What do you think?
Rate this book
About The Holy Bible
The Holy Bible by Robert G. Ingersoll is a critical examination of the Christian Bible, written by one of America's most famous orators and freethinkers. In this book, Ingersoll challenges the traditional interpretation of the Bible and argues that it is a work of human creation rather than divine inspiration. He examines the contradictions and inconsistencies within the Bible and questions the morality of certain passages. Ingersoll also discusses the historical context in which the Bible was written and the impact it has had on society. Despite its controversial nature, The Holy Bible is a thought-provoking and insightful analysis of one of the world's most influential religious texts.THIS 78 PAGE ARTICLE WAS EXTRACTED FROM THE Works of Robert G. Lectures V4, by Robert G. Ingersoll. To purchase the entire book, please order ISBN 0766172732.This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the old original and may contain some imperfections such as library marks and notations. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions, that are true to their original work.
78 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1894
About the author
Robert G. Ingersoll
1,049 books319 followers"On August 11, 1833, was born the greatest and noblest of the Western World; an immense personality, -- unique, lovable, sublime; the peerless orator of all time, and as true a poet as Nature ever held in tender clasp upon her loving breast, and, in words coined for the chosen few, told of the joys and sorrows, hopes, dreams, and fears of universal life; a patriot whose golden words and deathless deeds were worthy of the Great Republic; a philanthropist, real and genuine; a philosopher whose central theme was human love, -- who placed 'the holy hearth of home' higher than the altar of any god; an iconoclast, a builder -- a reformer, perfectly poised, absolutely honest, and as fearless as truth itself -- the most aggressive and formidable foe of superstition -- the most valiant champion of reason -- Robert G. Ingersoll." - Herman E. Kittredge
Robert Green Ingersoll, who became the best known advocate of freethought in the 19th-century, was born in Dresden, N.Y. The son of an impoverished itinerant pastor, he later recalled his formative church experiences: "The minister asked us if we knew that we all deserved to go to hell, and we all answered 'yes.' Then we were asked if we would be willing to go to hell if it was God's will, and every little liar shouted 'Yes!'" He became an attorney by apprenticeship, and a colonel in the Civil War, fighting in the Battle of Shiloh. In 1867, Ingersoll was appointed Illinois' first Attorney General. His political career was cut short by his refusal to halt his controversial lectures, but he achieved national political fame for his thrilling nomination speech for James G. Blaine for president at the national convention of the Republican Party in 1876. Ingersoll was good friends with three U.S. presidents. The distinguished attorney was known and admired by most of the leading progressives and thinkers of his day.
Ingersoll traveled the continent for 30 years, speaking to capacity audiences, once attracting 50,000 people to a lecture in Chicago—40,000 too many for the Exposition Center. His repertoire included 3 to 4-hour lectures on Shakespeare, Voltaire and Burns, but the largest crowds turned out to hear him denounce the bible and religion. He initially settled in Peoria, Illinois, then in Washington, D.C., where he successfully defended falsely accused men in the "Star Route" scandal, the most famous political trial of the 19th century. Religious rumors against Ingersoll abounded. One had it that Ingersoll's son was a drunkard who more than once had to be carried away from the table. Ingersoll wrote: "It is not true that intoxicating beverages are served at my table. It is not true that my son ever was drunk. It is not true that he had to be carried away from the table. Besides, I have no son!"
During the Civil War he was commissioned as Colonel and commander of the 11th Illinois Volunteer Cavalry, and was captured near Corinth, Mississippi. Although soon released, he still made time to treat his Confederate captors to a rousing anti slavery speech.
He hoped for but was never awarded a Cabinet post. The Republicans were afraid of his unorthodox religious views. He was told that he could progress politically if he hid his religious views, but Ingersoll refused on the charge that withholding information from the public would be immoral.
He strongly advocated equal rights for blacks and women. He defended Susan B. Anthony from hecklers when she spoke in Peoria; when every hotel in the city refused to house Frederick Douglass, he welcomed him into his home.
More: https://ffrf.org/news/day/dayitems/it...
http://infidels.org/library/historica...
http://www.robertgreeningersoll.org/8-2/
http://www.positiveatheism.org/tochin...
http://www.philosopedia.org/index.php...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_G...
