The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll.
Vol. 8.
by Robert G. Ingersoll.
INTERVIEWS
THE BIBLE AND A FUTURE LIFE
_Question_. Colonel, are your views of religion based upon the Bible?
_Answer_. I regard the Bible, especially the Old Testament, the same as I do most other ancient books, in which there is some truth, a great deal of error, considerable barbarism and a most plentiful lack of good sense.
_Question_. Have you found any other work, sacred or profane, which you regard as more reliable?
_Answer_. I know of no book less so, in my judgment.
_Question_. You have studied the Bible attentively, have you not?
_Answer_. I have read the Bible. I have heard it talked about a good deal, and am sufficiently well acquainted with it to justify my own mind in utterly rejecting all claims made for its divine origin.
_Question_. What do you base your views upon?
_Answer_. On reason, observation, experience, upon the discoveries in science, upon observed facts and the analogies properly growing out of such facts. I have no confidence in anything pretending to be outside, or independent of, or in any manner above nature.
_Question_. According to your views, what disposition is made of man after death?
_Answer_. Upon that subject I know nothing. It is no more wonderful that man should live again than he now lives; upon that question I know of no evidence. The doctrine of immortality rests upon human affection. We love, therefore we wish to live.
_Question_. Then you would not undertake to say what becomes of man after death?
_Answer_. If I told or pretended to know what becomes of man after death, I would be as dogmatic as are theologians upon this question.
The difference between them and me is, I am honest. I admit that I do not know.
_Question_. Judging by your criticism of mankind, Colonel, in your recent lecture, you have not found his condition very satisfactory?
_Answer_. Nature, outside of man, so far as I know, is neither cruel nor merciful. I am not satisfied with the present condition of the human race, nor with the condition of man during any period of which we have any knowledge. I believe, however, the condition of man is improved, and this improvement is due to his own exertions.
I do not make nature a being. I do not ascribe to nature intentions.
_Question_. Is your theory, Colonel, the result of investigation of the subject?
_Answer_. No one can control his own opinion or his own belief.
My belief was forced upon me by my surroundings. I am the product of all circumstances that have in any way touched me. I believe in this world. I have no confidence in any religion promising joys in another world at the expense of liberty and happiness in this.
At the same time, I wish to give others all the rights I claim for myself.
_Question_. If I asked for proofs for your theory, what would you furnish?
_Answer_. The experience of every man who is honest with himself, every fact that has been discovered in nature. In addition to these, the utter and total failure of all religionists in all countries to produce one particle of evidence showing the existence of any supernatural power whatever, and the further fact that the people are not satisfied with their religion. They are continually asking for evidence. They are asking it in every imaginable way.
The sects are continually dividing. There is no real religious serenity in the world. All religions are opponents of intellectual liberty. I believe in absolute mental freedom. Real religion with me is a thing not of the head, but of the heart; not a theory, not a creed, but a life.
_Question_. What punishment, then, is inflicted upon man for his crimes and wrongs committed in this life?
_Answer_. There is no such thing as intellectual crime. No man can commit a mental crime. To become a crime it must go beyond thought.
_Question_. What punishment is there for physical crime?
_Answer_. Such punishment as is necessary to protect society and for the reformation of the criminal.
_Question_. If there is only punishment in this world, will not some escape punishment?
_Answer_. I admit that all do not seem to be punished as they deserve. I also admit that all do not seem to be rewarded as they deserve; and there is in this world, apparently, as great failures in matter of reward as in matter of punishment. If there is another life, a man will be happier there for acting according to his highest ideal in this. But I do not discern in nature any effort to do justice.
--_The Post_, Washington, D. C., 1878.
MRS. VAN COTT, THE REVIVALIST
_Question_. I see, Colonel, that in an interview published this morning, Mrs. Van Cott (the revivalist), calls you "a poor barking dog." Do you know her personally?
_Answer_. I have never met or seen her.
_Question_. Do you know the reason she applied the epithet?
_Answer_. I suppose it to be the natural result of what is called vital piety; that is to say, universal love breeds individual hatred.
_Question_. Do you intend making any reply to what she says?
_Answer_. I have written her a note of which this is a copy:
_Buffalo, Feb. 24th, 1878._ MRS. VAN COTT;
My dear Madam:--Were you constrained by the love of Christ to call a man who has never injured you "a poor barking dog?" Did you make this remark as a Christian, or as a lady? Did you say these words to illustrate in some faint degree the refining influence upon women of the religion you preach?
What would you think of me if I should retort, using your language, changing only the sex of the last word?
I have the honor to remain,
Yours truly,
R. G. INGERSOLL
_Question_. Well, what do you think of the religious revival system generally?