The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1877-08-30

be compared" Now, if nature be
something different from matter, mo-
ton, or 9th essence OF peculiar bodies,
can these be called nature, or can she
be called the author OF theml
But he talks of the Laws OF Nature.
IL she a lawgiver2 The laws of stone
are just as puissant as the laws of ma
Iure. Is Nature the governor and the
governedl the agent and the patient
or is the term Flaw" equivalent to the
term ''nalure" There are some who
glory in being rational, and contemn
others as irrational. The nationals
censure the irratloRals for their igno-
rance Of the system of religion which
they embrace, or rather for having any
system which they do not fully com
prehend. After this, who would ex-
pect to hear person protesting to
teach and to admire what he calls the
System of nature" confessing IN
piecemeal his ignorance OF the whole
OF III Yet such is the author of the
system OF nature.
We shall now state the dogmas and
mysteries of atheism:
First OF the dogmas:
l. The universe presents but matter
snd motion.
2. From the action and reaction of
tue beings which the universe contains,
result a series of cause and effects.
3. Man is the work of Nature.
A. Motion is guided by constant and
invariable laws.
Now for a confession of ignorance
on those do9mas and topics connected
with them. Confessed ignorance OF
Atheists:
l. The different principles of each
OF these motions are unknown to us,
because we are ignorant of what origi-
nally constitutes the essence of these
beings. We know bodies only III the
mass; we are ignorant of their intimate
combinations, and the proportions OF
those combinations.
2. II VIC have a mind TO find the
principle of action IN matter and the
origin OF things; it is forever to fall
back into difficulties, and to absolutely
abndge the examination of our senses
which only can make lis know and
judge of the causes capable of acting
upon them or impressing on their mo-
tion.
3. We know nothing of the elements
of bodies.
4. The mind most practical in philo-
sophical observation hHs frequently
the chsgrin to find that the most sim
pie and most common effects escape all
his researches and remain inexplicablc
to him.
o. We are ignorant of the ways of
nature or of the essence of beings. Let
us, therefore, content ourselves with
avowing that nature has resources
which we know not of.
@. II they ask from whence man has
como, we reply, that experience does
not enable US to resolve this question,
and that it cannot really interest us.
1t suffices for US to know that man
exists, and that he is constituted in n
manner TO produce the effects Of which
we see him capable.
2. Perhaps this earth is mass de-
tached in the course of time from some
other celestial body. Perhaps 1t is the
result OF those spots or those lncrusta-
tons which astronomers perceive on
the suns disc, which from thence have
been able to diiTuse themselves into
our planetary system; perhaps this
= globe is an extinguished or displaced
comet, which heretofore occupied some
other place in the regions of space, and
Which, consequently, was then in a
state TO produce beings very different
from those which we find in it now.
8. We conjecture that the human
species is production peculiar to our
globe, in the position IN which it is
found, and when this position shall
happen to be changed, the human spe-
cies shall be changed, or will be
obliged 10 disappear.
0. 1t is probable that man was a nee
essary consequence OF the dlsentang-
ling of our own globe, or one of the re-
suits OF the qualities or properties of
the energies of which it was suscepti-
BILE, that he was born male and female,
that his existence Is coordinate with
that OF the globe.
10. The primitive man did perhaps
differ more from the actual man than
the quadrupeds differ from the insects.
II. II is as impossible for us to know
what they Will become as to know what
they have been.
70. II is not given to man to know
his origin, to know the essence of
thugs, nor 10 know their first princi-
pies; but We may conclude that he has
no Just reason to believe himself q
privileged being in nature.
IS. We know not the nature of mag
netism, OF electricity, of elasticity, of
attraction, of cohesion.
Ii. The most simple motions, the
most ordinary phenomena, the most
common modes Of action, are inexph-
cable mysteries, of which we shall
never know the first principles.
This, which is but sample, we must
give as specimen of the ignorance
confessed by those who pretend to be-
lieve that Christianity is predicated
upon the ignorance Of mankind.
have extracted these fourteen asser-
tions In their own words.
The skeptic has to confess as much
ignorance and TO believe more mystic
RES than the Christian. And this Is
neither the half nor the worst OF it; he
has to teach, admit and contend for a
number Of absurd mysteries, besides
those which he acknowledges, which,
In fact are much greater than are
taught in the most corrupt schools Of
Christian priests. But they are of an
other kind, and therefore are not TO be
compared:
1. The man who denies the Bible as
eerts that Il cannot really interest man
to know his origin. This is contrary
to universal experience, and TO the ar
dent desire of rational nature.
2. He asserts that man has no Just
reason TO believe himself privileged
being IN nature. This Is also contrary
to experience and the most commoa
observation.
3. Tie has, 10 any attempt to account
for the origin Of man. 20 suppose an alb
surdity, namely, that there were an in
fan male - nrzna& - or -