Robert Green Ingersoll, who became the best known advocate of freethought in the 19th-century, was born in Dresden, N.Y. The son of an impoverished itinerant pastor, he later recalled his formative church experiences: "The minister asked us if we knew that we all deserved to go to hell, and we all answered 'yes.' Then we were asked if we would be willing to go to hell if it was God's will, and every little liar shouted 'Yes!'" He became an attorney by apprenticeship, and a colonel in the Civil War, fighting in the Battle of Shiloh. In 1867, Ingersoll was appointed Illinois' first Attorney General. His political career was cut short by his refusal to halt his controversial lectures, but he achieved national political fame for his thrilling nomination speech for James G. Blaine for president at the national convention of the Republican Party in 1876. Ingersoll was good friends with three U.S. presidents. The distinguished attorney was known and admired by most of the leading progressives and thinkers of his day.
Ingersoll traveled the continent for 30 years, speaking to capacity audiences, once attracting 50,000 people to a lecture in Chicago—40,000 too many for the Exposition Center. His repertoire included 3 to 4-hour lectures on Shakespeare, Voltaire and Burns, but the largest crowds turned out to hear him denounce the bible and religion. He initially settled in Peoria, Illinois, then in Washington, D.C., where he successfully defended falsely accused men in the "Star Route" scandal, the most famous political trial of the 19th century. Religious rumors against Ingersoll abounded. One had it that Ingersoll's son was a drunkard who more than once had to be carried away from the table. Ingersoll wrote: "It is not true that intoxicating beverages are served at my table. It is not true that my son ever was drunk. It is not true that he had to be carried away from the table. Besides, I have no son!"
During the Civil War he was commissioned as Colonel and commander of the 11th Illinois Volunteer Cavalry, and was captured near Corinth, Mississippi. Although soon released, he still made time to treat his Confederate captors to a rousing anti slavery speech.
He hoped for but was never awarded a Cabinet post. The Republicans were afraid of his unorthodox religious views. He was told that he could progress politically if he hid his religious views, but Ingersoll refused on the charge that withholding information from the public would be immoral.
He strongly advocated equal rights for blacks and women. He defended Susan B. Anthony from hecklers when she spoke in Peoria; when every hotel in the city refused to house Frederick Douglass, he welcomed him into his home.
More: https://ffrf.org/news/day/dayitems/it...
http://infidels.org/library/historica...
http://www.robertgreeningersoll.org/8-2/
http://www.positiveatheism.org/tochin...
http://www.philosopedia.org/index.php...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_G...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
November 20, 2021
Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899) is not as well known as he should be. Many have never heard of the "Great Agnostic" but was one of the greatest American orators of all time. He was the Christopher Hitchens of his day (the late 19th Century) - the smartest guy in the room, a critical thinking, follower of science and reason - and did not hold back when attacking religious orthodoxy. He drew thousands when he spoke. In fact the Chicago Tribune reported that he drew 50,000 for a speech in 1876 at the then Chicago Industrial Arts Exposition Building. Before public address systems! The editor presents some theories as to why Ingersoll was regulated to the background historically - most center on his vehement criticism of religion and the supernatural. This is polarizing in the modern day. Can you imagine how that went over with some people 140 years ago?
In About the Holy Bible (written 1894) he examines parts of the Bible, Old and New Testaments and clearly makes the point that the book was a product of its time, written by fallible men who had only the knowledge of the day to work with, and absolutely not the words of any deity, or even inspired by the words of any deity. Historical fiction at best. A game of telephone which went on for hundreds of years. And why were SO MANY books left out of the final version? Who decided this? Fascinating stuff.
The late, great, Ingersoll is preaching to the choir here and I ate it all up. I loved this. Looking forward to reading more Ingersoll.
To follow is one great quote from this short book:
“Some Christian lawyers—some eminent and stupid judges—have said and still say, that the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all law.
Nothing could be more absurd. Long before these commandments were given there were codes of laws in India and Egypt—laws against murder, perjury, larceny, adultery and fraud. Such laws are as old as human society; as old as the love of life; as old as industry; as the idea of prosperity; as old as human love.
All of the Ten Commandments that are good were old; all that were new are foolish. If Jehovah had been civilized he would have left out the commandment about keeping the Sabbath, and in its place would have said: 'Thou shalt not enslave thy fellow-men.' He would have omitted the one about swearing, and said: 'The man shall have but one wife, and the woman but one husband.' He would have left out the one about graven images, and in its stead would have said: 'Thou shalt not wage wars of extermination, and thou shalt not unsheathe the sword except in self-defence.'
