💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › occult › heartbib.txt captured on 2023-01-29 at 10:09:43.
⬅️ Previous capture (2020-10-31)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
12 page printout
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
The value of this disk is $7.00. This disk, its printout, or
copies of either are to be copied and given away, but NOT sold.
Bank of Wisdom, Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
**** ****
THE HEART
OF THE BIBLE,
Where the Prophets Prophesy
Falsely, and the Priests Bear
Rule By Their Means
by
MARSHALL J. GAUVIN
The
Truth Seeker Company
49 Vesey Street New York
**** ****
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
By MARSHALL J. GAUVIN.
I am going to do what I have never done in my life -- I am
going to base my address upon a Bible text. You will find my text
in the thirty-first verse of the fifth chapter of Jeremiah; "The
prophets prophesy falsely and the priests bear rule by their
means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in
the end there-of?" And just to show you that I might have two
texts, if I needed that many, I will call up as a witness a verse
which stands in the next column -- the thirteenth verse of the
sixth chapter: "For from the least of them even unto the greatest
of them every one is given to covetousness; and from the prophet
even unto the priest every one dealeth falsely."
"The prophets prophesy falsely and the priests bear rule by
their means." False prophets prophesied and by means of these
false prophecies the priests controlled the people. Hence, both
prophets and priests dealt falsely with their fellowmen. So says
the Bible. I thoroughly believe in these parts of the Bible. I
believe, moreover, that not only in ancient Judea did priests
control their fellowmen by appealing to false prophecies; I am
satisfied that in America, today, priests still fool the people
with the same superstition based upon the same false prophecies.
The evidence of this will become clearer as we proceed.
Charles Foster Kent, one of the greatest biblical scholars
of the English speaking world, a man who because of his great
learning is Wolsey Professor of Biblical Literature at Yale
University, recently came to Minneapolis, on invitation, to
deliver several addresses on the modern scientific conception of
the Bible. Assuming that the world has advanced somewhat since
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
1
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
the dark ages of Christianity Professor Kent came to this city
believing, doubtless, that thoughtful people here would pay
respectful attention to the conclusions of science concerning one
of the most important questions that can be of interest to the
human mind -- the question of the origin and value of the Jewish
and Christian Scriptures. The eminent scholar received, for the
most part, the courteous hearing he deserved. So far, good. The
time has come to tell the truth, and the whole truth, about the
Bible and religion, and the man who is unwilling that the truth
should be told is the enemy of his fellowmen.
But one man in Minneapolis made himself conspicuous by the
adverse attitude he assumed towards Professor Kent and his
message. Dr. Riley, the man who advertises his name in large
letters and his subjects in small print, the man who expounds a
theology that is barbaric, our leading pulpit reactionary -- Dr.
Riley got the idea that by means of a barrage of religious smoke
be might obscure the light of reason which the master of biblical
learning was diffusing in the intellectual atmosphere of this
city. He therefore engaged the Auditorium, and invited us all to
hear his great sermon on "Professor Kent, or Cutting the Heart
Out of the Bible."
I heard Dr. Riley's sermon, and this morning I want to tell
you something about it. But before the reply to that strange
pronouncement, a word of explanation.
I should have preferred to answer Dr. Riley's attack on
truth -- for that is what it was -- when face to face with him on
the same platform. I accordingly sent him a courteous and
friendly challenge to meet me in joint debate at the Auditorium,
on the question, "Is the Bible the Inspired and Authentic Word of
God?" I was satisfied when I wrote my letter that Dr. Riley would
not debate. Therefore I was prepared for his refusal when, in
referring to my challenge in his sermon at the Auditorium last
Sunday night, he said: "Of course, I'll not debate with him. I'm
here to preach to those people, but I'll debate this question
with any woman who is teaching my child evolution in school."
