A handbook of Freethought

by Unknown

The Bible Sanctions Great Crimes.

We come now to look at the crimes perpetrated by the people of God, to show how the Bible and Christianity lie as insuperable obstructions in the pathway of progress.

Wars of Extermination.

And when thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, and it shall be, if it make the answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee and shall serve thee. And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee (that is, by defending their wives and children) then thou shalt besiege it.

And when the Lord God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword; but the women and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself, and thou shalt eat of the spoil of thine enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee. Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations. But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth. ([Deut. 20 : 10–17].)

So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs and all their kings; he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed as the Lord God of Israel had commanded. ([Joshua 10 : 40].)

Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amelek did to Israel (some three hundred years previous), how he laid wait for him in the way when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amelek, and utterly destroy all that they have and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. ([1 Sam. 15 : 2, 3].)

Now, therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

But all the women children that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. ([Numbers 31 : 17, 18].)

To believe these bloody massacres to have been done by the express command of the supreme ruler of the universe, made man brutal and despotic. And it is for this very reason that we have had so many wars among Christian nations. The Old Testament is a record of cruelty and blood; and if we fall back in time on this side of the cross of Christ, we shall find the same spirit, and the same bloody deeds perpetrated upon all those who were not numbered as the peculiar people of God. Constantine established Christianity in the Roman empire by the sword; and his holy successors have maintained it by the same power ever since.

Polygamy.

Although Christians now condemn polygamy, they uphold a Bible that not only approves it, but also shows distinctly that God instituted it.

Solomon had seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines, and was not condemned for his polygamy or concubinage, but was condemned for going after other Gods:

And the Lord was angry with Solomon because his heart was turned away from the Lord. ([1 Kings 11 : 9].)

There is nowhere any condemnation of Solomon for his polygamy to be found in the Bible. On the contrary, he is extolled to the highest degree. God is represented as saying: “I have found David, a man after mine own heart.” ([Acts 13 : 22].) “Yet among many nations was there no king like unto him (Solomon) who was beloved of God.” ([Neh. 13 : 26].)

David, although he was a man after God’s own heart, was not so highly esteemed as Solomon who was blest with a thousand wives. David did not have quite as many wives, and consequently did not achieve the royal grandeur of his son Solomon. The Lord gave David a number of wives: “And Abigail hasted and arose, and rode upon an ass with five damsels of her’s that went with her; and she went after the messengers of David and became his wife. David also took Ahinoam, of Jezreel, and they were also, both of them, his wives. ([1 Sam. 25 : 42, 43].)

And David took him more wives out of Jerusalem. ([2 Sam. 5 : 13].)

And I gave thee (David) thy master’s house and thy master’s wives into thy bosom. ([2 Sam. 12 : 8].)

The Christian apologist says that “the Lord endured them to practice polygamy in consequence of the hardness of their hearts.” But it is explicitly shown in the above passage that the Lord gave David a number of wives. “I gave thee thy master’s wives into thy bosom,” certainly exonerates David, and throws the responsibility on Jehovah. David is not censured for his polygamy, but is uniformly spoken of with approval except in one instance. In counseling Solomon Jehovah said: “And if thou wilt walk in my ways to keep my statutes and commandments as thy father David did walk, then I will lengthen thy days.” ([1 Kings 3 : 14].)

Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord and turned not aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite. ([1 Kings 15 : 5].)

