John Martin Crawford, trans. - "The Kalevala book 2"

Re told by Ellen C. Babbitt - "More Jataka Tales"

Various editors - "The New Hacker's Dictionary version 4.2.2"

Philip Melanchthon - "The Apology of the Augsburg Confession"

New Philadelphia Book Publisher Highlights Local Talent
Book and Publishing News from Publishers Newswire(tm)

Looking for Child to be on Cover of a New Book, 'The Model Child'
PHILADELPHIA, Pa. -- The Philadelphia literary world will celebrate the launch of two new players today, April 10th: Kay Square Press, a new publishing company focused on Philadelphia-area artists, their stories, and their art; and Kay Square's first release, 'With the Rich and Mighty: Emlen Etting of Philadelphia' (ISBN: 978-0-9815129-0-7), a critical biography by Kenneth C. Kaleta.

FlatSigned Press Alleges Don Imus Remarks Damage Legacy of President Gerald R. Ford
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- Nathan Yungerberg, an accomplished model scout and professional child photographer is launching a nation-wide casting call to find the cover model for his highly anticipated book release, 'The Model Child: A Parents Guide to the Child Modeling Industry' (ISBN: 978-0-9817018-0-6).

Books: Lectures Of Col. R. G. Ingersoll, Vol. I

C >> Col. Robert Green Ingersoll >> Lectures Of Col. R. G. Ingersoll, Vol. I




Such was the condition of man when the morning of science dawned upon
his brain, and before he bad heard the sublime declaration that the
universe is governed by law.

For the change that has taken place we are indebted solely to science--
the only lever capable of raising mankind. Abject faith is barbarism;
reason is civilization. To obey is slavish; to act from a sense of
obligation perceived by the reason is noble. Ignorance worships mystery;
reason explains it--the one grovels, the other soars.

No wonder that fable is the enemy of knowledge. A man with a false
diamond shuns the society of lapidaries, and it is upon this principle
that superstition abhors science.

In all ages the people have honored those who dishonored them. The have
worshiped their destroyers--they have canonized the most gigantic liars,
and buried the great thieves in marble and gold. Under the loftiest
monuments sleeps the dust of murder.

Imposture has always worn a crown.

The world is beginning to change because the people are beginning to
think. To think is to advance. Everywhere the great minds are
investigating the creeds and the superstitions of men--the phenomena of
nature, and the laws of things. At the head of this great army of
investigators stood Humboldt--the serene leader of an intellectual host
--a king by the suffrage of science, and the divine right of genius.

And today we are not honoring some butcher called a soldier--some wily
politician called a statesman--some robber called a king--nor some
malicious metaphysician called a saint. We are honoring the grand
Humboldt, whose victories were all achieved in the arena of thought;
who destroyed prejudice, ignorance and error--not men: who shed light--
not blood, and who contributed to the knowledge, the wealth and the
happiness of all mankind.

His life was pure, his aims lofty, his learning varied and profound, and
his achievements vast.

We honor him because he has ennobled our race, because he has
contributed as much as any man living or dead to the real prosperity of
the world. We honor him because he honored us--because he labored for
others--because he was the most learned man of the most learned nation--
because he left a legacy of glory to every human being. For these
reasons he is honored throughout the world. Millions are doing homage
to his genius at this moment, and millions are pronouncing his name with
reverence, and recounting what he accomplished.

We associate the name of Humboldt with oceans, continents mountains and
volcanoes--with the great plains--the wide deserts--the snow-lipped
craters of the Andes--with primeval forests and European capitals--with
wildernesses and universities--with savages and savants--with the lonely
rivers of unpeopled wastes--with peaks and pampas, and steppes, and
cliffs and crags--with the progress of the world--with every science
known to man, and with every star glittering in the immensity of space.