Later in his sermon, with characteristic logic the good man told
of having once enjoyed witnessing a fight in which a big boy, who
had beaten a little one, was in turn soundly beaten by another
little fellow who asked: "Why don't you take somebody your own
size." So the gentleman who would not debate with me thinks that
to debate with a school-ma'am would be to take somebody his own
size! But I am sure his argument would suffer disaster at the
hands of any intelligent school teacher who has spent a little
time in the study of religious questions.
Professor Kent holds that the Bible is not a supernatural
book. He holds that it is a collection of myths and legends
interwoven with various elements of more or less historical and
moral value. This at once reduces the Bible to a human book, and
by the same token it reduces Dr. Riley's religion to a
superstition. It is therefore because Professor Kent throws away
as myths the virgin birth, the miracles, the resurrection and the
blood atonement of Christ, along with all the miraculous features
of the Old Testament, that Dr. Riley charges him with "cutting
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
2
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
the heart out of the Bible." The heart of the Bible, therefore,
according to Dr. Riley, is its supernatural character. And so in
reply to Dr. Riley, I ask today: Is the heart of the Bible sound?
That is to say, Is the alleged supernatural character of the
Bible a reality or a myth?
When Dr. Riley began his sermon by declaring that his
objective was to reach the teachers and students in the
university and in the high schools, I thought he might have
something really worth while to tell us -- something of sound
fundamental value. When a man presumes to teach teachers and
serious-minded students, he ought to have something to say.
What, then, did Dr. Riley tell the teachers and students --
whom he asked to show their presence by rising -- as well as the
others of us who made up his vast audience of twenty-five hundred
people? Let us begin with his text. He read the thirty-sixth
chapter of Jeremiah. That chapter says that Jeremiah dictated
certain words to a scribe who wrote them down in a roll; that
Jeremiah had received the words from God; that the words were
read to Jehoiakim, the king, and that the king, disapproving of
the document, cut it up with his pen-knife and threw it into the
fire, where it was consumed. The statement that Jehoiakim cut up
the word of God Dr. Riley took for his text, and with the act of
Jehoiakim who cut up God's word, the reverend gentleman compared
the work of Professor Kent who has cut the heart out of the
Bible.
A clever comparison. But let us examine it. If the words in
the roll were God's words, how does it happen that Jeremiah
dictated them to the scribe" Why did not God dictate them
himself? Could he not speak to the scribe as well as to Jeremiah?
How is it that we can never get the words of God except through
some self-appointed prophet or priest? If God wished to convey a
message to me, why did he first tell it to somebody else?
Moreover, if the words in question really came from God, the king
must have known it, or must have had good reason to believe it.
Why, then, did he mutilate and cast into the fire what he must
have regarded as a divinely inspired manuscript? Is it not the
fact that the king destroyed the roll evidence amounting to proof
that he did not believe the claim that the document contained the
words of God? The logic of the situation certainly implies that.
And if the king of the Jews was satisfied that Jeremiah was a
false prophet, why should we believe otherwise? Unwittingly, Dr.
Riley gave his case away by resting it upon a story whose logic
testifies against his claims.
But this is not all. The Bible itself proves -- if it proves
anything -- not by implication alone but by fact, that the story
read by Dr. Riley is false -- that Jeremiah was a false prophet.
In the same thirty-sixth chapter of Jeremiah, at the thirtieth
verse, it is said that God made the following prophecy concerning
the punishment he was going to inflict upon Jehoiakim for
destroying a part of the Bible: "Therefore thus saith the Lord of
Jehoiakim king of Judah; he shall have none to sit upon the
throne of David: and his dead body shall be cast out in the day
to the heat, and in the night to the frost." It is here stated
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
3
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
that Jehoiakim was to have no successor upon his throne, and that
his unburied body was to remain exposed to the weather. But 2
Kings xxiv, 6, shows that neither of these things happened. The
book of Kings says. "So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and
Jehoiachin, his son, reigned in his stead." The Bible itself, I
repeat, proves Jeremiah's prophecy false; and this false
prophecy, mark you, is a part of the story Dr. Riley took for his
text. "The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule
by their means."
