New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-02-14
DIR. GROVE REPLIES TO INGERSOLL.
THE co1oNEL's ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE GOOD
NESS OF GOD.

NESS OF GOD.
Colonel Ingersors Argument Against TIE Good
ness OF God" wss The subject Of sermon by the
Rev d. w. S. Grove before a large congregation
IN IN. Church Of the Eternal Hope. Eighty hrst-st,
near Colum bus-ave.. yesterday morning. Among
other things. DR.. Grove said:
THE atheist says because there I. terrible SUI
ferirg in this world. conclude that there is no
God 10 prevent tt What is the way out OF this
dilemma? BY what intellectual process may We
understand that a good God not only permits this
suffering but foresaw II and made II certain? Per
haps II would be advantageous II we could Induce
Colonel Ingersou 10 explain Tho matter and 70 re-
flute his own argument against the goodness OF God.
But he has done Il time and again. for just as
often as his exuberance and wit bring him around
70 the atonement he has explained the true phi
losopbv Of suffering and has demolished his own
sophisn that human pain indicates Divine wick
edness.
NO na.sass. in all that Colonel Ingerson has
written arc more brilliant than those In which he
,cor.s the ipossbiity OF transferring virtue from
orc person 10 another With all the electric force
of great orators genius, he has made II plain
that each man must gain his own morality. his
own merit, MS own character and his own justin
cation by his own experience. Colonel IngersoH
has proven conclusively that no man can have
ideas thoughts nor Intellectual conceptions with
out experience. IN proving this the Colonel refutes
himself
over and over has Colonel Ingerson proclaimed
that philosopher must choose between Il word or
suffering and a race Of imbecies lie made the
choice right bravey over twenty years ago. ON
the title page OF one OF his books. printed in 1877
he wrote Give me the storm and the tempest OF
thought and action rather than the dead calm Of
ignorance. Danish me from Eden when you will
but first Let me eat of the fruit OF the tree OF
knowledge And that IS just what God has done
We all compelled 70 eat the fruit by the sweat
lnSersOll says that lie could believe IN the good
neIs OF God II even the most terrible accidents
and the most horrible crimes were prevented II
such done II would be Divine partially
thai gave back a dead child 10 q loving mother
two thousand years ago. and yet refuses 10 do the
sSme for millions OF weeping mothers to-day. lie
teaches that mercy mus partial were worse
than no mercy al all. and ye; ia the very next
breath he demands exactly that Partially 10 prove
the goodness Of Coo.
Under some Of the Arguments sd4uced by Colo
mel IugersOI the very endowments that he has
sought and obtained would be utterly worthless
and useless. Does not the Unequal distribution Ot
suffering and Tai1 prove Gods partially? Facts
be no iInpaTtiality under the working Of the 10
There car. be- under arbitrary working We
ulGst suffer FOR the sins OF our fOTefathers and
NAV have the benefits o. their virtue and wisdom
Our Inheritance. however, comes by natural law
and not b. arbitrary decree.
1.-THE country. the age ana the religion into which
We are born confer their blessings curses. bur
that wider inheritance reaches back through cen
nature, Ike fhDee OF men. do not bring equal 10yS
bur tie law f. impartial. - death the end 0f
Our existeNce. then the inequality OF this natural
providence might be complained o.. ! frankly con
continued faith IN the life beyond the grave.
In the long run. j believe that God will work ont
oil the apparent inequalities Of this life and event
ually that perfect Joy Will be accorded 10 His own.