4 ,but ,i believe both heaven and hell to be conditions1--not places1--and we have them both here in this life1 and will have them hereafter4 ,each individual makes his own heaven1 or his own hell1 and carries it with him when he leaves this life4 ,to quote from ,omar ,khayyam3 ,i sent my ,soul thru the invisible ,some letter of that ,after-life to spell2 ,and by and by my ,soul returned to me ,and answered3 ,i myself am ,heaven and ,hell2 ,heaven's but the vision of fulfilled desire1 ,and ,hell the shadow of a ,soul on fire4 ,the idea of a literal lake of fire and brimstone to be the eternal abode of by far the larger part of the human race1 according to the orthodox doctrine of ,christianity1 is not only unreasonable1 but unthinkable4 ,if it exists ,god must have made it2 and such a thought is a caricature of ,god4 ,such a view of hell practically involves the necessity of the personal devil that has always been associated with it2 and this is also both unreasonable and unthinkable4 ,if such a being exists he is either co-eternal with ,god--which is unreasonable--or ,god created him--which is unthinkable4 ,the idea that there is in this universe two co-eternal antagonistic spirits in eternal warfare with each other challenges human credulity4 ,if the ,bible story of creation and the fall of man is true1 as interpreted by orthodox ,christianity1 the devil got the best of ,god right from the start1 and has held it ever since2 and according to the current doctrines of the plan and means of salvation1 will hold it eternally4 ,this leads us inevitably to one of two conclusions3 ,god is neither ,infinite1 ,omniscient1 nor ,omnipotent1 else ,he would not have permitted such a condition to come about1 and permit ,himself to be thus defeated in his plans and purposes1 and lose eternally ninety percent of the highest product of his own creation1 ,man1 whom ,he made in his own image and likeness4 ,if we still insist that ,god is ,infinite1 ,omniscient1 and therefore knew in advance all that ever would take place1 including the fall of ,adam and its consequences1 ,omnipotent1 and therefore able to prevent it1 but did not1 it only makes the matter worse4 ,but to take the other horn of the dilemma1 that ,god created the devil first an angel in heaven1 who afterwards led a rebellion in heaven and had to be cast out1 and that hell was then created as a place in which to put him1 but where it proved afterwards that he could not be kept1 but got out and robbed ,god of the noblest product of his creative genius at the very threshold of creation1 corrupting the very fountain of human life itself1 whereby he became the ultimate possessor of nine-tenths of all the race forever1 is only to make the matter still worse than before4 ,he certainly was not ,omniscient1 and therefore able to foreknow what this newly created angel would ultimately do1 else ,he would not have made him2 nor was ,he ,omnipotent1 else ,he would have prevented it4 ,but if it still be insisted--and unfortunately it is by far the greater part of ,christianity--that ,god is1 nevertheless and notwithstanding1 ,infinite1 ,omniscient and ,omnipotent1 and either deliberately planned or supinely sat by and permitted these things to take place1 then ,he is not a ,god of goodness1 love1 justice1 truth1 mercy and benevolence1 but an unthinkable monster1 more diabolical and cruel than the wildest savage ever known to the earth1 or the most ferocious beast of prey in the jungle4 ,i might naturally fear such a ,god1 but never love or respect1 but eternally hate him4 ,i have already given my views of the story of ,eden and the fall of man2 that man never fell1 but is still incomplete1 but progressing onward and upward forever2 that he was never1 on the general average1 higher or better than now2 and as the years and ages go on he will continue thus to grow better and nobler1 making his own heaven as he goes along1 and destroying his own hell by learning his lessons of suffering for wrong doing1 and leaving it behind him4 ,no1 ,god did not make man in his own image1 implant in his very nature that eternal aspiration upward that is possessed by every normal human being1 and then make a devil to tempt and ruin him1 and a hell in which to eternally torment him4 ,i quote again from ,omar ,khayyam3 ,oh1 ,thou who didst with pitfall and with gin ,beset the road ,i was to wander in1 ,thou wilt not with predestined evil round ,enmesh1 and then impute my fall to sin4 444 ,ne'er a peevish boy ,would break the bowl from which he drank in joy2 ,and he that with his hand the vessel made ,will not in after wrath destroy4 ,,redemption ,,and ,,atonement ,it is hardly necessary to the purpose of this work1 to say anything at all on these subjects4 ,if man was never lost1 kidnapped or stolen from ,god1 he needed no redeemer1 to buy him back with a price4 ,if man never fell from the favor of ,god by disobedience1 and thereby incurred his anger1 illwill and wrath that sought vengeance on his life1 he needed no one to mediate1 propitiate or atone for him by shedding his own blood as a substitute4 ,the whole doctrine of redemption and atonement falls flat when the doctrine of the fall of man is removed from under it4 ,but as this is the very crux of the whole orthodox ,christian system1 the reader may be interested to know what conclusions ,i reached concerning it1 after some years of study1 as to both its origin and meaning4 ,these conclusions ,i reached1 not only from the study of the ,bible1 but from the study of history generally2 and especially the history of religion1 in other races as well as the ,jews4 ,it must be remembered that this doctrine of atonement by the shedding of blood1 is--or rather was1--in one form or another1 common to many ancient religions and nations4 ,it was by no means exclusively ,jewish or ,christian4 ,it probably had a common origin and purpose in all4 ,i have already intimated that all religious doctrine and practice had their origin in man's attempt to solve the problem of evil1 sin1 suffering and death2 and to remedy it4 ,i will treat this more fully when ,i come to consider the subject of religion specifically4 ,the general solution of this problem1 if not the almost universal one1 was1 that men had offended the gods and incurred their anger and illwill2 and for this reason the gods continually afflicted them thru life and ultimately destroyed them4 ,thus death was the final penalty for sin4 ,the gods could be finally satisfied only with the life1--the blood1--of the transgressor4 ,for the blood is the life4 ,this doctrine is not confined to ,genesis and the ,jews4 ,in fact1 the best ,biblical scholars of today are of the opinion that this story of ,eden and the fall were not originally ,jewish at all2 but that the tradition was learned during the exile in ,babylonia and ,persia1 where1 it has been learned from recent excavations1 the tradition existed centuries before the time of the captivity4 ,it is believed that this tradition so fitted into the ,jewish history and gave them such a satisfactory solution of their own sufferings and misery that it was brought back by them1 and1 with some adaptations1 incorporated into their own sacred literature as a part of their own history4 ,thus1 ,genesis is now believed by the best scholars and most competent critics1 not to be the first book of the ,bible written1 but in its present form1 one of the last written of the ,old ,testament4 ,but this is a digression4 ,quite early1 however1 tho the time and the exact reason why are both unknown1 it is evident that man conceived the idea that1 tho he could not escape ultimate death1 yet1 he might in some way appease the wrath of the gods1 and thus at least mitigate his afflictions in this life1 by offering them the life--the blood--of a substitute4 ,thus originated the practice of offering burnt offerings to the gods1 so common among so many ancient tribes and nations besides ,israel4 ,it was believed that the gods would be satisfied1 at least for the time being1 with the blood of an innocent victim1 especially if it was the best1 or the most precious the offerer had4 ,and from this grew the offering of human sacrifices1 especially one's own children1 as ,abraham offering ,isaac1 ,jephtha his daughter1 and the practice in ,israel so severely condemned by some of the earlier prophets1 of making their children pass the fire unto ,moloch4 ,other offerings in the course of time grew up1 such as fruits1 vegetables1 incense1 etc42 but no offering was acceptable as an atonement for sin1 except the offering of blood4 ,thus ,cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground and ,jehovah rejected it4 ,but ,abel came with the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof4 ,and ,jehovah had respect unto ,abel and unto his offering4 ,the later ,levitical ritual with its organized priesthood1 tabernacle1 temple1 etc41 was by no means the beginning of this idea of appeasing the wrath of ,jehovah by blood atonement2 but was only the more perfect and systematic organization and administration of it4 ,blood was considered so precious1 because it was the life1 that the children of ,israel were forbidden to eat it on penalty of death4 ,for the life of the flesh is in the blood2 and ,i have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your sins3 for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life4 ,lev4 xvii1 #aa4 ,i shall assume here that the reader is already sufficiently familiar with the practices of the ,jews1 as recorded thruout the ,old ,testament1 concerning this matter of blood atonement1 to render it unnecessary to go into further details4 ,if he is not already familiar with it1 he can easily become so4 ,the question has been asked1 why burn the offering8 ,why was it not sufficient simply to shed the blood8 ,perhaps in the beginning this was the practice4 ,there is nothing said about burning the offerings of either ,cain or ,abel4 ,it is highly probable they were not burnt4 ,jehovah was satisfied with the mere sight of blood1 the destruction of a life4 ,but this1 ,cain did not offer4 ,there was no blood in his fruit-offering2 hence ,jehovah was not only unappeased1 but insulted4 ,the first mention of burnt-offerings in the ,bible is the offering made by ,noah after the flood4 ,from this on they are common4 ,the purpose of burning the offering was simply to cook it1--to roast it4 ,the offering was nearly always eaten4 ,sometimes only the fat1 considered the choicest part1 was burnt as an offering to the god2 while the people and priests ate the balance1 either roasted or boiled4 ,see a full account of this in #a ,sam4 ii1 #ab;f4 ,as man has always made his gods in his own image he imagined the gods1 like himself1 loved to eat4 ,therefore1 in addition to appeasing the wrath of the god by the sight of the blood of the victim1 his favor was supposed to be further obtained by feeding him4 ,as the good host always sets the best he has before his guest1 so the best part of the sacrificed victim was placed on the altar for the god4 ,altho invisible1 it was firmly believed that the god consumed the burning flesh or fat1 as it was reduced to smoke and ascended to heaven4 ,the parties making the offering1--sometimes only an individual1 or a family1 but often the whole tribe1--ate the balance4 ,they were therefore1 eating with the god1 and consequently on good terms with him1 just as eating together today is an indication of friendship1 or the taking of salt together among certain savage tribes is a token of peace and friendship1 or the smoking from the common pipe among the early ,american ,indians4 ,later in ,israel1 the whole offering was burnt4 ,jehovah was entitled to it all4 ,men had outgrown the idea of eating with ,jehovah4 ,we now come back more specifically to the purpose of this blood atonement4 ,we have no account in all the ,old ,testament where it was ever offered with direct reference to a future life1--for the purpose of escaping hell4 ,we have already seen that there is absolutely nothing in the story of ,eden and the fall of man1 upon which to predicate any thought of immortality after physical death1 either a heaven or hell4 ,we now come to note that there is nowhere any direct reference to a life after death1 in any book of the ,old ,testament1 written before the exile4 ,the account of ,saul having the witch of ,endor call up ,samuel after his death2 and ,david's faith that he could go to his dead child1 indeed indicate some belief at this time in an after-life2 but nowhere is there the remotest reference to a hell1 a separate place of torment for the wicked4 ,in the case of ,samuel being recalled to converse with ,saul1 he says1 that altho ,jehovah had departed from ,saul1 and notwithstanding ,saul's great wickedness1 ,tomorrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me1--the saintly ,samuel1 all in the same place4 ,there are a few direct references to a future life1 in a few places only1 in some of the books written during or after the exile4 ,but nowhere in the ,old ,testament do we find a single reference to the offering of the sacrifice of atonement with any reference whatever to a future life4 ,to ancient ,israel1 ,jehovah was a ,god of the present1--not the future4 ,he did things then1--in the present tense4 ,he was the ,god of the living1--not of the dead4 ,and ,jesus affirmed the same thing4 ,he was exclusively a ,god for this world and this life4 ,the atoning sacrifice was offered to appease his wrath against them for their past sins1 not the sin of the individual only1 but the sins of the whole nation4 ,the benefits they expected to receive from this remission of sins thru the blood of the atonement were here and now1--not in some future life4 ,we pass rapidly now to the time of the ,christ4 ,altho the canonical books of the ,old ,testament give us no clue to any definite1 fixed beliefs among the ,jews concerning a future life1 heaven1 hell or the resurrection of the dead1 yet1 according to the ,new ,testament literature1 these views were all quite clearly defined1 and generally believed among all the ,jews1 except the party of the ,sadducees1 relatively a very small party4 ,whence came these beliefs8 ,if they had come by some divine revelation they would certainly have been recorded in some of their sacred books4 ,but they were not4 ,the only rational answer is that they learned all these things from their ,eastern masters during the captivity1 where all these beliefs are now known to have been current centuries before the captivity1 and brought them back on their return2 and with some modifications incorporated them into their own system4 ,yet there is no indication in the ,new ,testament1 nor any contemporary literature now extant1 that the atoning sacrifice that was continually offered in the temple1 even down to the destruction of ,jerusalem1 was ever offered with any view1 or reference to a future life2 much less as a means of escaping hell4 ,we turn now to the ,christ4 ,it has already been said that he nowhere makes the least reference to a vicarious atonement to be made by himself for the sins of world4 ,true1 he warns his disciples that he must needs go up to ,jerusalem1 there to suffer and be put to death2 but nowhere does he say that this death is to redeem back mankind from the devil2 nor appease the wrath of ,god against mankind by the sight of his blood2 nor to vindicate the majesty of a broken law1 for the benefit of mankind4 ,it is all but universally acknowledged that his disciples had no such conception of his mission1 but followed him up to ,jerusalem expecting to see him made ,king1 sit on the throne of ,david and restore ,israel to her pristine glory1 according to the universal interpretation of the ,messianic prophecies4 ,after his tragic death1 and alleged resurrection and ascension1--in which his disciples certainly implicitly believed1 no matter what the actual facts may be1--we still hear not a word about his death being a vicarious atonement for sin4 ,when ,peter preached that great sermon on the day of ,pentecost he says not one word about a vicarious atonement in the death of ,christ1 but lays the whole emphasis on his resurrection and ascension4 ,let the reader turn here to that sermon in the second chapter of ,acts and read it2 and he will find that the whole burden of ,peter's sermon is to the effect1 that since the ,jews had put ,jesus to death1 he had broken the bonds of death and hades1 they being powerless to hold him1 and had ascended to the right hand of ,god1 whereby he had conquered both death and hades1 and for which ,god hath made him both ,lord and ,christ4 ,note1 that because of this resurrection and ascension he had been made both ,lord and ,christ1--and not by any virtue in his death itself4 ,not the remotest hint of vicarious atonement6 ,the natural inference is--tho ,peter is not quoted as saying so in so many words1--that men are to be saved from death and hades hereafter1 because ,jesus had escaped from both1 and thus not only paved the way1 but himself thereby became able to save others also4 ,as is well known1 for half a century or more1 the followers of the new faith1 who for fifteen years were all ,jews1 or ,jewish proselytes1 looked with anxious expectancy for the return of this ,jesus1 with the power and glory of heaven1 to set up his earthly kingdom on the throne of ,david in ,jerusalem4 ,not a word yet about saving men's soul's from hell thru vicarious atonement4 ,no need for a vicarious atonement to save men from hell hereafter1 if they were soon to live on this earth forever--those who died before his return to be raised from the dead as he was1 while those that remained were to be caught up in the clouds to meet him in the air and live forever1--under the benign reign of the ,messiah of ,god4 ,but we are approaching its development4 ,there appears upon the scene one ,saul of ,tarsus1 afterwards known as ,paul the ,apostle4 ,it is generally conceded that he never saw ,jesus in his lifetime2 in fact knew nothing of him while he lived4 ,he early became a violent persecutor of the new sect1 which for years was only another ,jewish sect1 as exclusively ,jewish in its views and outlook as were the priests and ,rabbis4 ,but ,paul was a well educated man1 a scholar in his day1--and a philosopher4 ,he was a ,jew to the core1 and lived and died one4 ,we need not consider the story of his trip to ,damascus1 the supposed miracle on the way1 and his conversion to the new faith4 ,he soon became the greatest leader and exponent it had thus far produced2 and he put a new interpretation on it1 entirely unchristian1 if we are to take the recorded teachings of the ,christ himself as our standard for ,christianity4 ,and the ,christianity of the world today is much more ,pauline than ,christian1 judged by this standard4 ,this ,paul operated independent of the other ,apostles4 ,he was a free lance and launched forth1 both in a field1 and with a doctrine all his own4 ,he was thoroly familiar with the whole ,jewish system4 ,he knew all about the meaning and purpose of the sacrifice of atonement4 ,yet he was too wise not to know that there was no intrinsic merit in the blood of bulls and goats to cleanse from sin1 or appease the divine wrath4 ,yet as a loyal ,jew he certainly believed these to be of divine origin1--and that they must have a meaning deeper than the physical fact itself4 ,he was a believer in the coming of the long-promised ,messiah--to restore ,israel4 ,a man of his knowledge and foresight might well be able to read the signs of the times1 and see that the ,jewish nation could but little longer maintain its separate identity against the overwhelming power of the growing ,roman ,empire4 ,it must soon be swallowed up and its separate identity lost in the greater whole4 ,no power in ,israel seemed to be able to stem the tide of events4 ,remember that this was now some years after the crucifixion2 and after ,paul had changed his course towards the new sect1 because of the events about ,damascus1--no matter what they may have been4 ,at any rate1 it is quite clear1 no matter what the reasons may have been that induced him to do so1 that he had accepted in good faith1 as a veritable truth1 the belief in the physical resurrection of the crucified ,jesus4 ,paul tells us himself that after his escape from ,damascus he went into ,arabia for three years1--perhaps to try to think out some rational interpretation of the meaning of the events that he had felt himself forced to accept as true4 ,after this we find him passing thru ,jerusalem1 stopping a few weeks with ,peter and the other ,apostles to learn from them all he could2 and then going on to his native city1 ,tarsus1 where we lose sight of him for several years before we find him starting on his first great missionary journey from ,antioch1 in which we begin to get our first glimpses of the doctrine of vicarious atonement made for the sins of the world by the death of ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,during these years of ,paul's obscurity1 both in ,arabia and at ,tarsus1 what was he probably doing8 ,we do not know4 ,but is it unreasonable to conjecture that he must have spent at least a good portion of his time in profound study1 to try to reconcile these new views with the past history1 traditions and beliefs of his own people8 ,if this new teaching meant only a new ethical standard of life2 that men are saved by what they are and do1 without any reference to belief1 then the whole ,jewish system of sacrifices had no meaning at all1 and never did have4 ,we can hardly conceive of ,paul1 educated as he was in all the lore and traditions of his people1 accepting such a view as this4 ,to him all the traditions and practices of his people were at least of divine origin2 and hence must have a meaning of eternal significance4 ,yet1 it must have been plain to him that in the natural course of events1 as they were then clearly tending1 it could not be long until the elaborate temple ritual1 with all its sacrifices1 oblation1 burning bullocks and incense1 must soon cease forever6 ,and now for the interpretation4 ,all the ceremonial of ,israel had a meaning2 but it was symbolic1 typical of some reality to come4 ,the blood of bulls and lambs and goats could not in themselves atone for sin2 but they could point to the ,lamb of ,calvary1 slain for the sins of the world4 ,he that was without sin1--the lamb without spot or blemish1--was offered as a sacrifice for the sins of others4 ,the law had its purpose1 but it was now fulfilled1 all its symbolic meaning was consummated in the death of ,jesus1 and now it must go4 ,it was only a school master1 to keep us in the way until the ,christ should come4 ,when this lamb was slain1 ,god saw his shed blood1 and was satisfied4 ,his anger relented1 his wrath cooled and the hand of mercy was extended1 on the simple condition1--of faith4 ,what was the meaning1 intent and purpose of this vicarious atonement8 ,according to the belief of the time1 that ,jesus would soon return in the power and glory of heaven to set up his everlasting kingdom here on earth1 it was to prepare a people for this kingdom4 ,this kingdom was to be composed only of those who had been thus prepared for it1 by the remission of their sins1 thru this blood atonement4 ,the earliest ,christians1 all of whom were ,jews1 led by ,peter1 held that this new kingdom was to be forever limited to ,jews and ,jewish proselytes4 ,if any ,gentile wanted to have any part or lot in this new kingdom1 he must first become a ,jew4 ,but ,paul took a broader view4 ,to him the whole ,jewish system was purely preliminary to a greater dispensation1 which was now fulfilled2 symbolic and typical of a greater reality which was now here2 and had therefore fulfilled its purpose and was ended4 ,all symbolic ceremonial was now past forever4 ,there was no longer any distinction between ,jew and ,gentile as far as ,god's grace was concerned4 ,the ,new ,kingdom was open to all upon the same terms1--faith in ,jesus as the ,messiah of ,god1 and this particular interpretation of his mission4 ,this opening of the gates to all the world on equal terms produced a bitter controversy between ,peter and ,paul and led to a sharp and well defined division in the early church1 which continues to this day4 ,the ,roman ,church is ,petrine1 narrow1 exclusive and given to much elaborate ceremonial1 as were the ancient ,jews2 while ,protestantism is generally ,pauline1 much broader1 generally freer from ceremonial1 and as a rule much more truly ,catholic2 yet often narrow enough4 ,as time went on1 and ,jesus did not return as expected1 faith in his early coming waned2 and the idea began to grow that his real ,kingdom was not for this world at all1 but a heavenly one hereafter4 ,by this time the ,apostle ,paul was dead and the ,fourth ,gospel had appeared1 supposed to be written by the ,apostle ,john1 in which the ,master was quoted as saying1 ,my kingdom is not of this world4 ,thus the idea took form1 grew and developed that the real mission of the ,messiah1 after all1 was not the establishment of a kingdom here on earth1 but a heavenly kingdom hereafter2 and hence that his death was a vicarious atonement made by the shedding of his blood1 to satisfy the divine vengeance against sin1 and save souls from hell hereafter2 and thus fit them for this heavenly kingdom4 ,and ever since this doctrine became thus established1 by the middle of the second century1 almost the whole emphasis and entire energies of the church1 ,catholic and ,protestant1 have been directed1 not towards making this a better world by making mankind better1 building up1 developing1 purifying and uplifting human character2 but toward saving them from a hell hereafter4 ,and what little energy the church had left after this1 has been spent1 and is still being spent1 in never-ending controversy among themselves over just how to do it4 ,thus the doctrine of vicarious atonement1 thru blood1 and blood alone1 had its origin in the lowest paganism1 away back in the infancy of the human race1 was transmitted down thru ,judaism1 and transplanted from it into ,christianity4 ,but ,i cannot leave this subject without a few remarks on the various meanings that have been attached to the idea of vicarious atonement1 since it became an integral part of the ,christian system4 ,we have already seen that the original pagan meaning of blood atonement was based upon the idea that the gods were angry and out for vengeance1 and nothing but blood would appease them2 but that the blood of a proper substitute would answer this purpose4 ,but the earliest ,christian doctrine of the atonement made by ,christ was in the nature of redemption4 ,in fact the term became so deeply rooted and grounded in early ,christian nomenclature that it has never been fully eliminated4 ,but its use is much less now than formerly4 ,the theory was based upon tradition1 partly scriptural and partly not1 that in the affair of ,eden the devil fairly outwitted ,god and became rightfully entitled to the souls of all mankind forever2 but that on account of the great war in heaven1 in which the devil and his angels were cast out by the ,eternal ,son of ,god 7see ,milton's ,paradise ,lost71 the devil held a bitter grudge against this son1 and offered to bargain with ,god and give him back all the souls of mankind for the soul of this son4 ,so ,god1 knowing the power of his son to break the bands of death and hell1--which the devil did not know1--accepted the bargain2 and in due time1 as agreed upon1 the ,son of ,god came into the world1 died on the cross and went to hell1 in fulfillment of this contract2 and thus liberated all the souls already there1 and obtained a conditional release of all the balance of mankind1---the condition of faith1--and then suddenly broke the bands of death and hell and escaped back to heaven4 ,but he literally fulfilled his contract as originally made4 ,thus we find the old church creeds reciting--and still reciting--that he was crucified1 dead1 buried and descended into hell1 and the third day rose1 etc4 ,this idea may look strange to present day ,christians2 but all they have to do is to consult the early church literature to find that it was almost the universal belief as to the meaning of the atonement during the first few centuries of ,christianity4 ,the next view that gradually developed as the older one waned1 was the old ,jewish idea of substituted suffering and to which was added that of imputed righteousness4 ,that is to say1 that in order to save mankind and yet appease the divine wrath1 and satisfy the vengeance of an offended ,god1 ,god sent his son into the world to bear the brunt of his wrath instead of mankind1 and tho innocent1 to suffer as tho guilty2 and finally to die as a malefactor1 tho innocent of sin2 and because of the dignity and character of the victim and the intensity of his sufferings in both life and death1 they were sufficient in both quality and quantity to satisfy the divine vengeance against all mankind2 provided man would avail himself of these provisions for his release by accepting by faith the ,son of ,god as his suffering substitute2 whereupon1 ,god would forgive the sins of the faithful and impute to them the benefits of the righteousness of ,christ4 ,this doctrine of the atonement dominated the ,middle ,ages4 ,upon it was based the doctrine of supererogation1 whereby the surplus stock of good works of the holy saints might be laid up for the benefit of the less worthy1 who might receive the benefits of them thru the process of indulgences1 sold by the church for a money consideration4 ,it is still held in a somewhat modified form in a large part of ,christendom to this day4 ,the more modern doctrine of the atonement is that called the ,governmental ,theory4 ,that is to say1 that ,god was not so mad with mankind after all2 but having once ordained the law that the soul that sinneth1 it shall die1 the law could neither be abrogated nor suspended1 but must have its penalty4 ,as no mortal man could fulfill it for any one but himself1 and that only by his eternal death1 only the ,son of ,god could satisfy it for mankind4 ,therefore the ,eternal ,son of ,god became incarnate in human flesh1 but still remained ,very ,god of ,very ,god1 in order that he might meet the demands of this divine law for all mankind1 by not being amenable to it himself1 being without sin2 and yet by his sufferings and death paying its penalty in full for the whole human race2 subject1 however1 to the appropriation of its benefits by the individual1 thru faith4 ,in a measure this is the same as that of the substitution theory2 but it does not go to the extent of the doctrine of imputed righteousness4 ,the only exception to it is in the ,roman church1 and here the exception is apparent rather than real4 ,in the ,roman church salvation is by faith in the church1 the benefits of which are transmitted to the individual thru the sacraments of the church2 but in the ancient church1 and in practically all modern ,protestant churches1 saving faith is held to be individual and personal2 and must be not only faith in the atoning sacrifice made by ,jesus ,christ on the cross for all mankind2 but it must be faith in the correct view of the atonement4 ,hence1 no matter which of the views ,i have herein outlined may be correct1 those who have held to either of the others are all lost4 ,this is the only logical conclusion any one can reach who insists that salvation is impossible except by accepting any prescribed creed4 ,only those who possess and accept the right creed can be saved4 ,all the balance of mankind must be lost forever4 ,to take either of these views of the atonement1 or all of them together1 as the only means by which mankind can be saved from hell is to make ,god a complete failure from beginning to end4 ,as we have already seen1 the orthodox view of creation makes ,god either a failure or a monster4 ,the attempt to reform man thru the process of elimination by the flood proved a failure4 ,and now if the success of ,god's last attempt to save mankind thru the death of his son1 is limited to any interpretation orthodox ,christianity has ever placed upon it1 it is the most stupendous failure of all4 ,there is but one rational interpretation of any doctrine of salvation by vicarious atonement2 and that is that the atonement must be automatically as far-reaching and comprehensive in its results as the sin it is designed to remedy4 ,if sin entered into the world because of the offence of ,adam1 the head of the race1 and thus passed upon all men1 without their knowledge or consent1 simply because they were descendants of ,adam1 any scheme of redemption1 atonement1 or salvation that purports in any way to remedy1 or obviate the consequences of this original sin1 in order to be just must be equally as broad and comprehensive1 and operate as automatically and unconditionally in its remedial effects1 as did ,adam's sin in its consequences4 ,i have thus gone at some length into this doctrine of atonement and redemption4 ,perhaps ,i have wearied the reader4 ,but as it is the most fundamental doctrine of the whole orthodox ,christian system1 and has been such a bone of contention in all the ages of the ,christian church1 and was such a stumbling block to me for so long a time1 ,i felt that my ,confession of ,faith would be incomplete if ,i did not go into it in some detail4 ,my final conclusion is1 that man never fell1 but always has been and still is imperfect and incomplete1 but ever striving upward4 ,as man was never lost or stolen from ,god1 he needed no redeemer to buy him back4 ,as he was never an enemy to ,god1 but always his child1 ,god was never angry with him2 hence he needed neither mediator1 nor any one to make any atonement for him4 ,,chapter ,,vii ,a ,,new ,,interpretation ,,of ,,religion ,what is religion8 ,this over which men have waged the fiercest controversies known to human history2 that has been the source of more strife and bloodshed than any other single cause known to mankind2 and perhaps1 in one way or another1 more than all other causes combined1 previous to the recent ,world ,war4 ,it will be remembered that ,i said after finishing my special course of study on the origin1 authorship1 history and character of the ,bible and the processes of reasoning which it inspired1 that ,i gave the whole thing up1 inspiration1 revelation1 church and religion1 as a farce and a delusion1 as 'sounding brass and tinkling cymbals'2 and cast it all into the scrap-heap of superstition1 legend1 fable and mythology4 ,but after several years of study and observation ,i changed my mind again4 ,i found that what ,i had always been taught and understood to be religion was not religion at all1 but only a form of religious expression4 ,creeds and beliefs ,i found were not religion1 but the products of religion4 ,that subtle emotional experience which ,i had always been taught was religion1 ,i found was itself but a form of religious expression4 ,i learned that religion was not something one could get1 by repentance1 faith1 prayer1 etc41 as ,i had been taught and taught myself for years2 but something every normal human being on earth had by nature1 and could not get rid of4 ,then what is religion8 ,while it is the simplest thing on earth1 it is yet perhaps the hardest to define2 especially by one person for another4 ,its very simplicity eludes definition4 ,in trying to define it ,i shall use in part the definitions given by others1 as these are more expressive than any words of my own that ,i can frame3 ,religion essentially consists of man's apprehension of his relation to an invisible power or powers1 able to influence his destiny1 to which he is necessarily subject2 together with the feelings1 desires and actions which this apprehension calls forth4 ,another definition that is perhaps more direct and simple than the above is this3 ,religion is an impulse imbedded in the heart of man which compels him to strive upward4 ,it is a yearning of the soul in man to transcend its own narrow limits1 and to soar to the heights of supreme excellence1 where it may become identified with the noble1 the lofty1 the divine4 ,another has said that ,religion is simply the zest of life4 ,to these ,i will add that ,i understand religion to be that inner urge in all humanity that pushes it onward and upward2 that inspires in man the desire to rise above his present station and attainments1 and improve his condition2 that spirit within man that has lifted him from the lowest savagery to the highest attainments in civilization1 refinement and culture that man has yet reached2 and will still lead him on to heights yet invisible and undreamed of4 ,this inner urge is common to all humanity1 different only in degree1 and not in kind4 ,it is possessed by the lowest savage1 tho often in latent form1 yet capable of being touched and aroused into life and action1 as thousands of modern examples attest1 as a result of some form of missionary effort4 ,from the time that man first emerged above the brute1 stood erect1 looked up1 beheld the phenomena of nature about him1 thought1 and recognized that somehow and somewhere there was a ,power above1 beyond and greater than himself2 and conceived in his own mind1 however crude1 the first faint spark of an aspiration to improve and better his condition1 man became a religious being1 and has been such ever since1 varying only in degree1 not in kind4 ,all religion is therefore one and the same4 ,there may be many religions4 ,but back of all these is religion4 ,religion is one in its origin4 ,it is a part of the fundamental essence of human character4 ,it is inseparable from the faculties of thought1 reason and will4 ,it is one and the same with these4 ,man without these faculties of thought1 reason and will would not be man at all1 but a brute4 ,so without this inner urge1 and the faculty of aspiration upward1 which ,i have defined as the very fundamental essence of religion1 man would still only be a brute4 ,he would not be man at all4 ,religion is one in its origin because it is an essential characteristic of all human nature4 ,all religion is one in that it recognizes ,,something above man4 ,i use this word advisedly4 ,if ,i had said1 ,because all men recognize the existence of ,god1 or a ,supreme ,being1 ,i would have been misunderstood and the statement challenged4 ,men have become so habituated to calling all other men atheists who do not accept their particular definition of ,god1 that ,i omit the word entirely until ,i can further define my meaning4 ,because ,voltaire did not believe in the ,god of ,moses and the ,pope1 he was dubbed an atheist1 altho he was a devoutly religious man1 and built a chapel at his own expense on his estate and dedicated it to the worship of ,god4 ,man instinctively recognizes something above him4 ,it is immaterial by what name this may be called2 whether ,jehovah1 ,elohim1 ,allah1 ,heaven1 ,nirvana1 or ,jove2 nor what attributes we give it1 whether we call it ,person or ,principle1 the ,great ,unknown or the ,ultimate ,cause2 or whether it be a mere abstract ,ideal1 the creation of one's own fancy2 it is still that ,something which man recognizes as above him1 toward which he aspires and hopes to attain4 ,man also instinctively recognizes that he sustains some sort of personal relationship to this ,something1 that for want of a better name1 we call ,god4 ,it is necessary in this connection to repeat what we have already said3 ,that very early in the history of the human race man was led to this conclusion1 concerning his relationship and obligation to ,god1 thru his effort to interpret and solve the problem of evil1 or his own sufferings from it1 and his ultimate death4 ,the only possible method he had of interpreting these problems was drawn from his own nature and experience4 ,he knew himself as being alive1 as a conscious individual1 capable of exercising will and exerting force4 ,thus when he heard the roaring thunders1 saw the clouds floating overhead1 and the flashes of lightning among them1 felt the force of the wind and the falling rain2 in fact all the phenomena of nature and life about him1 including his own aches1 pains1 diseases1 suffering1 and the ultimate death of his kind1 he could only interpret these things in terms of living personality1 some great1 powerful individual1 or individuals behind1 and directing it all4 ,these became man's first gods4 ,man also interpreted his own relation to the gods1 and theirs to him1 in the same terms that defined his relations toward his fellowmen4 ,he recognized the fact that some of his fellowmen sometimes did him an injury1 or committed some offense against him2 that this offense or injury aroused in him a spirit of resentment1 a desire for vengeance in kind1 even to the taking of the life of the man who had injured1 or seriously offended him4 ,man made his gods in his own image4 ,he believed these gods to be like himself4 ,thus1 man interpreted his own sufferings to mean that he was out of right relations with the gods2 that he had personally offended them1--or1 one or more of them in some way1 according to the source from which he conceived some particular affliction to come4 ,when the individual was conscious of his own innocence1 he concluded that