The truth is that nearly all the patriarchs and prophets were polygamists. They had not the faintest idea of true marriage, but took women according to their caprice, and kept them as long as they were pleased with them and cast them off when tired of them. It is a remarkable fact that we do not often read of any marriage ceremony when these men after God’s own heart took them wives. A man in these days who “takes up” with a woman without marriage is called a free-lover. Were the patriarchs who took a number of women as wives without a marriage ceremony free-lovers? Just now the Christians cannot endure polygamy among the Mormons. They indorse it as a Bible institution, good enough for Abraham, Isaac, and all the rest, but out of fashion just now. The worst of it all is, the Christian sends missionaries and Bibles to the heathens and afterward reports wonderful success in converting them from their Paganism and polygamy through the means of preaching, praying, and missionary work; but when he thinks of the Mormon he forgets what wonders the missionary has done abroad in converting the polygamists, and insists that our Congress send Winchester rifles to Utah rather than missionaries. The Holy Ghost is of no account there. The gospel of peace must now as ever resort to the divine efficacy of bullets rather than Bibles, to secure a victory for truth, justice, and love. Christianity shows the same brutal instincts of war in its treatment of the Mormons that Constantine exhibited in establishing the church by the sword.

The Subjection of Woman.

The Bible nowhere teaches the equality of man and woman, but from Genesis to Revelation it treats her as man’s inferior. The mythology of the ancient Hebrew story of the Garden of Eden has proved to be a veritable curse to her. “And thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” ([Gen. 3 : 16]), has been the poisoned chalice put to her lips for over two thousand years. Paul the founder of the church, insists upon the subjection of woman. “Likewise ye wives be in subjection to your own husbands.” ([1 Peter 3 : 1].)

Wives submit yourselves to your own husbands. ([Col. 3 : 18].)

As the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. ([Eph. 5 : 24].)

The church has uniformly maintained this doctrine, and demanded in the marriage ceremony that she promise to love, honor, and obey her husband.

For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman but the woman (was created) for the man. ([1 Cor. 11 : 8, 9].)

Divorce.

Woman is unjustly treated in the matter of divorce, in both the Old and the New Testament. In the Old Testament the husband had the power to divorce his wife if she failed to please him, while the wife could not divorce her husband for any cause.

When a man hath taken a wife and marries her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eye, then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it into her hand and send her out of his house. ([Deut. 24 : 1].)

When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captives and seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her that thou wouldst have her to be thy wife, then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, she shall shave her head and pare her nails and she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house and bewail her father and mother a full month, and after that thou shalt go in unto her and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will, but thou shalt not sell her at all for money; thou shalt not make merchandise of her because thou hast humbled her. ([Deut. 21 : 10–14].)

Jesus says, “Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery; and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband, committeth adultery.” ([Luke 16 : 18].)

In this case there is a lack of qualification as to whether the man be innocent or not; and there is no allowance made in case the man who married her who was put away should be ignorant of her being a divorced woman.

Again, “But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery, and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery.” ([Mat. 5 : 32].)

Here we find not a word about the fornication of the husband. In short, there is no equality of rights and duties taught in these passages. Jesus, in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke teaches that it is adultery to marry a divorced woman. No matter what the crime of the husband has been, a wife is not allowed to put him away and marry another. If he is a fornicator, and his wife is divorced from him and remarries, she commits adultery. This is only a slight modification of the divorce law—that old law according to which the husband had only to write his wife a bill of divorcement and send her off; but it was not lawful for the wife to write a bill and send the husband away. All Christian nations have repudiated the teachings of both the Old and the New Testament on the question of divorce.

Marriage is now rapidly losing its sacramental character. If matches are made in heaven, it is evident that the work is poorly done, and for all practical purposes they might as well be made on earth; and the general opinion is inclined so strongly in that direction that greater attention is now given to the laws of life, which instruct us how to make happy earthly matches, leaving the matches of heaven to be formed when we get there.

The Jews practiced the sale of their daughters:

And if any man shall sell his daughter to be a maid-servant, she shall not go out as the man-servants do. If she pleases not her master who hath betrothed her to himself. ([Ex. 21 : 7].)

Jacob purchased Leah and Rachel, by serving Laban their father seven years for each of them. He agreed to serve seven years for Rachel, and after he had fulfilled his obligation, Laban deceived him by palming off Leah in the dark upon him as Rachel. But though so deeply wronged Jacob did not despair, but served another seven years for her whom he loved. See Genesis twenty-ninth chapter.