If Jehovah had been civilized, how much grander the Ten Commandments would have been.
All that we call progress—the enfranchisement of man, of labor, the substitution of imprisonment for death, of fine for imprisonment, the destruction of polygamy, the establishing of free speech, of the rights of conscience; in short, all that has tended to the development and civilization of man; all the results of investigation, observation, experience and free thought; all that man has accomplished for the benefit of man since the close of the Dark Ages—has been done in spite of the Old Testament.”
Mic drop.
In About the Holy Bible (written 1894) he examines parts of the Bible, Old and New Testaments and clearly makes the point that the book was a product of its time, written by fallible men who had only the knowledge of the day to work with, and absolutely not the words of any deity, or even inspired by the words of any deity. Historical fiction at best. A game of telephone which went on for hundreds of years. And why were SO MANY books left out of the final version? Who decided this? Fascinating stuff.
The late, great, Ingersoll is preaching to the choir here and I ate it all up. I loved this. Looking forward to reading more Ingersoll.
To follow is one great quote from this short book:
“Some Christian lawyers—some eminent and stupid judges—have said and still say, that the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all law.
Nothing could be more absurd. Long before these commandments were given there were codes of laws in India and Egypt—laws against murder, perjury, larceny, adultery and fraud. Such laws are as old as human society; as old as the love of life; as old as industry; as the idea of prosperity; as old as human love.
All of the Ten Commandments that are good were old; all that were new are foolish. If Jehovah had been civilized he would have left out the commandment about keeping the Sabbath, and in its place would have said: 'Thou shalt not enslave thy fellow-men.' He would have omitted the one about swearing, and said: 'The man shall have but one wife, and the woman but one husband.' He would have left out the one about graven images, and in its stead would have said: 'Thou shalt not wage wars of extermination, and thou shalt not unsheathe the sword except in self-defence.'
If Jehovah had been civilized, how much grander the Ten Commandments would have been.
All that we call progress—the enfranchisement of man, of labor, the substitution of imprisonment for death, of fine for imprisonment, the destruction of polygamy, the establishing of free speech, of the rights of conscience; in short, all that has tended to the development and civilization of man; all the results of investigation, observation, experience and free thought; all that man has accomplished for the benefit of man since the close of the Dark Ages—has been done in spite of the Old Testament.”
Mic drop.
February 1, 2024
Robert Ingersoll is balm upon my soul, a go-to bible-thrasher in the league of Dawkins, except a good hundred years earlier. He mercilessly tears the inconsistencies apart and shows the evil and capricious nature of god. Even if this god existed I wouldn’t dream of worshipping him, this slayer of men, women, children and unborn babies.
January 20, 2012
I read the free Kindle version and a free version is available to read online at Google Books http://books.google.com/books/about/A...
This is rhetorical and I wouldn't be surprised if someone could pick apart a claim here and there and show it false, but this review of the Bible by an atheist humanist is pretty much on the money and consistent with my reading of the Bible.
My personal note is that once you dispense with the idea that the Bible is the literal word of God and read it as pure literature from various contexts in history, you can engage with it like you would any ancient literature, history, or mythology. If you do believe in God you can read it as something God would like you to be aware of and learn from, but any God that fits any decent description I have heard of God wouldn't want you to take it literally as God's direct word. You can learn just as much from seeing the obvious mistakes made by the people and gods of the stories in it as you can from its timeless wisdom and account of human nature. In that sense, perhaps Mr. Ingersoll was a bit too harsh, but I have to agree with him on the relative merits of other ancient and modern literature.
But the difference between the Bible and at least most other ancient literature is that the Bible is historically very important to Western culture and, the King James Bile especially, to the English language and English speaking culture, and it is currently believed in some way and held sacred by probably billions of the Christians people on the planet. Christianity dominates this world we are in. You might as well read and find out for yourself what the dominant world religion believes. On the other hand, if you are Christian and are like most Christians you probably haven't read for yourself most of what you believe. Consider reading the Bible - the whole Bible, by itself, without a preacher making a speech that dances around what it really says.
This is rhetorical and I wouldn't be surprised if someone could pick apart a claim here and there and show it false, but this review of the Bible by an atheist humanist is pretty much on the money and consistent with my reading of the Bible.