some of his ancestors had grievously offended the god1 who relentlessly pursued his posterity and inflicted on them the penalties due for the sins of this ancestor4 ,hence the doctrine of inherited or original ,sin4 ,man then set about to devise some means to appease the wrath of the gods1 and thus restore harmonious relations with them4 ,a volume might be written here1 but we must proceed with the next proposition4 ,all religion is therefore one in its ultimate purpose1 and objective end3 ,to attain to its ideal1 or harmonize with its objective4 ,in other words3 ,to attain unto right relations with ,god4 ,lest ,i be misunderstood1 ,i will repeat3 ,it is immaterial what this ,god may be1 ,jehovah1 ,allah1 ,nirvana or ,jove2 ,person1 ,principle1 or ,abstract ,ideal4 ,it is that which man in his mind sets before him1 toward which he aspires and strives to attain4 ,remember that what we think ,god to be1 that is what ,god is to us4 ,we have now reached the point where divisions arise1 where religion branches out into religions4 ,wherewith shall ,i come before ,jehovah1 and bow myself before the high ,god8 ,shall ,i come before him with burnt-offerings1 with calves a year old8 ,will ,jehovah be pleased with thousands of rams1 or with ten thousands of rivers of oil8 ,shall ,i give my first-born for my transgression1 the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul8 ,what must ,i do to be saved8 ,this has1 in one form or another1 at one time or another1 been the burden of almost every soul among men4 ,how can man attain unto right relations with his ,god8 ,this is the great question of the ages4 ,keep in mind that it is immaterial who or what this god may be1 how crude or how refined1 from the lowest fetish to the highest spiritual conception1 the fundamental question remains ever the same3 ,how shall man get right with his ,god8 ,what must man do to be saved8 ,to answer this question has been the purpose of every system of religion known to mankind1 and every sect1 order and denomination known to every system4 ,and here is where confusion begins4 ,some one evolves a formula1 means1 or method that he believes meets the case4 ,some others are persuaded to accept it and the sect grows4 ,in the mean time some other person has evolved another2 and some other still another1 and so on1 and on1 and on1 ad infinitum2 all having the same purpose in view1 and each claiming to be the only right one1 or at least1 the best one4 ,and it is immaterial how erroneous1 crude1 or even barbarous one may look to the devotees of the other2 in fundamental purpose they are all the same4 ,the ,hindu mother who casts her babe into the ,ganges as food for the crocodiles1 as a sacrifice to her gods1 does it with as sublime a motive as any ,christian mother ever bowed before the altar of her own church1--and for the same purpose3 ,to get right with her ,god4 ,the ,parsee wife1 who burns herself to ashes upon the funeral pyre of her dead husband1 does it for the same purpose3 ,to get right with her ,god4 ,the devotee who throws his body before the wheels of the ,juggernaut to have it crushed as an act of devotion1 does it for the same purpose3 ,to get right with his ,god4 ,the devout ,mohammedan who bows himself to the earth five times a day1 and says his prayers with his face towards ,mecca1 does it for the same purpose3 ,to get right with ,allah4 ,the savage who repeats his incantations to his fetish that he has probably made with his own hands1 does it for the same purpose3 ,to get right with ,god as he conceives him4 ,the ,chinese that burns his sticks before the image in his ,joss-house1 does it for the same purpose3 ,to get right with his ,god4 ,and so on ad infinitum1 the same central purpose running thru it all1 whether ,hindu or ,parsee1 ,buddist or ,janist1 ,confucian or ,shintoist1 ,jew or ,gentile1 ,mohammedan or ,christian1 ,catholic or ,protestant1 ,methodist or ,baptist1 ,presbyterian or ,lutheran1 ,calvinist or ,arminian1 ,unitarian or ,trinitarian1 one and all1 have one and the same ultimate object3 ,to get into right relations with ,god1 each according to his own conception of ,god1 and what he understands to be his will concerning him4 ,however1 in the more rational interpretation of religion in these later times1 the element of fear of punishment hereafter has been almost1 if not entirely eliminated2 and the religious objective is made the highest1 noblest1 purest1 and best possible life in this world1 for its own intrinsic worth1 and without any reference to any future life1 resting firmly in the faith that he who lives right cannot die wrong4 ,hence1 religion does not consist in creeds1 dogmas1 or beliefs2 nor in forms1 ordinances1 ceremonies1 or sacraments1 as ,i was early taught to believe4 ,but these are1 one and all1 but so many varying forms of expression which religion takes4 ,they are all only so many different ways1 means and methods religion takes to attain to its ultimate purpose and aim4 ,they are only so many different paths which different men take in their search for ,god4 ,and is there but one true path to ,god1 while all the others only lead to hell8 ,and if so1 which is the right one8 ,ah1 herein lies the fruitful source of most of the world's tragedies and sufferings6 ,it was this that burned ,john ,huss1 ,savonarola and ,bruno4 ,it was this that lighted the fires of ,smithfield and hung helpless1 silly women in ,new ,england1 as witches4 ,but thank ,god1 it is abating and the dawn of a better day is in sight4 ,i have long since come to believe that all who honestly1 sincerely1 and diligently seek ,god will ultimately find him1 in some way1 at some time1 when ,god sees best to reveal himself1 no matter what method may be pursued4 ,i do not mean that all methods are equally good2 no1 not by any means4 ,the quest for ,god may be helped or hindered1 advanced or delayed1 accordingly as the methods of search may be correct or erroneous4 ,but ,i do mean to say that ,i do not believe the ,infinite ,god1 who knows the hearts of men1 and will ultimately judge them by this standard1 will forever hide1 and deny himself to any1 in whose heart ,he sees honesty1 purity1 and sincerity of purpose and motive1 because in their finite judgment1 they were unable to intellectually determine just which was the right1 or best way2--and this1 whether the searcher be ,hindu1 ,chinese1 ,pagan or ,parsee2 ,hottentot or ,arab1 savage or philosopher2 ,christian1 ,mohammedan or ,buddhist2 or any one else on earth4 ,man looketh upon the outward appearance2 but ,god looketh upon the heart4 ,and they that diligently1 honestly and earnestly seek after him will find him1--somewhere1 somehow--in this life or some other1 ,and when found1 it will not be in far-off realms of space1 but in one's own heart4 ,the outward ,god he findeth not1 ,who finds not ,god within4 ,,the ,,bible ,from the foregoing it is quite clear that religion is not something miraculously revealed from heaven1 handed down in a package already bound up1 complete and finished1 ready for use2 but that in its origin1 essence and purpose it is natural and common to all humanity alike4 ,its present status is but the result of its progressive development1 from its crudest forms in early humanity1 to the present day4 ,while forever remaining one and the same in its origin1 essence and purpose1 it has undergone changes in its forms of expression1 its means and methods1 in all ages as mankind has progressively developed upward4 ,what we call the great systems of religion1 such as ,buddhism1 ,christianity1 ,mohammedanism1 and others are but so many different forms of expression thru which religion manifests itself in human life2 and the various sects and denominations in all these systems are but further subdivisions in these forms of expression1 according to different desires1 tastes and opinions among different people4 ,hence1 religion was not produced by the ,bible1 nor is it in any way dependent upon the ,bible as a source of authority1 but just the opposite4 ,religion was long before the ,bible and itself produced the ,bible2 and the ,bible derives its sole authority from religion4 ,here is perhaps as good a place as any to answer the question that has often been asked me3 ,if the ,bible is not the ultimate source of authority in religion1 what and where is it8 ,just the same to you and me today that it was to ,noah1 ,abraham1 ,moses1 the prophets1 apostles1 and all others in all ages4 ,but were not these men divinely inspired8 ,no more than you or ,i may be1 even if we are not in fact4 ,this subject will be fully elucidated when ,i come to treat specifically of inspiration and revelation in the next subdivision4 ,the answer to this question about the source of authority in religion is clearly indicated in the very definition ,i have given of religion1 and ,i only make it more specific here to avoid any misunderstanding of my position on it4 ,if religion is a natural impulse imbedded in the heart of man which compels him to strive upward2 if it is the zest of ,life2 if it is that inner urge in all humanity that ever pushes it onward and upward2 these natural impulses themselves constitute the sole source of authority in religion4 ,thomas ,paine once said3 ,all religions are good that teach men to be good4 ,to which might well be added3 ,that religion alone is best which teaches men to live the best lives4 ,life1 not creed1 is the final test of religion4 ,to perceive what is right and what is wrong1 to cleave to the right and avoid the wrong1 is the highest1 noblest and best expression of religion4 ,now1 there is no single universal standard of right and wrong that is universally the same in its application to human life1 in all ages1 at all times1 and under all circumstances and conditions4 ,life is progressive2 and as it moves on new conditions arise1 new relations develop1 new problems present themselves1 and new and changing standards come with them4 ,for example1 human slavery and polygamy were both practiced in the days of ,abraham1 ,jacob1 ,moses1 ,david1 and ,solomon1 and for centuries afterwards2 and according to the ,bible1 with the divine sanction and approval4 ,the simple facts are1 that according to the standards of those ages1 according to the social development of the race at that time there was no moral turpitude in those practices4 ,but who would dare defend them now8 ,and yet these1 or most of them--and ,i say it reverently and sincerely--were doubtless good men1 judged by the standards of their time2 and devoutly religious4 ,coming directly now to the answer to the question3 ,the ultimate1 final authority in all matters of religion is the individual conscience1 the inner light1 that law written in the hearts of all men1 aided and assisted by all the light of the present day1 which includes all the light of the past that has come down to us1 both in the ,bible and from all other courses1 history1 science and the record of human experiences generally interpreted and applied by human reason4 ,that natural impulse imbedded in the heart of man which compels him to strive upward2 that inner urge that ever pushes him onward and upward1 will not only start him in the right way of life1 but will remain with him and guide him to the end1 if he will but hear and obey its voice1 interpreted by reason4 ,the reader will recall the opinion ,i reached concerning the ,bible after my special course of study and the process of reasoning that followed it4 ,but after fifteen years of continued study ,i changed my opinion about it again4 ,when ,i took a different perspective ,i got a different view4 ,first1 ,i was confronted with the fact that the ,bible is here4 ,and while all my inherited opinions as to its origin1 meaning and purpose were gone forever1 the second question remained unanswered3 ,how came it here8 ,after all these years of study and investigation ,i found an answer to this question satisfactory to myself1 which ,i have already indicated above1 but will here more fully elaborate as a part of my ,new ,confession of ,faith4 ,the ,old ,testament is but a record preserved and handed down to us1 first of events1 legends1 opinions and beliefs that existed in crude form as traditions1 long before a line of it was written2 and thereafter1 for a period covering approximately a thousand years1 it is a record1 tho evidently imperfect1 of the progressive development of the ,jewish race1 nation and religion1 which are so inseparably bound together that they cannot be separated4 ,let us go a little more into detail4 ,no one claims that a line of the ,old ,testament was written before ,moses4 7,and it is here immaterial whether ,moses wrote the ,pentateuch or not4 ,the ,jews believed he did47 ,yet the ,jewish system of religion1 at least in its fundamental features1 had been in existence since ,abraham1 some five hundred years before1 to say nothing of previous peoples back to ,noah1 or even to ,adam and his sons4 ,yet none of these had any ,bible whatever4 ,if it is claimed by any one that ,moses was the originator of the ,jewish system1 it leaves ,abraham and all his posterity1 down to the time of ,moses1 but pious pagans4 ,but according to the record1 ,moses added nothing to the principles of religious worship as practiced by ,abraham and the other patriarchs4 ,he simply reorganized1 systematized1 refined and somewhat elaborated the ancient system of worship1 and at most reduced it to regularity and order4 ,it was quite natural that ,moses should then reduce to writing the traditions and practices of his people1 and make a more or less complete record of their laws1 regulations1 and civil and religious institutions2 and especially of that system of religious worship which he had not originated1 but organized1 systematized and reduced to