Dr. Riley insisted that the Bible is the word of God
because, in numerous places in it, you may find such declarations
as this: -- "Now the word of the Lord came unto the prophet
saying," and "Thus saith the Lord." But does Dr. Riley not know
that Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Mrs. Eddy, and numerous other
religious people, some of them frauds and some of them mistaken,
have claimed that their notions came from God? And does he not
know his Bible well enough to know that a vital part of the story
from which he took his text is shown by the book of Kings to be
false?
Dr. Riley told us that Moses went up into the mountain, and
that God, with his own finger, wrote the decalogue on tables of
stone. But if God is a spirit, as Dr. Riley believes, what sort
of a finger can he have? Fancy God using his spiritual finger as
a chisel with which to carve letters on flat stones. In
imagination I can see the stone chips flying in all directions as
God's finger ploughed through the granite. Let me tell you the
truth -- which Dr. Riley did not tell -- about this God-writing-
the-decalogue - on - tables-of-stone-with-his-own-finger
business. In the thirty-fourth chapter of Exodus, you will find a
list of ten commandments. These commandments are said to be an
exact reproduction of those which were on the tables of stone
which Moses broke, and which are reported to have been written by
the finger of God. Now if you will examine this decalogue you
will find that it deals largely with feasts and sacrifices, and
that it contains not a word against stealing, or killing, or
adultery, or bearing false witness; not a word in favor of
honoring father and mother. Indeed it does not deal with moral
questions at all; it deals solely with religious observances. Yet
this set of ten commandments, although it is scarcely known at
all to ordinary Christians, is the Bible's original decalogue.
The popularly known version of the decalogue, found in the
twentieth chapter of Exodus, is the one which deals with moral
principles; but the Bible nowhere represents this series of
commandments as having been written by the finger of God. In
saying that the decalogue was written by the finger of God, Dr.
Riley, who was thinking of course of the ethical commandments,
misrepresented the Bible. The commandments which the Bible says
were written by the finger of God are wholly worthless; for those
that have value, no other authorship than that of man is claimed.
These two strikingly different versions of one of the outstanding
landmarks in the Bible go to prove the soundness of Professor
Kent's conclusion that the Bible is a product of evolution --
that it gradually grew into its present form.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
4
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
Dr. Riley ought to know that the whole story of Moses's
dealings with God on Mount Sinai is a myth; he ought to know that
biblical scholars have shown that the earliest parts of the Bible
were not written until about 500 years after Moses is supposed to
have died, and he ought to know that there is not a bit more of
evidence for the existence of Moses than there is for the reality
of an individual named Jack Frost.
Dr. Riley quoted, without mentioning any name, a great
professor" who said that "eight solid centuries passed before any
theologian questioned the plenary inspiration of the Bible." Such
a statement, coming from a man who pretends to be educated, is
quite amazing. Is Dr. Riley not aware of the fact that the Jewish
priests edited and changed their writings for centuries and that
the question as to which books should be included in the Old
Testament was not settled until the close of the first century of
the Christian era? Does he not know that for centuries Christian
theologians differed from one another as to which books, selected
from a large mass of Christian writings, should be considered as
belonging to the New Testament and regarded as inspired? Has he
not heard that church councils tried to decide by a majority vote
that certain books were inspired and that others were not, and
that, with respect to different books, the verdict of one council
was reversed by the vote of another? Is he not aware that today
the Catholic version of the Bible contains several books which
Catholics hold to be inspired but which Protestants reject as
uninspired? In a word, does he not know that the dogma of
inspiration is a human invention, built up and foisted upon the
world by priests? "The prophets prophesy falsely and the priests
bear rule by their means."