Humboldt adopted none of the soul-shrinking creeds of his day; wasted
none of his time in the stupidities, inanities and contradictions of
theological metaphysics; he did not endeavor to harmonize the astronomy
and geology of a barbarous people with the science of the nineteenth
century. Never, for one moment, did he abandon the sublime standard of
truth; he investigated, he studied, he thought, he separated the gold
from the dross in the crucible of his grand brain. He was never found
on his knees before the altar of superstition. He stood erect by the
grand, tranquil column of reason. He was an admirer, a lover, an adorer
of nature, and at the age of ninety, bowed by the weight of nearly a
century, covered with the insignia of honor, loved by a nation,
respected by a world, with kings for his servants, he laid his weary
head upon her bosom--upon the bosom of the universal mother--and with
her loving arms around him, sank into that slumber called death.

History added another name to the starry scroll of the immortals.

The world is his monument; upon the eternal granite of her hills he
inscribed his name, and there, upon everlasting stone, his genius wrote
this, the sublimest of truths:

"THE UNIVERSE IS GOVERNED BY LAW!"





INGERSOLL'S LECTURE ON WHICH WAY?



Ladies and Gentlemen: For thousands of years men have been asking the
questions: "How shall we civilize the world? How shall we protect
life, liberty, property and reputations? How shall we do away with
crime and poverty? How clothe, and feed, and educate, and civilize
mankind?" These are the questions that are asked by thoughtful men and
thoughtful women. The question with them is not, "What will we do in
some other world?" Time enough to ask that when we get there. The
business we will attend to now is, how are, we to civilize the world?
What priest shall I ask? What sacred volume shall I search? What
oracle can I consult? At what shrine must I bow to find out what is to
be done? Each church has a different answer; each has a different
recipe for the salvation of the people, but not while they are in this
world. All that is to be done in this world is to get ready for the
next.

In the first place I am met by the theological world. Have I the right
to inquire? They say, "Certainly; it is your duty to inquire." Each
church has a recipe for the salvation of this world, but not while you
are in this world--afterward. They treat time as a kind of pier--a kind
of wharf running out into the great ocean of eternity; and they treat
us all as though we were waiting there, sitting on our trunks, for the
gospel ship.

I want to know what to do here. Have I the right to inquire? Yes. If I
have the right to inquire, then I have the right to investigate. If I
have the right to investigate, I have the right to accept. If I have the
right to accept, I have the right to reject. And what religion have I
the right to reject? That which does not conform with my reason, with
my standard of truth, with my standard of common sense. Millions of men
have been endeavoring to govern this world by means of the supernatural.
Thousands and thousands of churches exist, thousands of cathedrals and
temples have been built, millions of men have been engaged to preach
this gospel; and what has been the result in this world? Will one
church have any sympathy with another? Does the religion of one country
have any respect for that of another? Or does not each religion claim
to be the only one? And does not the priest of every religion, with
infinite impudence, consign the disciples of all others to eternal fire?

Why is it the churches have failed to civilize this world? Why is it
that the Christian countries are no better than any other countries?
Why is it that Christian men are no better than any other men? Why is
it that ministers as a class are no better than doctors, or lawyers, or
merchants, or mechanics, or locomotive engineers? And a locomotive
engineer is a thousand times more useful. Give me a good engineer and a
bad preacher to go through this world with rather than a bad engineer
and a good preacher; and there is this curious fact about the believers
in the supernatural: The priests of one church have no confidence in
the miracles and wonders told by the priests of the other churches.
Maybe they know each other. A Christian missionary will tell the Hindoo
of the miracles of the bible; the Hindoo smiles. The Hindoo tells the
Christian missionary of the miracles of his sacred books; and the
missionary looks upon him with pity and contempt. No priest takes the
word of another.

I heard once a little story that illustrates this point: A gentleman in
a little party was telling of a most wonderful occurrence, and when he
had finished everybody said: "Is it possible? Why, did you ever hear
anything like that?" All united in a kind of wondering chorus except
one man. He said nothing. He was perfectly still and unmoved; and one
who had been greatly astonished by the story said to him: "Did you hear
that story?" "Yes." "Well, you don't appear to be excited." "Well
no," he said; "I am a liar myself."