more perfect order1 so that all this might be preserved for the benefit of the people thereafter4 ,this was the beginning of the sacred literature of the ,jews which1 when completed in its present form1 was called the ,bible--meaning simply1 ,the ,books4 ,after this1 tho the ,jewish system of religion1 according to the ,jews themselves1 was finished and complete1 they had but five books of written scripture1--the ,pentateuch4 ,yet thirty-four additional books were afterwards written and added to these4 ,can these later books be quoted as authority for that which existed1 in some instances1 a thousand years before they were written8 ,certainly not4 ,but the facts are plain4 ,the system of religion already existing1 but continually progressing1 gave rise to these subsequent books1 which are merely a record of the progress1 thoughts1 feelings1 beliefs1 practices1 etc41 of this peculiar and intensely religious people4 ,thus we see that the ,old ,testament is a growth produced by1 and recording the historic development of the ,jewish race1 nation and religion4 ,it is simply the literature of a people4 ,its various parts were written by representatives of the people themselves1 many of whose names are unknown1 at various times covering a period of a thousand years1 under many varying conditions and circumstances4 ,it records in part their history1 traditions1 legends1 myths1 their beliefs1 superstitions1 hopes1 fears1 ideals and aspirations2 and the legendary deeds of their national heroes1 just as we find them in the literature of ancient ,greece1 ,rome1 ,england or ,scandinavia4 ,it contains books of law1 ritual1 maxims1 hymns1 poetry1 drama1 letters1 sermons1 denunciations1 rebukes1 warnings1 arguments1 anecdotes and biography4 ,no literature on earth is more multifarious in its contents4 ,that it contains many contradictions1 errors1 inconsistencies and incredible statements is nothing to its discredit from this viewpoint of its origin4 ,the wonder is that there are not more4 ,but that it contains only what the various writers of its different parts1 at the time they wrote1 honestly thought and believed to be true1 may be freely admitted without in the least derogating from its true value1 or adding supernatural sanctity to it4 ,the ,old ,testament considered simply as a collection of ancient ,jewish literature1 reveals to us to-day many of the stages in the national1 racial and religious evolution of ancient ,israel1 just as the literature of any nation or people reveals the same thing concerning them1--no more and no less4 ,turning now for a moment to the ,new ,testament3 ,is it the source and authority for ,christianity8 ,or just the reverse8 ,which was first of the two8 ,that which goes before is the cause of that which comes after1--not the reverse4 ,if ,christianity is to be considered as a separate and distinct system of religion1 based upon divine authority1 the system was finished1 full and complete with the resurrection and ascension of ,christ--for the argument's sake1 admitting these to be facts4 ,hence ,christianity would have existed as a fact just the same1 whether a line of the ,new ,testament had ever been written or not4 ,as a matter of fact1 not a line of it was written for twenty-five or thirty years after these events1 and it was not completed for a hundred years thereafter4 ,therefore the ,new ,testament did not produce ,christianity2 nor is it the authority upon which it is based1 but just the opposite4 ,christianity produced the ,new ,testament and is the authority upon which it is based4 ,so the ,new ,testament1 like the ,old1 is just literature1--no more4 ,it records what the authors of its various parts1 in the light of their time1 and with the knowledge they possessed1 as common1 fallible1 mortal men like ourselves1 honestly thought1 felt1 hoped and believed was the truth4 ,it gives us the only historical sketch we have of the origin and early development of that system of religion that in one form or another now dominates a third part of the human race4 ,and as such it is the most valuable book the world possesses today4 ,but it is no more the infallible ,word of ,god than the ,old ,testament1 ,herodotus1 ,josephus1 ,plato or ,plutarch4 ,the conclusion of the whole matter is3 ,the ,bible is not the supernaturally inspired1 infallible word of ,god1 given by him as the source and final authority for religion1 outside of which and since its close there is no more revelation2 but it was written by fallible men of like passions with ourselves1 who wrote1--not as they were infallibly and inerrantly guided by the ,holy ,spirit1 but--as they were moved by the same impulses1 passions and motives that have moved men in all ages to write their thoughts1 feelings1 beliefs1 hopes1 fears1 aspirations and views of life4 ,thus1 as has already been said1 the ,bible is a product of religion instead of being its source and authority4 ,thus the literature of the ,jewish race and the early ,christians grew4 ,in course of time the thirty-nine books containing our present ,old ,testament were brought together in one collection4 ,we do not know just when4 ,afterwards the twenty-seven books of our ,new ,testament were collected in the same way4 ,age and tradition first embalmed them in an air of sanctity2 and then superstition made of them a fetish4 ,until this spell is broken there can be no hope of anything like unity in the religious world4 ,until this fetish of a once for all divine and infallible revelation1 completed and handed down from heaven is abandoned1 there will continue to be diversities of interpretation1 and consequently divisions1 controversies1 bickerings1 persecutions and recriminations will continue among mankind1 and wars will continue among nations4 ,it may be said here that all the other sacred literature of the world1 the ,bibles of other systems of religion1 the ,zend ,avesta1 the ,vedas1 the ,upanishads1 the ,koran1 and others1 had their origin in exactly the same source and manner as did our ,bible2 and attained sanctity and authority among their respective followers in exactly the same way4 ,but we need not go into it in detail4 ,but when we return to our first proposition1 that all religion in its origin1 fundamental essence and ultimate purpose is not only one and the same1 but is natural and common to all humanity2 that its processes are a continual revelation in nature and human experience in man's continuous progress onward and upward in the scale of human attainment2 and that the ,bible1 and all other literature of its kind1 merely records a part of these processes and revelations in nature and experience1 by which we are able to read the footprints of human progress in the past1 and that these various writers1 mostly unknown1 merely recorded what they saw1 felt1 believed or understood at that time to be the truth2 then all these difficulties of interpretation and sources of division vanish1 and these books take on a new value and importance that they never otherwise attain4 ,with this view of its origin and purpose the ,bible readily takes and holds its place as the most remarkable and invaluable book the world has ever known1 or perhaps ever will know4 ,it becomes at once an inexhaustible treasure-house of knowledge indispensable to the world's highest thought and progress1--knowledge which cannot be obtained anywhere else4 ,in this view its many contradictions1 discrepancies1 errors of fact1 and incredible statements become at once of little force and easily accounted for2 and when we consider the various ages in which its parts were written1 the many different authors of its different parts1 the standards of human knowledge and attainment in these times1 the wonder is that there are not more4 ,the ,bible is thus the greatest book of religious instruction that the world knows1 or ever has known4 ,it contains inexhaustible treasures of religious thought1 feeling1 emotion and experience1 of every conceivable type and variety1 which makes it indeed profitable for teaching1 for reproof1 for correction1 for instruction which is in righteousness4 ,it is an inexhaustible mine of the richest and purest gold1 fused in the fires of human experience in many ages4 ,but the gold is mixed with the sand and dirt and rocks and rubbish of the human frailties and weaknesses of the ages in which it was accumulated in this mine4 ,the pure gold must be separated from this dross in the crucible of present day human intelligence1 reason and experience4 ,it is like a great river that has wound its course thru many countries and as many different kinds of soil1 receiving tributaries from many different sources and directions4 ,it contains much pure water2 but it is impregnated with the sand and dirt and mud of the channels thru which it has passed4 ,it must be filtered and these elements eliminated before it can be put to its highest and best use4 ,as a great book of religious instruction it contains riches in human experience and inspiration from which any and all may draw something to fit their particular case and need4 ,but to get the highest value1 each must separate the gold from the dross1 the pure water from the sand and mud1 according to his particular case and need4 ,used in this way and for this purpose1 the ,bible will doubtless remain the world's greatest book of religious instruction and inspiration4 ,but to persist in the claim1 in the light of present-day knowledge1 that the whole of it is a divine revelation1 supernaturally given from heaven1 and infallibly and inerrantly true1 is to perpetuate confusion and discord among men1 and cause the wisest and best among them to discredit it altogether1 as many of them have already done4 ,but to reverence it for what it really is1 a record of the religious evolution of the most intensely religious nation of antiquity1 a great race that has contributed more to the religious life of the world than any other1 is a credit to the intelligence of any one4 ,to enshrine it in superstition1 and make it a fetish1 is idolatry4 ,,inspiration ,,and ,,revelation ,i am a strong believer in inspiration4 ,but ,i believe it to be1 like religion1 natural1 in a greater or less degree1 to all peoples1 in all ages and at all times2 and not something miraculous and supernatural1 limited to a select few1 of a single race1 in a long past age1 and since then has forever ceased4 ,it is perhaps hard to define inspiration according to this view of it4 ,like religion1 its very simplicity and universality eludes any exact definition2 especially by one person for another4 ,that it has often been manifest in much greater degree in some persons than in others2 and in these much stronger at some times than at others1 is not to be doubted for a moment4 ,it is no more a uniform condition than human attainment in intelligence and character are uniform4 ,the simple dictionary definition will perhaps be adequate for our purpose1--at least as a starting point3 ,the inbreathing or imparting of an idea1 emotion1 or mental or spiritual influence2 the elevating1 creative influence of genius2 also1 that which is so inbreathed or imparted4 ,it is that elevation of mental conception usually produced by intense concentration of mind1 deep earnestness of thought1 intense interest and zeal in a special subject or cause1 or by some objective environment4 ,a few simple illustrations will convey my meaning better than any lengthy metaphysical analysis4 ,one night a long time ago1 some sage philosopher was looking out upon the heavens1 contemplating the beauties of the stars in their majesty and glory4 ,these inspired a train of thought in his mind that found utterance in the nineteenth ,psalm3 ,the heavens declare the glory of ,god1 and the firmament showeth his handiwork4444 ,this is inspiration if there ever was such a thing2 and yet there is nothing miraculous or supernatural about it4 ,it is as natural as the raindrops that fall from the clouds4 ,on another occasion some devout and intensely religious saint1 but at the same time probably a great sufferer from some adverse fortune1 beheld a shepherd taking care of his sheep1 providing for them food and water1 caring for the sick and lame and nursing them back to strength1 leading them out to pasture thru the narrow defiles of the mountains1 amidst many dangers1 yet guarding them diligently against all4 ,and this sight gave rise to reflections on the divine providence that found expression in that sublime and beautiful ,twenty-third ,psalm3 ,the ,lord is my shepherd2 ,i shall not want4 ,he maketh me to lie down in green pastures2 ,he leadeth me beside still waters2 ,he restoreth my soul4 ,what is there in all the world's literature more inspired and more inspiring than this8 ,and yet it is no more miraculous nor supernatural in its origin than the shepherd caring for his sheep4 ,inspiration is simply a condition or state of mind4 ,it is purely psychological in its nature1 and may be produced by a great variety of causes2 but is not supernatural4 ,to some extent1 and in some degree1 but by no means always equal1 it has been common among all peoples of the past2 and at all periods of their history4 ,specimens of it have come down to us in this age1 enshrined and preserved in the literature1 music and art of these peoples4 ,it is as common among men today as it ever was in any past age4 ,it is embodied in some degree1 in most1 if not all the literature1 art and music of all ages2 but by no means to the same extent in all4 ,there are passages in ,dante1 ,goethe1 ,shakespeare1 ,milton1 ,browning1 ,emerson1 ,carlyle1 ,bryant1 ,longfellow1 ,lowell1 and a thousand others1 ancient and modern1 that are just as much the products of inspiration as the ,twenty-third ,psalm or the ,sermon on the ,mount4 ,but no one would