In the purchase of wives there was usually no ceremony, more than the witnessing of the sale. We read of David and Solomon taking wives, but no mention is made of any marriage ceremony.

A jealous husband could torture his wife, by having her poisoned. See [Numbers 5 : 11–31]. There was no such law for a jealous wife. There was no law of even-handed justice for a greatly wronged and outraged wife. The laws were made for the benefit of man, not for the protection of woman. Why? Because they were made by man.

The New Testament as well as the Old, Holds Woman in Servile Bondage.

Jesus and Paul were celibates, and their teachings and practice in regard to woman, have done her incalculable wrong.

The man is not of the woman, but the woman is of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman (was created) for the man. ([1 Cor. 11 : 8, 9].)

Paul gets this idea from the mythical story of creation in Genesis.

In that childish story God is represented as making woman as “an help meet,” for Adam. Indeed her creation does not seem to have been intended at all, but the Creator seeing that it was not good for man to be alone, “caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept; and he took out one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead: And the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.” ([Gen. 2 : 21, 22].) Woman was an afterthought to the Lords of creation then, and she is an afterthought to the lords of creation now.

In that ancient myth woman was doomed to perpetual servitude because she was of an investigating turn of mind, and sought to know good and evil. The sentence was, “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” ([Gen. 3 : 16].)

Neither Jesus nor Paul proclaimed the dignity of marriage, or discerned the necessity of enlarging the sphere of woman. Jesus shared the common sentiments of his age, and looked upon the marriage relation as incompatible with the establishment of the kingdom of heaven. He deemed it necessary to call his disciples away from their families, and even to advise the men to make eunuchs of themselves if they were able to do so. ([Mat. 19 : 12].) In his teachings on the question of divorce, he is far from perceiving the even-handed justice which the case demands. He says ([Mark 10 : 11, 12]) that if either the husband or the wife put away one the other and marry again, commits adultery. All second marriages would therefore be unlawful according to this teaching. In Matthew ([5 : 32]) he permits the husband to put away the wife for the crime of fornication, but makes no provision for the wife to put away the husband for the same offense. His disciples received an unfavorable impression of marriage, and after listening to him on this subject, they suggested: “If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.” ([Mat. 19 : 10].) How could these plain people have misunderstood him upon a subject with so little chance for misapprehension?

Paul’s teachings were adverse to the marital relations: “Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.” ([1 Cor. 7 : 27].)

“It is better to marry than to burn.” ([1 Cor. 7 : 9].) What an idea of marriage! He does not have the least conception of love, or of the higher and refining joys of the conjugal relation. But permits him who cannot keep himself from beastliness to marry. In this his judgment is remarkably short-sighted, for he does not regard the sacrifice which the woman must make who marries the beast. He looks upon woman as a mere safety-valve for men’s passions,—her rights are not considered: she has no rights. He will permit man to marry, but young widows he denounces as heaping up damnation to themselves in marrying: “But the younger widows refuse, for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry having damnation, because they cast off their first faith.” ([1 Tim. 5 : 11, 12].) To marry was to wax wanton against Christ, which was nothing less than damnation! But old widows who were above sixty years of age could join the church if they had “been the wife of one man” and “had washed the saints’ feet.” ([1 Tim. 5 : 9, 10].) I wonder what he thought of rejecting all young widowers, and accepting none under sixty years of age, and only those of them who had washed their grandmother’s feet?

Paul not only advocates celibacy which is an evil to woman, but where the marriage relation exists he insists upon the subjection of woman to her husband: “Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands;” ([1 Peter 3 : 1].) “Obedient to their own husbands;” ([Titus 2 : 5].) “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection;” ([1 Tim. 2 : 11].) “Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ so let the wives be (subject) to their own husbands in everything.” ([Eph. 5 : 24].)