My personal note is that once you dispense with the idea that the Bible is the literal word of God and read it as pure literature from various contexts in history, you can engage with it like you would any ancient literature, history, or mythology. If you do believe in God you can read it as something God would like you to be aware of and learn from, but any God that fits any decent description I have heard of God wouldn't want you to take it literally as God's direct word. You can learn just as much from seeing the obvious mistakes made by the people and gods of the stories in it as you can from its timeless wisdom and account of human nature. In that sense, perhaps Mr. Ingersoll was a bit too harsh, but I have to agree with him on the relative merits of other ancient and modern literature.
But the difference between the Bible and at least most other ancient literature is that the Bible is historically very important to Western culture and, the King James Bile especially, to the English language and English speaking culture, and it is currently believed in some way and held sacred by probably billions of the Christians people on the planet. Christianity dominates this world we are in. You might as well read and find out for yourself what the dominant world religion believes. On the other hand, if you are Christian and are like most Christians you probably haven't read for yourself most of what you believe. Consider reading the Bible - the whole Bible, by itself, without a preacher making a speech that dances around what it really says.
December 29, 2011
Packed with reasons why the Bible isn't a "good book," clearly articulated for a general audience. This book even made me question the goodness of Jesus' character.
November 18, 2020
Robert G. Ingersoll, where have you been all my life?
If one reason or another the works of Robert Ingersoll have evaded my attention until just recently. I have read only other published lecture, but they have both made a deep impression on me. Perhaps it is a bit premature to place him alongside Nietzsche or any other enemy of religious quackery but what I have read thus far have made me curious to read more. Apart from a few archaic words here and there it is written in a very simple and straightforward way that does not require a degree in theology, although it would help to be familiar with the subject he is discussing. I have only dipped into the bible and some day hope to read it from cover to cover. I am not a great believer in throwing out the baby with the bath water and imagine one will find pearls of wisdom within. But Mr. Ingersoll is attacking the damage it has caused in the thousands of years since its publication and all the subsequent abuse and misery it has granted its preachers. He lays this out in devastating clarity in the final pages. It was wonderful to read. I wish I had discovered him much earlier in my life. Although I greatly admire Nietzsche and how his works have given me a foundation for my own beliefs, he can be a bit bombastic and pretentious at times. From these two lectures Mr. Ingersoll states repeatedly that he values humanity and that we are best to sever our superstitious ties with the past and move forward. He illustrates the hate and fear that lays within the covers of this holy book.
It is a relatively quick read at just under a hundred pages. I wish it was much longer. He rushes by many interesting ideas that would have benefited with all little more elucidation. But I understand that this was a lecture and even at its current length it must have been a long sit. I will need to find a good biography about him. I cannot imagine that these combative views did not sit well with the religious society of the times.
If one reason or another the works of Robert Ingersoll have evaded my attention until just recently. I have read only other published lecture, but they have both made a deep impression on me. Perhaps it is a bit premature to place him alongside Nietzsche or any other enemy of religious quackery but what I have read thus far have made me curious to read more. Apart from a few archaic words here and there it is written in a very simple and straightforward way that does not require a degree in theology, although it would help to be familiar with the subject he is discussing. I have only dipped into the bible and some day hope to read it from cover to cover. I am not a great believer in throwing out the baby with the bath water and imagine one will find pearls of wisdom within. But Mr. Ingersoll is attacking the damage it has caused in the thousands of years since its publication and all the subsequent abuse and misery it has granted its preachers. He lays this out in devastating clarity in the final pages. It was wonderful to read. I wish I had discovered him much earlier in my life. Although I greatly admire Nietzsche and how his works have given me a foundation for my own beliefs, he can be a bit bombastic and pretentious at times. From these two lectures Mr. Ingersoll states repeatedly that he values humanity and that we are best to sever our superstitious ties with the past and move forward. He illustrates the hate and fear that lays within the covers of this holy book.
It is a relatively quick read at just under a hundred pages. I wish it was much longer. He rushes by many interesting ideas that would have benefited with all little more elucidation. But I understand that this was a lecture and even at its current length it must have been a long sit. I will need to find a good biography about him. I cannot imagine that these combative views did not sit well with the religious society of the times.
April 30, 2019
It was good as a whole. I completely agree with his position about the Bible in the sense that is written, from the inspiration and selected for and by men.