But suppose it were true that the doctrine of inspiration
was not questioned by any theologian during a period of eight
hundred years. That certainly would not prove that the Bible is
inspired; rather, it might prove no more than that no theologian
was willing to risk his life at the hands of a persecuting
church; for in those awful centuries, the murderous Christian
church was ready to strike with death the man who dared to oppose
her creed.
This religious "champion" who will not defend his
superstition in public debate, but who is perfectly willing to
argue against science with a school-ma'am, has the audacity to
say that the practice of calling the inspiration of the Bible in
question "did not curse the Christian centuries," that it
"belongs to the twentieth century." According to this man,
therefore, it is an accursed thing to question a religious
fiction that was invented by priests. But let us examine a little
more closely the reverend gentleman's peculiar notion as to this
matter. The centuries when the Bible filled the world with its
authority were centuries of religious persecution -- centuries of
tortures inflicted and agonies endured in the precious name of
Christ. Let me give you one illustration. A few years ago I saw
in the Eden Musee, in New York, a wax representation of one of
the tortures of the Inquisition. By means of an iron band around
one of his wrists, a man was suspended from a chain attached to
the ceiling of a dungeon. Around one of the man's ankles there
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
5
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
was another iron band to which a chain was secured, and dangling
from the end of that chain was a weight of some twenty-five or
thirty pounds. Let me hasten to say that where the iron bands cut
into the flesh -- at the hand and foot -- blood was flowing;
while the features of the martyr bore the awful impress of agony
and grim despair. Crouching behind this victim of the church, in
a corner of the dungeon, were his wife and children with swollen
hearts and eyes inflamed with tears. Perhaps that man was
suspected of having expressed the charitable view that God would
not burn a good unbeliever forever, and for that mild heresy the
church had fallen upon him. And he was to endure that frightful
torture until he confessed, and then he was to be burnt alive.
The picture represented one of the practices of triumphant
Christianity as exemplified in the ferocious Inquisition, in
Spain, in Italy, in France, in Germany and in other Christian
countries, during the frightful centuries when the man who dared
to question the authority of the Bible forfeited his life. But
thanks to the blessed influence of skepticism, which Dr. Riley
denounces, the time came when the red hand of the church was
wrenched from the throat of a suffering world; and the religious
liberty of our time is the glorious child of that rationalistic
spirit which says to the Christian: "You shall not persecute your
fellow man on the strength of your belief that the Bible is the
word of God." In denouncing as a curse the spirit which questions
the authority of the Bible, Dr. Riley is denouncing as a cure the
fact that increasing culture and advancing civilization have come
to protect the sane man from the fanaticism of believers drunk on
that priestly concoction -- the inspiration of the Bible.
"History," says Dr. Riley, "is consistently illustrating the
permanency of the Bible." Is that statement true? It certainly is
not. I assume, of course, that by the "permanency of the Bible,"
Dr. Riley means the unimpaired authority of the Bible. As to
that, let us see. Only a few centuries ago the Bible was regarded
as the final authority which proved that the earth is flat; that
this is the only world in existence; that it is the center of the
universe; that the sun travels around it every day; and men who
differed with this ignorance were, on the authority of the Bible,
burnt alive. Until a little while ago the Bible upheld the
Inquisition, burnt women as witches, championed the despotism of
kings, fanned the flames of religious wars, and bound shackles to
the limbs of millions of slaves. Dr. Riley is from the South, and
he knows that many of his relatives fought in the greatest of
civil wars in defense of human slavery, because, among other
reasons, slavery is upheld by the Bible. But we have advanced,
and the man who would today quote the Bible in defense of any of
the follies or crimes I have mentioned, would be laughed at by
thoughtful people.
Assuredly, the Bible as a book is relatively permanent; so
is the book of AEsop's Fables; so are the tales of the Arabian
Nights; but the authority of the Bible in matters of science and
history and morals has gone from the cultured world forever.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
6
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
Voltaire, Paine and Ingersoll, and the other men who have
criticized the Bible, Dr. Riley avers, "are dead and forgotten,
and yet the book abides." But Voltaire is not forgotten; his
works are read throughout the world; and the glory of the
Rationalistic civilization of modern France is destiny's tribute
to the genius of the greatest mind ever produced by the French
race.