pretend to say that all that these men wrote was equally inspired1 or of equal value4 ,what then is to be the test of inspiration8 ,how are we to know what is inspired from what is not8 ,there is no absolute and infallible test4 ,the rule ,i have generally followed is what may be termed1 the test of reproduction4 ,the test of the perfect life of an oak is the production of an acorn that will produce another oak4 ,the test of all complete and perfect animal life is its power to reproduce itself in the perpetuation of its own species4 ,the test of inspiration is whether or not it reproduces its kind3--,does it inspire8 ,who can read the ,twenty-third ,psalm1 or the ,sermon on the ,mount1 the parable of the ,lost ,sheep1 or the thirteenth chapter of ,first ,corinthians without feeling the spirit of inspiration in his own soul8 ,therefore these must be inspired1 because they inspire others4 ,who can read ,emerson's essay on ,spiritual ,laws1 or ,the ,over-,soul1 and not be inspired8 or ,longfellow's ,resignation8 or ,bryant's ,lines to a ,water-fowl1 or ,thanatopsis1 and not be inspired8 ,then these must have been inspired1 or they could not inspire4 ,who today can sing the ,star ,spangled ,banner1 ,geo4 ,f4 ,root's ,battle ,cry of ,freedom1 or ,julia ,ward ,howe's ,battle ,hymn of the ,republic1 without feeling a thrill of inspiration that stirs the very depths of the soul8 ,then1 these must have been inspired4 ,time and space fail me to mention even any of the great orators of history from ,demosthenes to ,woodrow ,wilson1 who by the power of their eloquence have been able to so inspire men to action as to change the course of empires and the destiny of nations4 ,the secret of all this is that these men were themselves inspired1--not by some miraculous supernatural influence1--but by the natural intensity of their own earnestness1 sincere devotion to1 and all-absorbing interest in the cause they espoused1 until they lost themselves in their cause1 and became thus inspired1 and inspired others4 ,yes1 inspiration is as common and potent in the world today as it ever has been in any age of the past4 ,its spirit still enters into holy souls1 making them friends of ,god and prophets4 ,just a few words about ,revelation will suffice4 ,revelation has been generally looked upon as almost synonymous if not identical1 with inspiration2 or so intimately connected with it that they could not be separated4 ,what might be distinctively called revelation was the product1 or out-put of inspiration4 ,whatever truth may still remain as to these relations1 since we have seen that inspiration is not something miraculous and supernatural1 but purely and wholly natural1 there can be no such a thing as revelation in any miraculous or supernatural sense4 ,and yet1 all that man has ever learned1 accomplished1 attained to1 or achieved is a revelation4 ,man1 with all his boasted knowledge and achievement1 has never created anything2 all that man has ever done1 at his best1 has been to discover and utilize things and forces that are as old as the universe itself4 ,all the discoveries he has ever made1 all the knowledge he has ever gained1 all that he has ever accomplished or achieved1 has been the result of a continuous1 unfolding revelation from the dawn of time to the present day2 by which he has been able to discover1 utilize and appropriate to his own use and benefit1 that which has existed1 in one form or another1 eternally--all of which is a revelation1 divine1 but not miraculous4 ,a few centuries ago ,copernicus gave us a new view of the universe4 ,this was revelation4 ,but the universe had existed in exactly the same form and relations since the morning stars sang together4 ,a little later ,newton revealed to us the law of gravitation4 ,this was the first man ever knew of it4 ,but the law had existed just the same since the chaos was first reduced to cosmos4 ,the potential power of steam as a mechanical force was just as great in the days of ,noah or ,abraham as it is today4 ,but it remained for ,robert ,fulton1 but a little over a century ago1 to apply it to practical use2 and this was just as much a divine revelation as the call of ,abraham1 or the vision of ,moses on the ,mount4 ,the same is true of electricity4 ,all the multifarious uses to which it has ever been applied1 were just as potent in the days of ,shalmanezer or ,solomon as they are today4 ,every discovery and new use to which it has been applied since the day that ,franklin drew it from the clouds and corked it up in a bottle1 has only been so many new divine revelations2 as much so as the vision of ,paul before the gate of ,damascus1 or ,john on the ,isle of ,patmos4 ,in fact more so4 ,and on ad infinitum4 ,all the progress man has ever made or ever will make is only the result of this divine revelation ever unfolding itself to him1 just as fast1 and no faster than he is able to appropriate and use it4 ,thus ,god reveals himself to man1 not miraculously1 but naturally and thru nature itself1 just in proportion to man's ability to understand1 receive and appropriate it4 ,jesus is quoted as saying3 ,i have yet many things to say unto you1 but ye cannot bear them now4 ,howbeit when he1 the spirit of truth1 is come1 he shall guide you into all the truth4 ,did that spirit of truth ever come8 ,and if so when1 if ever1 was it withdrawn8 ,he said in another place that it should remain forever4 ,yes1 ,i believe that same spirit of truth is still in the world today and has been ever since man has been here1 guiding men into the way of truth just in proportion to their ability to receive it4 ,and also1 all truth is divine1 because all truth comes from the same source--,god4 ,the truth concerning the universe1 the laws of nature in the material world are thus just as divine1 as are the moral laws governing man in his social relations1 or those governing his relations to ,god4 ,and the great store-house of ,nature has not yet revealed even an infinitesimal part of her infinite riches for man's use and benefit1 that are yet to be revealed as man progresses onward and upward4 ,instead of having reached the zenith of man's discoveries and achievements1 and therefore a finished revelation1 we have not yet passed the dawn4 ,the heavens still declare the glory of ,god2 but the scientist1 philosopher1 and astronomer of today sees much more in them than does the savage1 or did the author of the ,nineteenth ,psalm4 ,and as man goes on he will see more and more of ,god in ,nature1 and understand him better1 until the final fruition of his hope and faith is reached4 ,inspiration and revelation are thus both living realities1 as much so now as at any time in the past1 and will continue so while mankind continues to inhabit this planet4 ,all the progress1 achievement and attainment mankind has ever made1 from the days of the ,cave ,man and the ,stone ,age to the present time1 are but the products1 results1 fruits of this inspiration and revelation1 that has ever impelled and led mankind onward and upward4 ,i firmly believe that the future holds in store a civilization1 social status1 human achievement1 intellectual and moral attainment on this planet1 as far above the present as this is above that of the ,cave ,man2 and as inconceivable to us now as this was to him2 and all this will be but the product1 result1 fruit of this eternal1 never-ending process of inspiration and revelation that has brought mankind to where he is today4 ,,chapter ,,viii ,,jesus ,,of ,,nazareth ,we have now reached the most interesting1 if not the most vital part of this ,confession of ,faith4 ,thus far ,i have said almost nothing about the ,man of ,nazareth4 ,what then shall ,i do unto ,jesus1 who is called ,christ8 ,the temptation is very great here to elaborate at some length upon my views of this1 the most unique character in all history4 ,i would like to give my views in full1 with all the arguments1 pro and con1 as to his personality1 character and mission4 ,but this would extend this work to an undue length4 ,some day ,i may write it more fully in another book4 ,i must be content now to give as briefly as possible the conclusions ,i have reached1 without going into any very detailed arguments to support them4 ,what do we know about ,jesus anyway8 ,he never wrote a line that we have any record of1 except a few words in the sand when the ,jews brought a sinful woman before him to accuse her2 and we know not what these words were4 ,we have no record that he ever authorized any one else to write anything for1 or about him4 ,we have three short biographies of him that were written anywhere from fifty to eighty years after his death1 the exact date of neither being known4 ,the authors of two of these--,mark and ,luke--it is admitted were not ,apostles2 and there is no evidence that either of them ever knew ,jesus in his lifetime4 ,it is admitted that each of them got all his information from another1 and that one of them got his information from a person--,paul--who himself never knew ,jesus in the flesh4 ,it is admitted that the other--,matthew--as we now have it1 is not the original writing of the ,apostle of that name2 that the original is entirely lost1 and no one knows what additions or eliminations it underwent in its translation and transcription into another language4 ,years later a fourth biography appeared by an unknown author1--tradition being the only evidence that it was written by the ,apostle ,john--so entirely different in its general make-up and contents1 that but for the name of its subject and a very few passages in it1 no one would ever take it to be about the same person that formed the subject of the other three4 ,when these four are taken together1 and all repetitions and duplications are eliminated1 it would leave us with a small pamphlet of some sixty or seventy pages as our only record of this most remarkable character of all history4 ,none of the epistolary writings throw any light on the life1 doings1 sayings or personality of ,jesus4 ,they only deal with deductions drawn from or based upon it4 ,when we add to this the fact that at least fifty years had elapsed1 after the events described had happened1 before a line of it--at least in its present form--was written2 and that in an age when few people could write and no accurate records were preserved1 and when those that did then write1 wrote only from memory or tradition2 and when we further consider the varying and often very different accounts given by the different writers of the events they describe1 differences in both the doings and sayings of ,jesus1 altho these are mostly only matters of minor detail1 yet we become more and more convinced that we have no means of knowing for certain just what ,jesus did2 nor whether or not he uttered the exact words that the writers put into his mouth4 ,compare today the memory of any individual as to the exact details of some event1 even that he personally witnessed1 fifty years ago2 especially as to the exact words used on any particular occasion1 and we will have more than a fair example of the imperfection of human memory4 ,add to this the fact that this was in a very superstitious age1 when every wonder was translated into a supernatural miracle1 and our perplexity only becomes the greater4 ,the doctrine of infallible guidance by divine inspiration is out of the question4 ,if there was no other evidence against such an idea1 the internal contents of these books themselves would forever destroy it4 ,then1 what do we know about ,jesus8 ,very little4 ,i do not accuse these writers of any deliberate misrepresentation1 conscious fraud or forgery4 ,they undoubtedly wrote what they honestly and sincerely believed at the time to be the truth4 ,but they wrote simply as fallible men like ourselves4 ,their means of information in many cases was doubtless very meager and uncertain4 ,they doubtless did the best they could under the circumstances4 ,they wrote the truth as they understood it to be truth1 just as any other historian or biographer would do today4 ,and what they wrote is all we know4 ,it is the only basis we have upon which we can form any judgment as to who or what ,jesus of ,nazareth was4 ,what ,paul may have thought of him1 and the system of theology he built thereon1 is of but little value4 ,what the ,church ,fathers may have thought1 in the light of the age in which they lived1 and their own standard of intellectual attainments1 is of less4 ,we have got to fall back upon the four gospels1 and interpret them1 not in the light of the superstitious age in which they were written2 not assuming them to be exact truth2 for in view of the fact of their own contradictions of each other on material and vital points this is impossible2 but in the full light of this age of science and exact knowledge2 of a more highly developed intelligence1 and a deeper and more accurate reasoning power4 ,with these records as a basis1 or starting point1 we must work out the problem for ourselves3 ,who and what was ,jesus8 ,first1 he was a ,jew1--born1 lived and died a ,jew4 ,there is no evidence that he ever rejected1 or abrogated the religion of his fathers4 ,that he tried to reform it1 inject into it a deeper spiritual life1 a more rational and higher ethical standard1 will more fully appear as we proceed4 ,he came not to destroy the law1 but to fulfill it1--not by dying on the cross1 for the law nowhere says1 or even intimates1 anything about anybody dying on a cross or anywhere else4 ,he came to fulfill it by living up to its full ethical and spiritual import1 and teaching others to do so4 ,moses had summed up the law in ten commandments1 the ,pharisees of the time of ,jesus had made of these ten thousand--to be exact1 six hundred and thirteen--and ,jesus reduced them to two1--and