There is another trouble with the supernatural. It has no honesty; it
is consumed by egotism; it does not think--it knows; consequently it
has no patience with the honest doubter. And how has the church treated
the honest doubter? He has been answered by force, by authority, by
popes, by cardinals and bishops, and councils, and, above all, by mobs.
In that way the honest doubter has been answered. There is this
difference between the minister, the church, the clergy, and the men who
believe in this world. I might as well state the question--I may go
further than you. The real question is this: Are we to be governed by
a supernatural being, or are we to govern ourselves? That is the
question. Is God the source of power, or does all authority spring, in
governing, from the consent of the governed? That is the question. In
other words, is the universe a monarchy, a despotism, or a democracy? I
take the democratic side, not in a political sense. The question is,
whether this world should be governed by God or by man; and when I say
"God" I mean the being that these gentlemen have treated and enthroned
upon the ignorance of mankind.

Now let us admit, for the sake of argument, that the bible is true. Let
us admit, for the sake of argument, that God once governed this world--
not that He did, but let us admit it, and I intend to speak of no god
but our God, because we all insist that of all the gods ours is the
best, and if He is not good we need not trouble ourselves about the
others. Let them take care of themselves.

Now, the first question is, whether this world shall be governed by God
or man. Admitting that the being spoken of in the bible is God, He
governed this world once. There was a theocracy at the start. That was
the first government of the world. Now, how do you judge of a man? The
best test of a man is, how does he use power? That is the supreme test
of manhood. How does he treat those within his control? The greater
the man, the grander the man, the more careful he is in the use of
power--the tenderer he is, the nearer just, the greater, the more
merciful, the grander, the more charitable. Tell me how a man treats
his wife or his children, his poor debtors, his servants, and I will
tell you what manner of a man he be. That, I say, is the supreme test,
and we know tonight how a good and great man treats his inferiors. We
know that. And a man endeavoring to raise his fellow-men higher in the
scale of civilization--what will that man appeal to? Will he appeal to
the lowest or to the highest that is in man? Let us be honest. Will he
appeal to prejudice--the fortress, the armor, the sword and shield of
ignorance? Will he appeal to credulity--the ring in the nose by which
priests lead stupidity? Will he appeal to the cowardly man? Will he
play upon his fears--fear, the capital stock of imposture, the lever and
fulcrum of hypocrisy? Will he appeal to the selfishness and all the
slimy serpents that crawl in the den of savagery? Or will he appeal to
reason, the torch of the mind? Will he appeal to justice? Will he
appeal to charity, which is justice in blossom? Will he appeal to
liberty and love? These are the questions. What will he do? What did
our God do? Let us see. The first thing we know of Him is in the Garden
of Eden. How did He endeavor to make His children great, and strong, and
good, and free? Did He say anything to Adam and Eve about the sacred
relation of marriage? Did He say anything to them about loving
children? Did He say anything to them about learning anything under
heaven? Did He say one word about intellectual liberty? Did he say one
word about reason or about justice? Did He make the slightest effort to
improve them? All that He did in the world was to give them one poor
little miserable, barren command, "Thou shalt not eat of a certain
fruit." That's all that amounted to anything; and, when they sinned,
did this great God take them in the arms of His love and endeavor to
reform them? No; He simply put upon them a curse. When they were
expelled He said to the woman: "I will greatly multiply thy sorrow. In
sorrow shalt thou bring forth children. Thy husband shall rule over
thee." God made every mother a criminal, and placed a perpetual penalty
of pain upon human love. Our God made wives slaves--slaves of their
husbands. Our God corrupted the marriage relation and paralyzed the
firesides of this world. That is what our God did. And what did He say
to poor Adam? "Cursed be the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou
eat of it all the days of thy life; thorns and thistles shall it bring
forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field, and in the
sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread." Did He say one word calculated
to make him a better man? Did He put in the horizon of the future one
star of hope? Let us be honest, and see what this God did, and we will
judge of Him simply by ordinary common sense.