Thomas Paine forgotten! He has more readers today than he
ever before had; his influence against superstition is a growing
influence; and only a little while ago the man who fought on two
continents for the liberty of body and mind came very near being
elected to America's Hall of Fame, where, in a little while, he
will be honored with this country's immortals.
Ingersoll forgotten! Ingersoll, whose rich humanity, touched
with poetry, gave pathos and music to human speech; Ingersoll,
who glorified all the virtues of life and love and home;
Ingersoll, whose logic reaved the heavens of a heartless phantom
who would gloat forever over the victims of his revenge;
Ingersoll, whose radiant personality diffused a magnetic charm,
whose home life was as beautiful as the most ideal heaven
realized, and whose twelve volumes of eloquence, wisdom and
humanity constitute a Bible infinitely more noble than that which
Christians worship as the word of God! Ingersoll forgotten? But
why argue the point? The giants of Freethought are surely not
forgotten when even Dr. Riley has to mention them.
Dr. Riley was good enough to mention a number of theologians
-- Kuenen, Wellhausen, Driver, Kirkpatrick and others -- who have
produced and systematized the evidence that the Bible is a human
book, and then with a wave of the hand he brushed aside the
scholarship of these mighty men as a worthless thing. Then,
railing against "modernism," which is the scientific view of
religious questions, the progressive intellectual spirit of
today, this sensational preacher, who would debate with a school
ma'am, dared to refer to these masters of modern culture as
"these fool professors."
But is Dr. Riley a scholar? Does be know the questions
involved in biblical study in a fundamental way? Is not his
knowledge circumscribed within the narrow limits imposed by
Baptist theology? I judge from what I heard him say. But the men
he sneeringly calls "fool professors" are scholars; they have
studied the Bible in the languages in which it was written; they
are familiar with the history, the institutions and ideas out of
which the Bible was born; and they have traced through various
changes the growth of the myths and legends of which that book is
largely composed. Yet Dr. Riley, with that confidence which is
strong in proportion as knowledge is lacking, or with a less
admirable mental disposition, would label these men as "fools"
and banish them from the world's seats of learning. Well, he
cannot succeed, and it is encouraging to remember that no fact
ever yet was destroyed by the mere noise of a bagpipe.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
7
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
I should like to invite Dr. Riley's attention to this
alternative. He either knows the facts which are found in the
writings of the scholars he condemns, or he does not. If he does
not know these facts, he is presuming on his ignorance; if he
does know these facts, he is presuming on the ignorance of his
supporters; for the culture of today is a challenge to the
intelligent brain to know the truth about the Bible and remain an
orthodox believer in it.
What would you think of one who would dare to sneer at
physiologists, calling them fools, and then triumphantly deny the
circulation of the blood? What would you think of a man who
professed to be well informed in mathematics, and yet argued that
a part is equal to the whole? Yet that precisely is the attitude
of Dr. Riley in religion. If Dr. Riley had a, little more logic
and a few more facts, he might qualify as a teacher; as it is, he
is only a D.D. -- a Dispenser of Darkness.
Why does Dr. Riley despise, or pretend to despise, the
modernists? I will tell you. He is against them because they have
shown that the Adam and Eve story is a myth; that man never fell
into sin by disobeying God -- never brought upon himself the
curse of eternal damnation; that civilization was never destroyed
by a universal flood; that God never turned the river Nile into
blood, never filled the houses of the Egyptians with frogs; that
God never put himself on record as being in favor of slavery,
polygamy, religious persecution and wars of extermination; that
no prophet ever ascended into heaven in a chariot of fire; that
50,070 persons were not killed, in one grand slaughter, for the
crime of looking into a wooden box; that a fellow named Daniel
did not live all night unharmed in a den with hungry lions; and
that scores of other such pious tales are not a bit more true
than the sermons of Baptist preachers. In brief, Dr. Riley fights
the critics because they have shown, and conclusively shown, that
the supernatural character of the Bible is a myth; that the heart
of that book is unsound; that Dr. Riley's religion is built on
fallacies and fables.
