Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1910-02-24

Editor Courier:
Please grant me about half the space
used by man signing himself SeneS
lin which he attempted to answer
former article of mine. Words, words,
words. Such a "diarrhea of words ana
conception of IDEAS the Courier has
not been burdened with for many
day
in answering my argument against
the non taxation OF church property
he only says that the church to which
The belongs is ready to pay its proper
ton. But he doesn't say whether he
thinks it right or wrong to tax non
church members for the support OF
the churches. He says for instance n
man may have no children and refuse
to pay taxes to support schools. he
must know this is an entirely different
matter, as our public schools are en-
tirely separate from religion
4 He quotes me where say one
class of people can have no right to
regulate the religious observances of
another and claims that government
regulated religious observances among
the Mormons and slave holders. Every
body knows polygamy was regulated"
because ii was a violation of the law
of all the states, and slavery was abol-
,ished by force of arms without regard
Ito religion. as war measure.
= But in this answer he puts himself
lin a dangerous position, for he puts
himself on the side of those who claim
a right to regulate" etc. as did the
Christian church for 400 years after
the establishment of that religion, dur
ing which time millions of people We're
murdered because they refused to be
"regula ted
1.-The precise difference between the
+ Christians code Of morals and that OF
the so-called free thinker is this: the
first has logical basis in the doctrines
of Christianity. while the second is
purely arbitrary, and has only the lpse
diXit of certain writer's possessing un-
, limited personal assurance and infal-
. Ilible self assertion; is illogical and in
consistent with his principles
Now what is the logical basis in the
doctrines of Christianity" Man was
created in the garden of Eden; by dis
: obeying a simple command not to eat
of a certain fruit he fell from the favor
!, of God and all his descendants inner
tied Adams depravity. cit used to be
total depravity, but the churches are
ashamed of that now, as they are OF
infant damnation). Then after God
had repented that he had made man,
after about 1000 years he invented a
plan to redeem fallen man. He con-
cluded to have a son born by the help
of virgin, and murdered this son, and
had it proclaimed to few of fallen
Adams fallen descendants, that who
O soever would believe in this miracle OF
virgin born God should be saved
. from the consequences of Gods blum
der in creating man; but whoever
would not or could not believe this
: story should be forever punished in q
burning lake of fire vulgarly called
hell. (But the churches are ashamed
of that kind of q hell now and have
improved it wonderfully except at
third ra te reViValS)
> Now If Senex can improve upon that
:, as a succinct statement of the basis OF
= Christian doctrines he has the liberty
. to do so.
e But where is the logic: the art OF
u rea soning Justly? Is it logical that one
9 person should suffer for another, ever
ct IL any blame could be attached to the
poor wretches who were held respon'
sible for Adams transgressions? | de-
ny the divine inspiration of the Bible
1t is not logical to claim that the book
q lis from God, considering the hundreds
: of errors and contradictions therein
SO much for the logical basis.
# AS to "the personal assurance ant
= infallible self-assertion of the FREE
thinkers" and the other numerous
filings of this kind, I leave the reade
to Judge If l got in more self asser
y tions than he has in his two column
~ of fine print they would be numerou
indeed.
I have made no self-assertions
ia What I have asserted are the con
st illusions arrived at by the careful in
vestigations of scientists who hav
positively proved what theology ha
F. always at first denied and then unwill
ingly admitted, viz: The antiquity 9
RI man thousands of years before Adam
Bible date, the rotundity of the eartf
the heliocultric theory of the eartf
I'd and many other things too numerou
to mention.
st Now a few thoughts as to the an
tiquity OF man. This was establishe
ay completely by the authors | mention
ed in my last article. The work of An
or drew D. White is one of the most com
plete and reliable in existence. He wa
president of Cornell university in Ne
We York for twenty years, was [ mite
c. States Minister to Germany, also
an Russia. besides filing other respor
government. and the state of Ne
\ York.
DR. Senex. after using the create
y part of a column in abuse of DR.. Whit
!. trying to destroy confidence in hir
al comes out fatty and acknowledges a
Ia that | wished to prove by these auti
;, critics on mans antiquity; acknow
edges that by late Christian authors {
,re the subject that man existed on Il
ha earth from $4,000 to 10000 years ago.
h Mr.. White gives references to II
~, authorities for everything he claims
- hundreds of them; and now comes Il
20 new archaeologist mentioned by Sen
"a and claims credit and superior aut
GRITTY in science after the victory M
VOW been won decades before by Whit
al, Buchner and many others.
ne But this has been the habit of tn
Is ologians during all this long warfai
al in which science has made new di
Il coveries and has been fought back
the orthodoxy as long as they cou
lite and when the case became hopeie
a and science has de the case so pla
there was no other course to purst
Der then the church has adopted the fac
w and tried to conform the scriptures
the the new situation.
i'm In the early centuries the Bible b
bed lievers strenuously held on to t
is geocentric theory of the earth and
heavenly bodies, until Nicholas Cope
z nicus and Calico, both Catholics, M
a withstandng the prosecutions OF I
orthodoxy, proved the sun was
ort, center of our solar system. So with t