kept them4 ,this is how he fulfilled the law4 ,next1 ,jesus was the son of ,joseph and ,mary by the same process of natural generation by which all other human beings come into the world4 ,paul1 the earliest and most elaborate writer of the ,new ,testament1 nowhere gives us the remotest hint that he had ever heard of any such a thing as the supernatural birth2 and it is wholly unthinkable that if such had been the truth he should have been ignorant of it2 or that if it sustained such a vital relation to the ,christian system of religion to which he devoted his whole life1 he should never in the remotest manner refer to it4 ,mark's gospel1 written to the best of our knowledge about fifty years after the death of ,jesus1 nowhere refers to it4 ,as we have already seen1 we do not know what the ,apostle ,matthew may have written1 as we do not have his original writing at all4 ,the early ,ebionite copies of the ,greek translation and transcription did not contain the first two chapters1 and consequently no reference to the supernatural birth4 ,we are left to fall back on ,luke and we will have to examine his story a little in detail4 ,in all of its details1 including the genealogy1 it is quite different from that in ,matthew4 ,luke alone mentions the visit to ,jerusalem when ,jesus was twelve years old1 and in which he was missed from the company when they started on the return home4 ,when ,joseph and ,mary found him in the temple1 she is quoted as saying1 ,son1 why hast thou thus dealt with us8 ,behold thy father and ,i have sought thee sorrowing4 ,now1 if ,jesus was not really the son of ,joseph1 but of the ,holy ,ghost1 his mother certainly knew it2 and if so her statement1 thy father and ,i have sought thee sorrowing1 was not only a deliberate untruth2 but if ,jesus was ,god1 he also knew it was an untruth4 ,another inconsistency in the story is1 that if ,jesus was thus the son of the ,holy ,ghost1 and therefore ,god1 and his mother knew it1 why should she worry about his being missing from the caravan8 ,couldn't ,god take care of himself and find his way back to ,nazareth at any time he wished to go8 ,on another occasion1 mentioned by all the synoptics1 when ,jesus was teaching1 his mother and brethren are reported as calling for him1 evidently for the purpose of restraining him in his work1 or persuading him to desist1--and this is the interpretation that has been most generally given to these passages1 and the answer which ,jesus gave supports it as correct1--such a course is entirely inconsistent with any conception that his mother at the time knew him to be the supernaturally born ,son of ,god4 ,turning now to the ,fourth ,gospel1 we have not only an entirely different character1 but an entirely different philosophy as to his life and mission4 ,not a word is said or anywhere hinted about a divine birth4 ,in the beginning was the ,word1 and the ,word was with ,god1 and the ,word was ,god4444 and the ,word became flesh1 and dwelt among us4 ,to state it in the simplest words ,i can command1 the theory of the ,fourth ,gospel is that of the old ,alexandrian philosophy of the incarnation of the ,divine ,logos1 or ,word1 or message from ,god1 in human flesh1 applied to ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,his pure and simple manhood is recognized1 into which1 in some mystical manner1 nowhere explained1 the ,divine ,logos1 or ,word1 or ,life1 or ,god ,himself1 entered into the man ,jesus1 whereby he became the ,son of ,god and the ,messiah1--and not by the process of miraculous generation in the flesh4 ,the old ,ebionite doctrine was that this ,divine ,logos1 or ,word1 or ,spirit of ,god entered ,jesus at his baptism1 and that he thereby became the ,messiah1 distinctively the ,son of ,god by divine selection1 and not by supernatural generation4 ,there is no evidence that his disciples during his lifetime ever had the slightest conception that he had a supernatural birth4 ,when ,philip tells ,nathaniel that he has found the ,messiah of whom ,moses and the prophets wrote1 he also tells him that this ,messiah is ,jesus of ,nazareth1 the son of ,joseph4 ,even after the death of ,jesus the disciples seem to have had no knowledge of any supernatural birth4 ,the two on their way to ,emmaus1 after the crucifixion1 express their disappointment3 ,we hoped that it was he who should redeem ,israel4 ,no such expression of disappointment can possibly be reconciled with any thought that this ,jesus who had so recently been crucified was the eternal ,son of ,god incarnated in human flesh4 ,on the day of ,pentecost ,peter speaks of him in no higher terms than ,a man approved of ,god4 ,if ,jesus was supernaturally born1 as a matter of course his mother knew it all the time2 yet during the whole life of ,jesus she is nowhere mentioned as giving the slightest intimation of it2 but on the contrary all the record we have of anything she did do or say would naturally lead to just the opposite conclusion4 ,of course no one else knew anything about it4 ,taking it naturally for granted1 that at least at the beginning1 his disciples knew nothing of it1 if they ever learned it afterwards1 there must have been some special time1 condition or circumstance under which they came into possession of these remarkable facts4 ,yet1 there is not a hint in the ,new ,testament about any such time1 place1 circumstance or incident4 ,how then did the idea of a supernatural birth and the deification of ,jesus come about1 if it was not a real fact8 ,very simply and quite naturally4 ,any one acquainted with ancient history knows that in that age of the world1 and for centuries before1 it had been almost a universal custom1 especially in ,greece and the ,roman empire1 to attribute some supernatural origin to1 and deify their heroes1--sometimes while they were yet alive1 but most certainly after their death4 ,just so1 after the death of this remarkable man1 and his cult continued to gather adherents1 time and distance lent perspective1 and he naturally grew larger and greater in their estimation1 until1 naturally and inevitably1 permeated by the universal thought of the age in which they lived1 they gradually came to look more and more upon their great master as being something more than ordinarily human1 until this thought gradually ripened into his deification2 and of course to be consistent with this he must have been1 like all other deified heroes1 supernaturally born4 ,and out of this the legend of ,bethlehem1 in both its forms1 in ,matthew and ,luke1 somehow grew1--nobody knows exactly how4 ,it is just like many other myths of past ages4 ,the first we know of them they are full grown and complete2 yet1 like all other things1 they must have had a natural and gradual growth4 ,as to where he was born we do not know1 nor is it material4 ,it is by far the most probable that he was born at ,nazareth where his parents lived4 ,the legend that he was born at ,bethlehem was doubtless a pure conjecture1 made necessary by those who accepted him as the ,messiah of ,hebrew prophecy1 to make it correspond with the prophetic declaration that the ,messiah should be born at ,bethlehem of ,judah4 ,this fully accounts for the ,bethlehem story as the place of his birth4 ,the fact is they are all purely conjectural1 made to fit into some preconceived notion of his personality or character4 ,we have no reliable account whatever of his birth or early life4 ,we now come to consider the man1--yes1 the man ,christ ,jesus4 ,we have already said he was a ,jew and lived and died one1 with apparently no thought or purpose other than to reform and correct the abuses into which his people had lapsed1 and revive and intensify the deep spiritual and ethical meaning of religion4 ,born of the most intensely religious race of all antiquity1 he was the most intensely religious of his race4 ,he perceived a new conception of ,god1 not as the arbitrary ruler and vindictive judge of his people1 but as the universal ,father of all men1 not anthropomorphic1 but ,infinite ,spirit1 whose greatest attributes were love1 justice1 mercy and truth1 expressed in the great term ,fatherhood2 and that all men are children of the great ,father1 and therefore brothers4 ,this expresses his fundamental philosophy and working basis of life4 ,upon it he undertook to build up and establish1 not a new system of religion1 but a new order of life4 ,the central idea in this was man's direct relationship to ,god4 ,in his own life he embodied a perfect example of his ideal4 ,he thus became not ,god incarnate bodily in human flesh1 nor the ,son of ,god in any different sense than all are sons of ,god--except perhaps in degree and not in kind--but the most complete reflection and interpretation of ,god in terms of human life that the world had ever known before his time1 has ever known since1 or perhaps ever will know4 ,but this last statement is saying more than any man can know for certain4 ,we know not what ,god may yet have to reveal to mankind1 nor how ,he will reveal it4 ,his course of life and teaching naturally brought him into direct conflict with the prevailing order of his time4 ,we need not discuss that in detail4 ,it soon led to a violent and tragic death1 before he had fairly begun his work4 ,we cannot form any guess what might have been the result if he had been permitted to live out a normal life and continue his teaching4 ,he only met the same fate that many prophets before him had met1 and many more since4 ,if he should appear today here in ,america and pursue the same course toward public institutions and popular beliefs and practices1 he would meet with a reception little different from what he met in ,palestine nineteen hundred years ago4 ,he might not indeed be crucified on a cross2 but he would stand a good chance to be cast into jail and sent to a penitentiary for a term of years for sedition and attempting to interfere with the established order4 ,and no persons would be more active in his prosecution than some of the modern ,pharisees who occupy high places in that great institution that bears his name4 ,if he had appeared in ,europe some four or five hundred years ago1 he would have been almost dead certain to meet the same fate of ,john ,huss1 ,savonarola and ,giordano ,bruno4 ,but now1 as then1 the poor1 down-trodden and oppressed would doubtless hear him gladly4 ,there is no reliable evidence that he ever claimed to be the ,messiah of ,hebrew prophecy4 ,he is quoted on several occasions as having accepted the appellation when applied to him by others4 ,on one occasion only is he quoted as having affirmatively declared himself the ,messiah2 and that was to the woman of ,samaria1 and the whole circumstance of it renders it incredible4 ,it would certainly be a very unusual course to take1 for the ,jewish ,messiah to come and announce himself as such1 not to the ,jews themselves1 but to a very obscure1 not to say disreputable woman1 of the most despised race known to the ,jews4 ,it was however quite natural that1 after his followers had universally accepted him as the ,jewish ,messiah1 they should recall some occasional remarks that he may have made1 upon which to base this belief2 and that these remarks would finally take more concrete form1 until when written1 fifty to a hundred years after they were uttered1 they were perhaps entirely different from anything ,jesus ever said4 ,as a matter of fact there is nothing in the life or teachings of ,jesus1 as recorded in the ,new ,testament1 that at all corresponds to the personality or character of the ,messiah of ,hebrew prophecy4 ,and may ,i add here1 that the ,messiah of ,hebrew prophecy1 for whose coming the ,jews were looking at that time1 and for which most of the ,jews have been looking ever since1 is but a fiction and a myth1 born entirely out of the patriotic devotion and fervid poetic fancy of the ,old ,hebrew prophets8 ,in the days of ,israel's adversity1 when all the really unquestioned ,messianic prophecies were uttered1 the mind of prophet and people turned back to the golden days of ,david's glorious reign2 and in their intense patriotism and unfaltering faith in ,jehovah1 they hoped and believed that he would some day raise up a ,king of the line and house of ,david that would restore the ancient glory of ,israel2 and so they prophesied--the wish being father to the thought4 ,and this is all there is to ,old ,testament ,messianic prophecy4 ,and a great many of the most intelligent ,jews of the ,reformed ,school of today are beginning to think the same4 ,but if there was ever a true prophet of ,god1 a man in whom the ,god-life in human form was truly manifest1 a man supremely divine1--not by miraculous generation1 but by spiritual union with ,god1 whereby ,god indeed became manifest in human flesh1--that man was ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,and as such he becomes the eternal example for all mankind after him4 ,as a man he justly commands the highest homage that the world can give to man4 ,but make him ,god1 and the chain that connects him with man is at once broken4 ,if ,jesus was ,god1 and therefore incapable of temptation or sin1 the temptation and triumph in the wilderness becomes a farce1 without any meaning to mankind whatever4 ,but as a mortal man struggling with and overcoming the strongest temptations of life1 it has infinite significance to all mankind4 ,if he overcame as a man1 so may ,i4 ,as a god1 the sweat of ,gethsemane and the agony of the ,cross are but mockery--not equal to a single pin-prick in a whole mortal life4 ,but as a man1 struggling with the last enemy1 with eternity before him1 a means of escape at hand1 but deliberately devoting his life and his all in the most excruciatingly torturous manner known to human ingenuity in cruelty1 it becomes a