Dr. Riley's quarrel with Professor Kent arises chiefly from
the fact that Professor Kent in his "Shorter Bible," rejects the
alleged virgin birth of Christ, and explains away the
resurrection, the miracles, the blood atonement. Christ is
represented as having been a man -- an entirely human being --
and all the supernatural embroidery of the Gospel story is
accounted for as the product of evolution in religious thought.
This makes the story natural, human, and fits it, or tries to fit
it, into the procession of historical events.
But Dr. Riley will not have Jesus the man. He knows that on
any human foundation the Baptist religion must perish as a
superstition. So he wants a God who died to save us from the hell
he himself had made after we have been properly baptized by
immersion!
The dear Doctor complained bitterly that the Professor has
"mutilated" the account of the virgin birth. The virgin birth! --
a miracle that all nature denies. Dr. Riley should know that not
only is there no evidence whatever for the virgin birth of
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
8
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
Christ, but that there is not a line of evidence to prove that
Christ ever lived at all, But taking the story as it stands in
the Gospel, he ought to know that according to the first chapter
of Matthew, Joseph and Mary were husband and wife when it was
discovered that Mary was to become a mother. He ought to know,
further, that both Matthew and Luke try to show that Christ was
of the house of David, and accordingly trace the descent of
Joseph through the royal line, thus plainly implying their belief
that Joseph was Christ's father. Nothing can be clearer than that
it was the intention of the writers of the genealogies of Joseph
to show that Jesus was the son of Joseph. That is common sense.
But Dr. Riley does not want common sense; he wants religious
dogma. Ah, but he would appeal to common sense if he were brought
face to face with a virgin birth story today. Suppose a young
woman of Minneapolis were to declare that the father of her child
was a Holy Ghost, do you think Dr. Riley would believe the story?
It is only when you go back far enough into history, to the
foundation of a religion, that a plain fiction becomes a pious
fact!
And the resurrection and ascension of Christ -- what of
these miracles? Dr. Riley classes Professor Kent among the fools
because he does not believe these fairy tales. Well, suppose a
devout member of his congregation came to Dr. Riley and told him
that while passing through the cemetery yesterday, he saw the
door of one of the vaults gently open, and lo! as he looked, a
Christian gentleman who died and was buried some time ago walked
out of the vault in his grave clothes, alive and apparently well.
Do you think, once more, that Dr. Riley would believe the story?
What would be regarded as a deliberate untruth, or as an evidence
of mental derangement, when viewed at close range becomes divine
inspiration when placed in the hazy distance of religion's dawn.
Christ ascended into heaven, says Dr. Riley. Very well, but
which way did he go? If he left at noon, he went in the direction
we call up. If he left at midnight, he went in the direction
exactly opposite. The direction we call "up" changes every moment
with the continuous revolution of the earth.
Dr. Riley says Christ went "up," but science replies that
there is no "up."
Dr. Riley complains that Professor Kent's theories lead
straight to Unitarianism. But what of that? Unitarians are good
people, and in the matter of religious common sense they come
very close to Freethinkers. And among the statesmen and literary
men of this country, the Unitarians are as remarkable for their
number and ability as the Baptists are conspicuous for their
absence. Moreover, in the Bible, Unitarians figure far more
prominently than Baptists. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, were
Unitarians. Christ, if he lived, was a Unitarian, and so was
Paul. These men were of the opinion that one God was quite
enough, and that view is the essence of Unitarianism properly so-
called. Dr. Riley, of course, has a combination of three Gods in
one, but that notion gets no real support whatever from the
Bible. It is worthy of note that the only verse in the Bible in
which the three heavenly witnesses are mentioned was thrown out
as a forgery by the makers of the Revised Version.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
9
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
Dr. Riley's pet aversion is the science of evolution. Over
and over again in his sermon he attacked the doctrine, now
accepted by the entire educated world, that all living things
have developed from lower forms. And, as you will recall, this is
the question he is willing to debate with the schoolma'am.
