The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-12-23
INGERSOLL TAKEN UP.
REV. J. W. RoeAN's REPLY TO
"WHY AM AN AGNOSTIC."

The Danger in Discussing Skeptics
and Their Opinions from the Pulpit.
What an Agnostic Is, ana the Class
of People who Profess to be Ag-
nostics- Some ofIngersolrs Attacks
Answered.
Rev. J. w. Rogan, of the First Pres
byterian church, took up Bob IngersolI's
article in the North American Rsrie,c,
"Why am an Agnostic," last night He
started out with the proposition that
it is always a questionable thing to bring
the discussion of skeptics and their opinions
into the pulpit-in the first place, because
it is likely to advertise them and procure
for them ten or a hundred readers, where
before they had none; and in the second
place. because Of the peculiar constitution
of the mind, and the natural bias of the
heart, it is difficult thing to expose their
errors and establish the truth to the salts
faction of popular audience.
They have the advantage, to start with,
MIR. Rogan admitted, from the fact that
destruction is much easier than construc-
ton, the affirming of a negative than the
proving of an affirmative, and the interjec-
ton of doubt than the removal of it. AS
q
Rogan did not believe that there can be
any danger of advertising him. Generally
speaking, he did not believe that the world
at large greatly cares why Ingersoll is an
agnostIc, or that it would have been any
worse off if he had never volunteered to in
form it upon the subject.
DOES INGERsoLL HIMSELF KNow7
The first thing, Mr.. Rogan said, that i'm
pressed him after reading Mr.. Ingersolls ar
ticle and noting its unfairness and dogma
tism, was that the author evidently does not
himself know why he is an agnostic and
that he is somewhat confused as to what an
agnosric is. elf you turn to an unabridged
dictionary only a decade DID," Mr.. Rogan
said, II doubt if you will fl the word:
certainly you will not find it in one a decade
and half old. And yet - lille an agnostic
was such rare creature ten or fifteen years
ago that he was not of sufficient importance
to get his name into the dictionary. now he
abounds on every hand He is quite the
thing, you know. Following the lead of a
few intidel scientists and free-thinkers
who have assumed the name. hu dreds of
those who do but little, if any, thinking.
count it their chief honor TO be known as
agnosticS. If you approach almost any
young man of certain type, and begin to
press home upon him the subject Of religion,
You need not be surprised as he tWirls his
cane with one hand and bis mustache with
the other, and gives his shoulders peculiar
shrug, to hear him answer with a half
cynical and half vacant smile, so. am
an agnostic."
WHAT AN AGNosTIc is.
For a definition of ''agnostic" Mr..
Rogan turned to the Greek, in which
the word means, literally, one who does not
know. Agnc sticism is, as a rule, only lit
tie softer and less bald term for atheism, as
Prof. Huxley shows in his definition of it.
However, taken etymologically. an agnostic
Is one who does not say there is no God, and
no future life. but who, with a show of
humility, says there may be God, and
there may tie future life. but if there is
we cannot know anything on the subject.
Mr. Rogan was led to charge Mr.. Inger-
soil with having confused ideas as to what
an agnostic is, from the fact that in the
concluding paragraph of his article he uses
places he uses it in the broader sense, affirm
ing with great confidence that he does
know.
CHRIsTIANITY's EVIDENCES.
In answering the opening paragraph of
MIR. IngersolPs article, 1.-THE same rules or
laws of probability must govern in religious
questions as in others. There is no subject,
and can be none, concerning which any
human being is under any obligation to be
that no fault can he found with this propo-
sition, or at least with the statement of the
fact contained in the proposition. There is
no one that will claim that any human being
is called upon to believe anything without
evidence. ''We will further admit that
the same laws of probability obtain
IN reference to religious que ,tions as others
Where he parted company with Mr..
lngersoll was IN the latter's implication
upon evidence. "What, / ask, then, In all
the universe does? We point to tae Bible:
TO Its prophecies; to the person of Christ:
10 ms life; to his teachings and his work:
to the adaptation of his religion to the
wants OF man, and to It's influence on the
world, and triumphantly ask, what are
tnese put evidences -indisputable evidences
of the truth Of the christian religiong'
INGERsoLL's ATTACK ON THE BIBLE.
Having thus attempted to stab our re-
ligion under the cover of sophism," Mr.
Rogan continued, "Mr. Ingerson next
openly asserts, The man, who, without
prejudice, reads and understands the Old
and New Testaments will cease to Le an
orthodox Christian Now | submit that
the man who would say as Ingersoll did
IN his article on divorce, that the Bible
is opposed to the family relation, and that
Christ encouraged men to hate their wives,
HNo % SShiSOeChb JuOk6 VI Wuhb an un-
biased mind is. So far from men not con-
tinuing Christians if they read the Bible
with unprejudiced minds, affirm they
cannot read it with such mind AID not be-
come Christians, or, at least, convinced of
its truth
Having insinuated that our religion is
Is without evidence, and having affirmed
that no one who reads the Bible with un.
pre1udiced mind can believe in it, Mr..
lngerson proceeds to strike at the doctrine
of the existence of God. Taking up what is
known as the theological argument, or the
argument from design, he attempts to brush
this out of existence by the repetition of a
sophism used by Hume, and which. no
doubt, is much older than that celebrated
snfidel.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD DENIED.
After giving us to understand that he
can see no evidence of design in the world
around him, Mr.. Ingersoll says: 1t does
not occur TO him 1.-THE one who thinks he
does see these evideu ces) that it is necessary
TO account for an infinite personality. He
Is perfectly certain that there can be no
design without designer, and he is
equally certain that there can be a design
without designer. The absurdity becomes
so great that it takes the place of demon.
stration." ask if that primary, intuitive
belief, found the world over, that every
effect must have had an adequate cause
l0dEk n&E Co., !.