After a while Cain murdered his brother, and he was detected by this
God. And what did this God say to him? Did He say one word of the
crime of shedding human blood? Not a word. Did He say one word
calculated to excite in the breast of Cain the slightest real sorrow for
his deed? Not the slightest. Did He tell him anything about where Abel
was? Nothing. Did He endeavor to make him a better man? Not a bit.
What had He ever taught him before on that subject? Nothing. And so
Cain went out to the other sons and daughters of Adam, according to the
bible, and they multiplied and increased until they covered the earth.
God gave them no code of laws. God never built them a schoolhouse. God
never sent a teacher. God never said a word to them about a future
state. God never held up before their gaze that dazzling reward of
heaven; never spoke about the lurid gulfs of hell; kept divine
punishment a perfect secret, and without having given them the slightest
opportunity, simply drowned the world. Splendid administration!
Cleveland will do better than that. And, after the waters had gone
away, then He gave them some commandments. I suppose that He saw by
that time that they needed guidance.

And here are the commandments:

1. You may eat all kinds of birds, beasts and fishes.

2. You must not eat blood; if you do, I will kill you.

3. Whosoever sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.

Nothing more. No good advice; not a word about government; not a word
about the rights of man or woman, or children; not a word about any law
of nature; not a word about any science--nothing, not even arithmetic.

Nothing. And so He let them go on, and in a little while they came to
the same old state; and began building the Tower of Babel; and he went
there and confounded, as they said, their languages. Never said a word
to them; never told them how foolish it was to try and reach heaven
that way. And the next we find Him talking to Abraham, and with Abraham
He makes a contract. And how did He do it? "I will bless them that
bless thee, and curse them that curse thee." Fine contract for a God.
And thereupon He made certain promises to Abraham--promised to give him
the whole world, all the nations round about, and that his seed should
be as the sands of the sea. Never kept one of His promises--not one.
He made the same promises to Isaac, and broke every one. Then He made
them all over to Jacob, and broke every one; made them again to Moses,
and broke them all. Never said a word about anybody behaving
themselves--not a word. Finally, these people whom He had taken under
His special care became slaves in the land of Egypt. How ashamed God
must have been! Finally He made up His mind to rescue them from that
servitude, and He sent Moses and Aaron. He never said a word to Moses
or Aaron that Pharaoh was wrong. He never said a word to them about how
the women felt when their male children were taken and destroyed. He
simply sent Moses before Pharaoh with a cane in his hand that he could
turn into a serpent; and, when Pharaoh called in magicians and they did
the same, Pharaoh laughed. And then they made frogs; and Pharaoh sent
for his magicians, and they did the same, and Pharaoh still laughed.
And this God had infinite power, but Pharaoh defeated Him at every
point!

It puts me in mind of the story that great Fenian told when the great
excitement was about Ireland. An Irishman was telling about the
condition of Ireland. He said: "We have got in Ireland now over
300,000 soldiers, all equipped. Every man of them has got a musket and
ammunition. They are ready to march at a minute's notice." "But," said
the other man, "why don't they march?" "Why," said the other man, "the
police won't let them." How admirable! Imagine the infinite God
endeavoring to liberate the Hebrews, and prevented by a king, who would
not let the children of Israel go until he had done some little miracles
with sticks! Think of it! But, said Christians, "you must wait a little
while if you wish to find the foundation of law."