Indeed, he ought to be very good in a debate on this question
with a lady, particularly a young lady, for he has had some
experience, and he has a victory to his credit. Yes, he once
convinced a girl of nineteen, a Columbia University student, that
evolution is all wrong, It happened in this way. He met the girl;
the conversation turned to the subject of evolution; and the
following dialogue ensued: "Do they teach evolution at Columbia?"
"Oh, yes." "Do you believe in it?" "Why, yes, don't you?" "No."
"You don't believe in evolution?" "No." "And you say you are an
educated man?" "I have had a college education." "Well, why don't
you believe in evolution?" And then for one whole hour he poured
out his soul to that girl in defense of the Bible against
evolution. And the girl, completely overcome -- convinced if not
enlightened -- said to him: "I wish my father could have been
here and heard your great plea for the truth." No wonder Dr.
Riley likes to argue with ladies. They flatter him and make him
think he's smart!
But in his defense of the Bible against evolution, did Dr.
Riley tell the girl of the numerous contradictions that are to be
found in the first and second chapters of Genesis? Did he tell
her that according to the first chapter the earth, in the
beginning, was completely enveloped in water, and that according
to the second chapter the earth was originally a dry plane? Did
he tell her that according to the first chapter the trees were
made, before man, while the second chapter says they were made
after man? Did he tell her that according to the first chapter
all the beasts of the field were made before man, but that the
second chapter plainly declares that the beasts were made after
man? Did he tell her that if the first chapter is true the man
and the woman were made together, after all other things had been
formed, but that if the second chapter is to be believed, the man
was made alone, and then the beasts were made, and finally the
woman was manufactured from one of the man's ribs? In short, did
he tell the girl, what every biblical scholar now knows, namely,
that there are two completely contradictory accounts of the
creation side by side in Genesis, and that both of these accounts
are Babylonian myths? He certainly did not. And it is because he
is unwilling to face these proofs that his creation stories are
utterly without scientific value, that he writes me of his being
"not at all disposed to debate with unbelieving men."
Dr. Riley does not believe in evolution, and with a pride
that is truly pathetic he sneers at the most comprehensive,
illuminating and constructive science ever grasped and unfolded
by the intellect of man.
But stay a moment, Dr. Riley. When you have finished with
your denunciation of evolution, I want you to come over here and
sit down beside this anthropoid ape from the African forest,
while I tell this audience some very meaningful facts in your
hearing. Passing over the evolution of living things from the
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
10
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
simplest forms of life up to this ape, I want to call your
attention to the essentially human characteristics of this
animal. This ape stands nearly six feet high -- a powerful man-
like creature. I recognize him as a relative of mine and I am
satisfied that he is a relative of Dr. Riley's. This ape has two
hundred bones in his skeleton; So has Dr. Riley. This ape has
three hundred muscles; so has Dr. Riley. This ape's body is
covered with hair; so, in lesser degree, is Dr. Riley's. This ape
has a four-chambered heart; precisely the same kind of a heart
beats in the breast of Dr. Riley, This ape has thirty-two teeth,
set in a certain definite order in his jaws; Dr. Riley has the
same number and kind of teeth correspondingly arranged. This
ape's brain is built up of ganglionic cells, and consists of the
cerebrum, the cerebellum, the corpus callosum, the medulla
oblongata and the hippocampus minor; Dr. Riley's brain is
composed of the same kind of cells and has the same parts.
