It is unscientific to declare that dust was changed into lice.
It is not scientific to say that God caused a thick darkness over the land of Egypt, and yet allowed it to be light in the houses of the Jews.
It is not scientific to say that about seventy people could, in two hundred and fifteen years increase to three millions.
It is not scientific to say that an infinitely good God would destroy innocent people to get revenge upon a king.
258
It is not scientific to say that slavery was once right, that polygamy was once a virtue, and that ex- termination was mercy.
It is not scientific to assert that a being of infinite power and goodness went into partnership with in- sects,--granted letters of marque and reprisal to hornets.
It is unscientific to insist that bread was really rained from heaven.
It is not scientific to suppose that an infinite being spent forty days and nights furnishing Moses with plans and specifications for a tabernacle, an ark, a mercy seat, cherubs of gold, a table, four rings, some dishes, some spoons, one candlestick, several bowls, a few knobs, seven lamps, some snuffers, a pair of tongs, some cur- tains, a roof for a tent of rams' skins dyed red, a few boards, an altar with horns, ash pans, basins and flesh hooks, shovels and pots and sockets of silver and ouches of gold and pins of brass--for all of which this God brought with him patterns from heaven.
It is not scientific to say that when a man commits a sin, he can settle with God by killing a sheep.
It is not scientific to say that a priest, by laying his hands on the head of a goat, can transfer the sins of a people to the animal.
259
Was it scientific to endeavor to ascertain whether a woman was virtuous or not, by compelling her to drink water mixed with dirt from the floor of the sanctuary?
Is it scientific to say that a dry stick budded, blossomed, and bore almonds; or that the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water can cleanse us of sin; or that a good being gave cities into the hands of the Jews in consideration of their murdering all the in- habitants?
Is it scientific to say that an animal saw an angel, and conversed with a man?
Is it scientific to imagine that thrusting a spear through the body of a woman ever stayed a plague?
Is it scientific to say that a river cut itself in two and allowed the lower end to run off?
Is it scientific to assert that seven priests blew seven rams' horns loud enough to blow down the walls of a city?
Is it scientific to say that the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down for about a whole day, and that the moon also stayed?
Is it scientifically probable that an angel of the Lord devoured unleavened cakes and broth with fire that came out of the end of a stick, as he sat
260
under an oak tree; or that God made known his will by letting dew fall on wool without wetting the ground around it; or that an angel of God appeared to Manoah in the absence of her husband, and that this angel afterwards went up in a flame of fire, and as the result of this visit a child was born whose strength was in his hair?
Is it scientific to say that the muscle of a man de- pended upon the length of his locks?
Is it unscientific to deny that water gushed from a hollow place in a dry bone?
Is it evidence of a thoroughly scientific mind to believe that one man turned over a house so large that three thousand people were on its roof?
Is it purely scientific to say that a man was once fed by the birds of the air, who brought him bread and meat every morning and evening, and that after- ward an angel turned cook and prepared two sup- pers in one night, for the same prophet, who ate enough to last him forty days and forty nights?
Is it scientific to say that a river divided because the water had been struck with a cloak; or that a man actually went to heaven in a chariot of fire drawn by horses of fire; or that a being of infinite mercy would destroy children for laughing at a bald-
261
headed prophet; or curse children and childrens children with leprosy for a father's fault; or that he made iron float in water; or that when one corpse touched another it came to life; or that the sun went backward in heaven so that the shadow on a sun- dial went back ten degrees, as a sign that a miserable barbarian king would get well?
Is it scientific to say that the earth not only stopped in its rotary motion, but absolutely turned the other way,--that its motion was reversed simply as a sign to a petty king?
Is it scientific to say that Solomon made gold and silver at Jerusalem as plentiful as stones, when we know that there were kings in his day who could have thrown away the value of the whole of Palestine without missing the amount?
Is it scientific to say that Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth in glory, when his country was barren, without roads, when his people were few, without commerce, without the arts, without the sciences, without education, without luxuries?
According to the Bible, as long as Jehovah attended to the affairs of the Jews, they had nothing but war, pestilence and famine; after Jehovah abandoned them, and the Christians ceased, in a measure, to persecute
262
them, the Jews became the most prosperous of people.
Since Jehovah in his anger cast them away, they have produced painters, sculptors, scientists, statesmen, composers, soldiers and philosophers.
It is not scientific to believe that God ever pre- vented rain, that he ever caused famine, that he ever sent locusts to devour the wheat and corn, that he ever relied on pestilence for the government of man- kind; or that he ever killed children to get even with their parents.
It is not scientific to believe that the king of Egypt invaded Palestine with seventy thousand horsemen and twelve hundred chariots of war. There was not, at that time, a road in Palestine over which a chariot could be driven.
It is not scientific to believe that in a battle between Jeroboam and Abijah, the army of Abijah slew in one day five hundred thousand chosen men.
It is not scientific to believe that Zerah, the Ethio- pian, invaded Palestine with a million of men who were overthrown and destroyed; or that Jehoshaphat had a standing army of nine hundred and sixty thousand men.
It is unscientific to believe that Jehovah advertised for a liar, as is related in Second Chronicles.
263
It is not scientific to believe that fire refused to burn, or that water refused to wet.
It is not scientific to believe in dreams, in visions, and in miracles.
It is not scientific to believe that children have been born without fathers, that the dead have ever been raised to life, or that people have bodily as- cended to heaven taking their clothes with them.
It is not scientific to believe in the supernatural.
Science dwells in the realm of fact, in the realm of demonstration. Science depends upon human ex- perience, upon observation, upon reason.
It is unscientific to say that an innocent man can be punished in place of a criminal, and for a criminal, and that the criminal, on account of such punishment, can be justified.
It is unscientific to say that a finite sin deserves infinite punishment.
It is unscientific to believe that devils can inhabit human beings, or that they can take possession of swine, or that the devil could bodily take a man, or the Son of God, and carry him to the pinnacle of a temple.
In short, the foolish, the unreasonable, the false, the miraculous and the supernatural are unscientific.