Christians now assert that from Sinai came to this world all knowledge
of right and wrong, and that from its flaming top we received the first
ideas of law and justice. Let us look at those ten commandments. Which
of those ten commandments were new, and which of those ten commandments
were old? "Thou shalt not kill." That was as old as life. Murder has
been a crime; also, because men object to being murdered. If you read
the same bible you will find that Moses, seeing an Israelite and an
Egyptian contending together, smote the Egyptian and hid his body in the
sand. After he had committed that crime Moses fled from the land. Why?
Simply because there was a law against murder. That is all. "Honor thy
father and thy mother." That is as old as birth. "Thou shalt not
commit adultery." That is as old as sex. "Thou shalt not steal." That
is as old as work, and as old as property. "Thou shalt not bear false
witness against thy neighbor." That is as old as the earth. Never was
there a nation, never was there a tribe on the earth that did not have
substantially, those commandments. What, then, were new? First, "Thou
shalt worship no other God; thou shalt have no other God." Why?
"Because I am a jealous God." Second, "Thou shalt not make any graven
image." Third, "Thou shalt not take My name in vain." Fourth, "Thou
shalt not work on the Sabbath day." What use were these commandments?
None--not the slightest. How much better it would have been if God from
Sinai, instead of the commandments, had said: "Thou shalt not enslave
thy fellow-man; no human being is entitled to the results of another's
labor." Suppose He had said: "Thou shalt not persecute for opinion's
sake; thought and speech must be forever free." Suppose He had said,
instead of "Thou shalt not work on the Sabbath day," "A man shall have
but one wife; a woman shall have but one husband; husbands shall love
their wives; wives shall love their husbands and their children with
all their hearts and as themselves"--how much better it would have been
for this world.

Long before Moses was born the Egyptians taught one God; but
afterwards, I believe, in their weakness, they degenerated into a belief
in the Trinity. They taught the divine origin of the soul, and taught
judgment after death. They taught as a reward for belief in their
doctrine eternal joy, and as a punishment for non-belief eternal pain.
Egypt, as a matter of fact, was far better governed than Palestine. The
laws of Egypt were better than the laws of God. In Egypt woman was equal
with man. Long before Moses was born there were queens upon the
Egyptian throne. Long before Moses was born they had a written code of
laws, and their laws were administered by courts and judges. They had
rules of evidence. They understood the philosophy of damages. Long
before Moses was born they had asylums for the insane and hospitals for
the sick. Long before God appeared on Sinai there were schools in
Egypt, and the highest office next to the throne was opened to the
successful scholar. The Egyptian married but one wife. His wife was
called the lady of the house. Women were not secluded; and, above all
and over all, the people of Egypt were not divided into castes, and were
infinitely better governed than God ever thought of. I am speaking of
the God of this bible. If Moses had remembered more of what he saw in
Egypt his government would have been far better than it was. Long before
these commandments were given, Zoroaster taught the Hindoos that there
was one infinite and supreme God. They had a code of laws, and their
laws were administered by judges in their courts. By those laws, at the
death of a father, the unmarried daughter received twice as much of his
property as his son. Compare those laws with the laws of Moses.

So, too, the Romans had their code of laws. The Romans were the
greatest lawyers the world produced. The Romans had a code of civil
laws, and that code today is the foundation of all law in the civilized
world. The Romans built temples to Truth, to Faith, to Valor, to
Concord, to Modesty, to Charity and to Chastity. And so with the
Grecians. And yet you will find Christian ministers today contending
that all ideas of law, of justice and of right came from Sinai, from the
ten commandments, from the Mosaic laws. No lawyer who understands his
profession will claim that is so. No lawyer who has studied the history
of law will claim it. No man who knows history itself will claim it.
No man will claim it but an ignorant zealot.

Let us go another step--let us compare the ideas of this God with the
ideas of uninspired men. I am making this long preface because I want
to get it out of your minds that the bible is inspired.

Now let us go along a little and see what is God's opinion of liberty.
Nothing is of more value in this world today than liberty--liberty of
body and liberty of mind. Without liberty, the universe would be as a
dungeon into which human beings are flung like poor and miserable
convicts. Intellectual liberty is the air of the soul, the sunshine of
the mind. Without it we should be in darkness. Now, Jehovah commanded
the Jewish people to take captives the strangers and sojourners amongst
them, and ordered that they and their children should be bondsmen and
bondswomen for ever.