Indeed, bone for bone, muscle for muscle, nerve for nerve, the
ape and the man agree -- even to the rudiment of the tail! This
ape has four or five joints at the base of his spine -- the
lingering relic of an ancestral tail; and at the base of his
backbone, Dr. Riley carries the same conclusive proof that his
remote ancestors -- the primitive Baptists -- swung from the
limbs of trees by their tails. In one important respect alone,
relatively speaking, the man surpasses the more humble creature
-- in the development of the brain. But who shall say that in
several hundred thousand years Nature could not raise the low
forehead of this lesser brother high enough to enable him to
preach sermons denouncing knowledge and praising superstition?
It is of no use for Dr. Riley to deny the truth. All the
facts of animal and plant life contribute their force to prove
the truth of evolution, and in the whole field of thought there
is no other explanation of the rise of living things. In fighting
the doctrine of evolution, Dr. Riley is like the man who thinks
that by holding a straw hat before his eyes he can darken the
sun. The truth is with us to abide. The creed must disappear.
Dr. Riley's sermon was delivered; the evening passed; and as
I left the Auditorium, I tried to recall one unassailable truth,
one conclusive argument, one striking example of healthy,
rational thought, one certain indication that the man who would
teach teachers has grasped the essential scope and meaning of the
broad scientific culture of our time; but I could not do it. We
were again told that "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from
all sin"; that Freethinkers are unhappy; that skeptics should not
be allowed to teach in our schools; and that the philosophy of
today is the climax of foolishness. Indefensible assertions were
uttered with complete ministerial assurance. But nothing was
argued in a scientific way; nothing was proved; the whole sermon
was inadequate, hollow, pitiful. Twenty-five hundred people
listened attentively to a discourse that was so lame, so
medieval, so childish, so barren of cultural worth, that a lover
of truth, one who knows the importance of time and knowledge in
human life, might well have wept.
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
11
"THE HEART OF THE BIBLE."
Dr. Riley complains that he cannot get into the University
of Minnesota to address the students as often as be used to.
Well, "there's a reason," and that reason is our ground for hope.
The school is freeing itself from the dead hand of the church.
Science is completing its divorcement from superstition. The
purpose of the school is to teach what somebody knows --
practical facts for the conduct of life. The church is a stranger
to truth. Founded on fallacies, her teachings grope in a mirage
of mythology. When education becomes completely free from the
impediment of religion, humanity will surge forward upon the
broad highway of intellectual and moral advance. In the school
from which Dr. Riley's teachings are excluded there is hope for
real education.
**** ****
From a lecture delivered before the Twin City Rationalist
Society, in the Lyric Theater, Minneapolis, Minn., Sunday
morning, Nov. 20, 1921; being a reply to Dr. W.B. Riley's sermon
on "Professor Kent; or, Cutting the Heart Out of the Bible."
**** ****
GAUVIN'S WRITINGS:
Aims of Freethought ........................ 10 cents
Bible a Dangerous Moral Guide .............. 15 cents
Did Jesus Really Live? ..................... 15 cents
Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? ............. 15 cents
Gauvin-Olson Debates ....................... 75 cents
Illustrated Story of Evolution ................ $1.00
Is There a Life After Death? ............... 20 cents
Is There a Real God? ....................... 20 cents
Story of Evolution .......................... 5 cents
Why the World Is at War. ................... 15 cents
**** ****
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
The Bank of Wisdom is a collection of the most thoughtful,
scholarly and factual books. These computer books are reprints of
suppressed books and will cover American and world history; the
Biographies and writings of famous persons, and especially of our
nations Founding Fathers. They will include philosophy and
religion. all these subjects, and more, will be made available to
the public in electronic form, easily copied and distributed, so
that America can again become what its Founders intended --
The Free Market-Place of Ideas.
The Bank of Wisdom is always looking for more of these old,
hidden, suppressed and forgotten books that contain needed facts
and information for today. If you have such books please contact
us, we need to give them back to America.
**** ****
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
12