The reasons given for woman’s subjection are, “The man is not of the woman, but the woman is of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman (was created) for the man.” ([1 Cor. 11 : 8, 9].) “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.” Wherefore? Because “Adam was first formed, then Eve.” “And Adam was not deceived but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” ([1 Tim. 2 : 11–14].) Woman has always been the guilty cause of man’s great misfortune. Adam was not to blame but Eve was the guilty one. Lot was innocent but his daughters were fearfully wicked. Joseph did not tempt anyone, but his master’s wife tempted him. Job, dear man, was all patience, but his wife flew into a rage, and tried to have him curse God and die. Solomon, the pure-hearted and single-minded man of seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines was inspired to say, “One man among a thousand have I found, but a woman among all these have I not found.” ([Eccl. 7 : 28].)

And to this day the Christian marriage ceremony demands of woman that she promise to love, honor, and obey her husband.

The Bible Sanctions Slavery.

What driveling idiots we mortals have been to suppose for a moment that a good being, a heavenly father, would let one part of his family hold the other in slavery!

Moreover of the children of the strangers, that do sojourn, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land, and they shall be your possession.

And ye shall take as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen forever, but over your brethren, the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigor. ([Lev. 25 : 45, 46].)

If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve, and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself he shall go out by himself; if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him; if his master has given him a wife, and she has borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s and he shall go out by himself. ([Ex. 21 : 2–4].)

The New Testament Sanctions Slavery.

Servants, obey in all things your master according to the flesh; not with eye-service, as men pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing God. ([Col. 3 : 22].)

Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. ([1 Peter 2 : 18].)

In addition to these positive indorsements of slaveholding, it should be remembered that Jesus never condemned it, and it was not difficult, therefore, for the church also to indorse and support it.

The American Church was the Bulwark of American Slavery.

The slave system in this country always received the support of the church. In the early history of the country it was occasionally condemned by some of the bravest ministers, but as the nation grew powerful, so also did this sum of all villainies. Not only the ministers of the slave states, but ministers of the free states lent their support to this despotism. The Rev. N. Bangs, D.D., of New York, said:

It appears evident that however much the apostles might have deprecated slavery as it then existed throughout the Roman empire, he did not feel it his duty as an embassador of Christ, to disturb those relations which subsisted between master and servants, by denouncing slavery as such a mortal sin that they could not be the servants of Christ in such a relation.

Rev. E. D. Simms, professor in Randolph-Macon college, a Methodist institution, affirmed that, “Those extracts from Holy writ unequivocally assert the right of property in slaves.”

The Rev. Wilbur Fisk, D.D., late president of the (Methodist) Wesleyan university, in Connecticut: “The relation of master and slave may and does in many cases, exist under such circumstances as free the master from the just charge of immorality.”

Rev. Moses Stuart, of Andover, insisted that, “the precepts of the New Testament respecting the demeanor of slaves and their masters, beyond all question, recognized the existence of slavery.”

The Rev. Dr. Taylor, of Yale college, said: “I have no doubt that if Jesus Christ was now on earth, he would, under certain circumstances, become a slaveholder.”

The “Independent” makes an admission. Speaking of the degradation of the Southern negroes, it says: “For this Protestant Christianity solely is to blame. It allowed slavery. It was slow to see its enormity. In the South it supported slavery with all its power. It let the negroes live in ignorance of the word of God. It raised no voice against unchristian laws forbidding slaves to be taught to read, and forbidding marriage.”

We could give hundreds of just such quotations from ministers who upheld slavery as a divine institution. And these were the blind leaders of the blind until leaders and people were precipitated into the life and death struggle of the nation. If the preachers had been honest and brave we would never have had to pass through the terrible ordeal of the great rebellion.

The northern churches were almost all in sympathy with the “divine institution.” Their ministers did not dare to condemn the system lest they should be deposed for their abolitionism. The writer was pastor of a Methodist church in Brooklyn in 1859, and was dismissed from his pastorate on account of his anti-slavery preaching. After President Lincoln’s emancipation proclamation the synods and general conferences arrayed themselves against the system, but not before.