Now let us compare Jehovah to Epictetus--a man to whom no revelation was
ever made--a man to whom this God did not appear. Let us listen to him:
"Remember your servants are to be treated as your own brothers--children
of the same God." On the subject of liberty is not Epictetus a better
authority than Jehovah, who told the Jews to make bondsmen and
bondswomen of the heathen round about? And He said they were to make
them their bondsmen and bondswomen forever. Why? Because they were
heathen. Why? Because they were not children of the Jews. He was the
God of the Jews and not of the rest of mankind. So He said to His
chosen people: "Pillage upon the enemy and destroy the people of other
gods. Buy the heathen round about." Yet Cicero, a poor pagan lawyer,
said this--and he had not even read the old testament--had not even had
the advantage of being enlightened by the prophets: "They who say that
we should love our fellow-citizens, and not foreigners, destroy the
universal brotherhood of mankind, and with it benevolence and justice
would perish forever." Is not Cicero greater than Jehovah? The bible,
inspired by Jehovah, says: "If a man smite his servant with a rod and
he die under his hand he shall be punished. It he continue a day or two
and then die, he shall not be punished." Zeno, the founder of the
stoics, who had never heard of Jehovah, and never read a word of Moses,
said this: "No man can be the, owner of another, and the title is bad.
Whether the slave became a slave by conquest or by purchase, the title
is bad." Let us come and see whether Jehovah has any humanity in Him.
Jehovah ordered the Jewish general to make war, and this was the order:
"And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee, thou shalt
smite them and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with
them, nor show mercy unto them." And yet Epictetus, whom I have already
quoted, said: "Treat those in thy power as thou wouldst have thy
superiors treat thee."

I am on the side of the pagan. Is it possible that a being of infinite
goodness said: "I will heap mischief upon them; I will send My arrows
upon them. They shall be burned with hunger; they shall be devoured
with burning heat and with bitter destruction. I will also send the
teeth of locusts upon them, with the poisonous serpent of the desert.
The sound without and the terror within, shall destroy both the young
men and the virgins, the sucklings also, and the men with gray hairs."
While Seneca, a poor uninspired Roman, said: "A wise man will not
pardon any crime that ought to be punished, but will accomplish in other
way all that is sought. He will spare some; he will pardon and watch
over some because of their youth; he will pardon these on account of
their ignorance. His clemency will not fail what is sought by justice,
but his clemency will fulfill justice." That was said by Seneca. Can
we believe that this Jehovah said: "Let his children be fatherless and
his wife a widow. Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg.
Let them seek their bread out of desolate places. Let the extortioner
catch all that he hath, and let the stranger spoil his labor. Let no
one extend mercy unto them, neither let any favor his fatherless
children." Did Jehovah say this? Surely He had never heard this line--
this plaintive music from the Hindoo: "Sweet is the lute to those who
have not heard the voices of their own children." Let us see the
generosity of Jehovah out of the cloud of darkness on Mount Sinai. He
said to the Jews: "Thou shalt have no other God before Me. Thou shalt
not bow down to any other gods, for the Lord thy God is a jealous God,
visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children to the third an
fourth generation of them that hate Me." Just think of God saying to
people: "If you do not love Me I will damn you." Contrast this with
the words put by the Hindoo poet into the mouth of Brahma: "I am the
same to all mankind. The who honestly worship other gods involuntarily
worship me. I am he that partaketh of all worship. I am the reward of
worship." How perfectly sublime! Let me read it to you again: "I am
the same to all mankind. They who honestly worship other gods
involuntarily worship me. I am he that partaketh of all worship. I am
the reward of worship." Compare these passages. The first is a dungeon,
which crude hands have digged with jealous slime. The other is like the
dome of the firmament, inlaid with constellations. Is it possible God
ever said: "If a prophet deceive when he hath spoken a thing, I, the
Lord, hath deceived that prophet?" Compare that passage with the poet, a
pagan: "Better remain silent the remainder of life than speak falsely."