spectacle to command the awe and admiration of angels4 ,jesus is indeed the savior of the world1 not by having redeemed mankind with the purchase-price of his own blood2 but by his life and words in teaching men how to live1 and by his death how to die1 if necessary1 for the right4 ,i know of no more fitting close to this my view of ,jesus1 than a quotation from ,ernest ,renan's ,apostrophe to ,jesus4 ,ernest ,renan was called an infidel because he abandoned the church of his fathers1 and with it the deity of ,jesus4 ,but he found in ,jesus the supreme model of all human life1 the most perfect and complete reflection of the ,god-life in mankind the world has ever known4 ,repose now in thy glory1 noble founder4 ,thy work is finished2 thy divinity is established4 ,fear no more to see the edifice of thy labors fall by any fault4 ,henceforth beyond the reach of frailty1 thou shalt witness from the heights of divine peace the infinite results of thy acts4 ,at the price of a few hours of suffering1 which did not even reach thy grand soul1 thou hast brought the most complete immortality4 ,for thousands of years the world will depend on thee3 ,banner of our contests1 thou shalt be the standard about which the hottest battle will be given4 ,a thousand times more alive1 a thousand times more beloved1 since thy death than during thy passage here below1 thou shalt become the cornerstone of humanity so entirely1 that to tear thy name from this world would be to rend it to its foundation4 ,complete conqueror of death1 take possession of thy kingdom1 whither shall follow thee1 by the royal road which thou hast traced1 ages of followers4 ,,liberty ,,my ,,new ,,church ,,relations ,,and ,,second ,,call ,,to ,,the ,,ministry ,i have thus outlined1 perhaps at greater length than was necessary1 the processes thru which ,i passed in my religious life from my early childhood to mature middle life4 ,i have shown how ,i was born in the bondage of orthodoxy2 and how ,i was ultimately driven to abandon1 not only it1 but religion altogether4 ,i then outlined the processes thru which ,i passed that led me to a satisfactory settlement in my own mind1 of the problems embraced in the general and comprehensive term ,religion1 which ,i have tried to describe as ,my ,new ,confession of ,faith4 ,from the time ,i left the church and ministry until ,i reached the conclusions herein outlined1 was about fifteen years4 ,i reached them purely by my own investigations1 not knowing that there was a church on earth that would accept me in its fellowship while holding them4 ,i could not perjure myself by subscribing to a creed which ,i not only did not believe1 but despised1 merely for the sake of the social prestige or business advantage such church membership might give me1 as ,i have known some to do1 and was often importuned to do myself4 ,whatever other shortcoming may be charged to my account1 it can never be said of me that ,i was untrue to my own moral convictions in these matters2 altho this tenacity to principle1 or as it was often called1 hard-headed stubbornness1 has more than once caused me embarrassment1 and put me at some disadvantage in business4 ,i could not let the tongue say what the heart denied4 ,my views of the church itself had also necessarily changed with my changed views of its theology4 ,i no longer looked upon it as an institution of supernatural sanctity and authority4 ,to me it is simply ,the ,assembly4 ,any assembly of people gathered together for the worship of ,god is a true church4 ,it does not depend upon any particular form of organization1 the maintenance and administration of any particular ordinances1 or so-called sacraments4 ,it does not depend upon ,succession1--,apostolic1 ,baptismal1 ,ordination1 organization or otherwise4 ,where two or three are gathered together in my name1 there am ,i in the midst of them4 ,this is all that is essential to a true church4 ,it depends upon unity of purpose1 rather than uniformity of belief4 ,hence1 any assembly of people1 anywhere1 united together for the worship of ,god1 striving to live better lives themselves1 and to help others to do the same1 and thus make this world better and human life happier1 meets all the essentials of a true church of ,god1 regardless of any form of organization1 ordinance1 sacrament1 creed1 belief or ecclesiastical pedigree4 ,but for years1--as will presently appear1--,i did not know that any church existed1 that would come any way near meeting this definition4 ,i naturally supposed that any organization calling itself a church was based upon belief in the ,bible as the infallible word of ,god1 and the sole source of authority in all matters of religion4 ,this ,i had completely abandoned and could never go back to it4 ,in fact ,i did not trouble myself to inquire for a possible church fellowship4 ,i supposed ,i was forever barred from any church membership whatever1 except that ,i felt a welcome in attending the ,reformed ,jewish synagogue1 where the preaching was on a high intellectual plane1 sane and rational1 dealing with modern problems instead of ancient creeds and dogmas2 and ,i liked this4 ,but ,i was not a ,jew2 and ,i knew ,i could never accept their theology4 ,all ,i could ever expect was to be a welcome visitor1 a stranger within the gate4 ,however1 ,i must go back a little4 ,some few years after ,i left the ministry of the ,methodist ,church1 and while still living not far from the last church ,i served1 a friend one day asked why ,i had left the ,church and ministry4 ,i told him very briefly a few of my doctrinal difficulties2 to which he replied1 ,ashley1 you are a ,unitarian4 ,i thought but little of it4 ,i was not really interested in churches any more anyway4 ,but he handed me a pamphlet to read and told me he was a ,unitarian back in ,ohio where he came from4 ,i read the pamphlet at his request4 ,i do not now remember what it was1 or just what it was about4 ,but ,i was impressed with the fact that the views therein expressed were very similar to my own2 and if that was ,unitarianism ,i was also probably a ,unitarian4 ,but still it aroused no special interest as there was no ,unitarian church anywhere about4 ,if there had been1 ,i might then have been led to investigate further4 ,but years went by1 and all the perceptible effect was that ,i would occasionally think how nearly ,i must be a ,unitarian1 until ,i finally determined that if ,i ever had an opportunity ,i would investigate the matter further4 ,in the summer of #aiab1 business relations led me to move to ,dallas1 ,texas4 ,passing on the street one day1 ,i noticed the sign1 ,first ,unitarian ,church4 ,a new inspiration came to me4 ,i now had an opportunity to investigate just how near my religious convictions coincided with those of this church4 ,when the church opened after the summer vacation ,i began to attend its services1 only occasionally at first1 reading in the meantime much of its literature kept at the church for free distribution4 ,i became intensely interested and by the spring of #aiac ,i was a regular attendant4 ,the more ,i read the more ,i found myself in substantial accord with what ,i understood to be the salient points of twentieth century ,unitarianism4 ,i found especially these points that impressed me very deeply3 ,it had no creed4 ,it had no specific statement of beliefs4 ,it had no doctrinal standard or test of religious faith as a condition of church membership4 ,it not only permitted1 but encouraged the greatest freedom of thought and the most searching investigation of all subjects presented for consideration1 believing firmly that truth had nothing to fear from such a course4 ,i found it had no test of membership but that of human character4 ,i found a man was judged by what he is1 and not by what he thinks or believes4 ,i found its service to be reverent and dignified1 but free from useless ceremonial4 ,the preaching by ,rev4 ,george ,gilmour1 its minister1 ,i found to be profound and scholarly1 yet deeply spiritual and inspiring1 dealing primarily with present-day religious and social problems rather than creeds1 dogmas or beliefs4 ,i was profoundly surprised and much gratified to find a church and people and minister so broad1 so liberal and so fraternal as ,i found this ,first ,unitarian ,church in ,dallas4 ,i soon found that whether ,i agreed with all other ,unitarians or not1 ,i at least had here a free and cordial fellowship for the worship of ,god and the service of man1 without any ecclesiastical harness to put on1 or any strings to limit me to prescribed bounds4 ,a new light dawned upon me4 ,the bondage of orthodoxy ,i had broken years ago4 ,but ,i wandered for years in the desert of agnosticism1 famishing and unfed4 ,i had found in my own heart the bread of life2 but ,i had no table at which to spread it--and man being a social animal as well as a religious one1 cannot live alone4 ,my name was soon on the membership roll of this church1 where ,i hope it will remain until ,i am translated1 no matter where else ,i may serve and place it4 ,it was here that ,i first found my bearings and placed my feet on the solid rock of rational religion4 ,the supreme satisfaction1 the peace of mind1 serene content1 and supernal joy of this situation ,i shall not attempt to describe4 ,those that were born in a liberal faith and have never known anything else can neither understand nor appreciate it4 ,it is indeed a new birth1 a new light1 a new life of freedom1 fellowship and fraternity in a common service for ,god and humanity4 ,,the ,,new ,,call ,,to ,,preach ,i have before described what ,i once interpreted as a divine call to preach4 ,it was the new-born enthusiasm of one who felt himself a brand snatched from the eternal burning to proclaim the same deliverance to what he believed to be a lost and ruined world2 to warn sinners to flee from the wrath to come4 ,it was then the consuming passion of a soul on fire with zeal for the salvation of all mankind from what he believed to be an overwhelming and eternal destruction that awaited them1 and might come upon them at any moment without warning4 ,and now1 having tasted of the sweets of liberty1 ,i desired to proclaim liberty thruout the land to all the inhabitants thereof1 the same liberty to those yet in the bondage of fear from which ,i had escaped and to those who were still wandering in the deserts of doubt1 looking for a haven of rest1 and not knowing that it was so near4 ,i knew that the great masses were inside of the houses in which they were born1 with the doors all bolted and the windows fastened down4 ,not a ray of light is permitted to enter there1 because a new thought might explode their delusions and disturb their repose4 ,for these there is little hope4 ,but ,i knew there were yet thousands--,i had met and talked with many of them--who1 as ,i was for years1 were wandering in the deserts1 hungering for the bread of life1 looking for a fellowship where they might have freedom of thought and conscience1 and yet join with others of like minds in the free worship of ,nature's one great ,god4 ,i would address myself to these4 ,i was so long one of them1 ,i thought my experience might be of benefit4 ,it would aid me in helping them4 ,i would tell my story of bondage1 of deliverance1 of wandering in the deserts of doubt1 of the dawning light1 of the full blaze of the sun of liberty1 of freedom and fellowship in the worship of ,god and the service of mankind4 ,i have now spent five years in this service1 the happiest and best years of my life4 ,they have been crowned with some degree of success4 ,i am not yet old4 ,i hope to be able to devote at least a score of years yet to this happy service4 ,having escaped from ,bondage to ,liberty myself1 my only ambition now is to carry the message of deliverance to others1 until they shall likewise find freedom in ,the ,fatherhood of ,god1 ,the ,brotherhood of ,man1 ,the ,leadership of ,jesus1 ,salvation by ,character instead of ,creed1 and the hope of the ,progress of ,mankind ,onward and ,upward ,forever4 ,my only regret is that ,i did not discover this way of light and liberty long before1 so that ,i might have had more years to devote to this happy service4 ,,an ,,afterword ,dear reader1 my story is finished4 ,i have had but one motive in writing it3 ,a hope that ,i may in some way help others who are still in the meshes of ecclesiastical bondage1 or disturbing doubts1 to find the way of light and liberty in a rational religious faith4 ,to what extent ,i have succeeded or failed1 only the future and my readers can determine4 ,if you have derived any benefit from it2 if ,i have been able to cast any ray of light along your pathway2 if it has helped you to solve any problem that has perplexed you1 ,i am fully repaid for the labor of writing it4 ,i have not said nearly all that is in my heart1 nor all ,i would like to say1 but all the compass of this work would permit4 ,but if ,i have stirred up in the mind of the reader a desire to know more of the questions so briefly discussed herein1 and to press his investigations further for this purpose1 ,i have little doubt as to what will be the ultimate result4 ,and just one more thing1 dear reader3 ,if this book has been of any benefit to you2 if it has helped to clear up any doubts in your mind1 and point the way toward light and liberty in your own life and experience1 may it not do as much for others8 ,it may be the saving of a life from ,bondage to ,liberty2 to that peace that passeth understanding1 in a rational religious faith1 based1 not upon dogma or creed1 but upon man's fundamental nature and need1 interpreted and applied by that highest and best light that man has1 ,,enlightened ,,reason1 for the same ,god who is the ,author of ,religion is also the ,author of ,reason4