, 1879-03-30
CANDOR VS.. WIT.
REMARKS on Mr. lSGERSOLLs LECTURE
10 The Editor OF The Tribune.

TO the Editor Of The Tribune
CHICAGO, March 29.-The prevailing feeling
among intelligent readers Of the Bible In refer
eucs to the profane and coarse assaults made on
1t by Mr. Robert Ingersoll, is that few people
are so ignorant US to be imposed upon by lis
vulgar wtticisms- But, iuasmuch as there are
not few who accept without inquiry his &C
count of what is in the Bible, it may be well to
rive few illustrations OF his unscFupufousncss
iu putting ''mstakes" into the Bible which he
either knows, or ought to know, are not there.
lie asserts positively that Moses must have
understood BY armament something solid,
though every one who has studied the subject
knows, and the fact has been published again
and again, that the Hebrew word means soI1sc-
thing exceedingly attenuated, being the very
best word in tl1e language to designate the at
mosphere; while the mistake found III the En-
p1lsb yori .tfirmament" is due to the science
OF Alexandria, where, in the third century bc-
fore Christ, tue stexpanse" " OF Moses WIS trans
lu1ed "stereoma" (tirmumcnD to suit the ad~
yuncel astronomy OF tile time.
Wss IN pa q the az 81 had had
cveu been touched By single CLEAN OF light"
is he dealing, fairly with narrative that makes
light It's first creation!
When he ACCUSES Moses OF comprcsslnS the
astronomy of the universe into five words, Is be
dealing tairly with narrative tnat does not pro-
Tess to give any astronomy ut all, but, after
general reference to the heavens and the eartn
as created In the beginning, restricts ITSELF TO
the earth and its t1environment ~ ANY intelli-
gent person can see that this Is the -eason why
sun, moon, and stars are referred to only IN
their relations to the earth.
When he represents the tirEt and second chap
tiers Of Genesis as varying repetition OF the
SAME STORY, IS it fair to withhold all reference to
the different purport and object Of the 1Wo mar
ratiyes, which fully and satisfactorily explains
the variation!
Is it lair in speaking of the deluge to repre-
eeut it as ascribcd to nothing but rain, when the
Bible expressly SAYS, "AN The fountains of the
great deep we're broken up" evidently pointing
to such 1: subsistence Of the land as Is familiar
to any ono acquainted with geology!
Is it fair to make the Bible responsible for the
Armenian tradition that the ark rested on the
top OF Mount Ararut, Il 100 feet hign- when the
Bible nowhere, troEi Genesis to Revelation,
makes aEy such statement! The district of
Ararat on the mountains or highlands OF which
the ark rrsted is not the '"ACri-Dagh " to which
the name Ararat has iu n.oderL times been
giyen; md Mr.. lngersoll's ignorant mistake
nbout it is OF the same kind as that OF The bump
kin who should inquire Tor tho Coliseum In
Rome, Ny, or rseek the .tomo OF Leoudas in
It viii oe ar once seen that with this chilllike
ignorance is connected the 1Egersoll nonsense
So SAYS the ,guorant critic, while the simple aud
reasonable statement OF tie Bible Is: :" Fifteen
cubits upwards did the waters prevail" AS foE
the submersion Of even the bills to the utmost
verge of the horizon, The tubsideuce OF the land
was quite sufficient TO accomplish it without re-
| sorting to tile suppoSl[lon OF any unrca3onao1e
/ quantity OF water.
Is it lair, When MIR lngersoll wishes to render
ridiculous the rate Of increase among the Is
| raelitcs in Egypt, to represent the length OF
| their stay there Us 215 years, when Moses says
Exodus, XII, 40l: SNOW the sojournins OF the
children Of Israel who dwclt in Egypt was sso
years." The only other place In the Pentateuch
+ho of rht.rs strv IA r4f4rre1 4. 4