But he make wrong assumptions like: Luke was a Disciple of Jesús. If one gospel say one thing and others doesn't then they disagree. He takes some of the Jesus words literally and evaluates Jesús philosophy from that, when is clear that is a metaphor.
But he make wrong assumptions like: Luke was a Disciple of Jesús. If one gospel say one thing and others doesn't then they disagree. He takes some of the Jesus words literally and evaluates Jesús philosophy from that, when is clear that is a metaphor.
October 22, 2021
"God is a guess"
"How can an inspired man prove that he is inspired"
"An inspired book should certainly excel all the books produced by an uninspired man"
It goes on and on. The bible is the source of so much violence and death.
Full of contradictions and historically impossible events yet for 1000s of years it's denial could to lead to one's death. Which really says more about the books true purpose and reason for existence.
Ingersoll dismantles this holy book with logic.
"How can an inspired man prove that he is inspired"
"An inspired book should certainly excel all the books produced by an uninspired man"
It goes on and on. The bible is the source of so much violence and death.
Full of contradictions and historically impossible events yet for 1000s of years it's denial could to lead to one's death. Which really says more about the books true purpose and reason for existence.
Ingersoll dismantles this holy book with logic.
April 29, 2024
This essay is a very deliberate and thorough discussion of the nature of the Christian Bible, its authorship and origins, likelihood of its veracity as a source of information about historical events, as well as a contemplation as to whether it should properly be considered a morally good book at all due to the morally questionable nature of the actions and ideals described therein.
PG- while there is no sex, language, or violence (other than discussion of the actions described in the Bible itself), the nature of the discussion may be jarring to some younger readers.
PG- while there is no sex, language, or violence (other than discussion of the actions described in the Bible itself), the nature of the discussion may be jarring to some younger readers.
December 17, 2020
Firstly it's 127 pages long.
This is a short book critical of the bible written by The Great Agnostic from the Age of Free Thought. It is a great book and a must read for agnostics, atheists and doubting christians and jews.
This is a short book critical of the bible written by The Great Agnostic from the Age of Free Thought. It is a great book and a must read for agnostics, atheists and doubting christians and jews.
May 15, 2017
Simple, but effective critique of Christianity and religion. I should read more of Ingersoll's work.
November 16, 2017
Eh. He is a good writer. Fun to read. But there was nothing ground breaking here. Mostly just Enlightenment snobbery.
March 30, 2019
Great little book that clearly lays out why the holy bible is not a good book.
July 17, 2019
Short and succinct
An easy read, and an important one. Well worth the time of any thinking person, and more than worth the time of those that do not.
An easy read, and an important one. Well worth the time of any thinking person, and more than worth the time of those that do not.
August 8, 2019
Reason
Ingersoll writes clearly and convincingly. Aside from a few errors of fact, and an ignorance of modern research, he nevertheless makes a strong case for his position.
Ingersoll writes clearly and convincingly. Aside from a few errors of fact, and an ignorance of modern research, he nevertheless makes a strong case for his position.
April 4, 2012
This short work from the 19th century agnostic Ingersoll was a little disappointing. Right away he starts talking about Moses making up a religion to control his followers, regardless of what someone's opinion of this is, there's no way to know of this is true, if you accept the bible then Moses was telling the truth, if you don't then Moses could have been mistaken or delusional but that's no indication he made up a religion. Most of the rest of the book continues in like manner, he spends a significant portion attacking some of the things Jehovah commanded the Israelites to do in the old testament. He expects the people of ancient Israel to have the same mindset as his and since they didn't they are a barbarous people (for example he goes on about Jehovah gave the Israelites no schools, no sciences, no arts, no commerce). Overall this polemic attacks the bible but doesn't do a great job of getting its point across, its much more of a book written for the atheist not as much to convince a believer of his errors (and there are far better books at accomplishing this). I hope his book on the mistakes of moses has a little more substance.
He did make a decent point about if Jesus was god incarnate he would know the future and if so why didn't he take more care to explain his words and help prevent all of the battles we've had over doctrine (such as actually explaining the trinity himself or clarifying his position on earth).
He did make a decent point about if Jesus was god incarnate he would know the future and if so why didn't he take more care to explain his words and help prevent all of the battles we've had over doctrine (such as actually explaining the trinity himself or clarifying his position on earth).
August 13, 2016
One of the finest books I have read on the Bible. The author tho long deceased has taken a book and shone it for what it is filed with misconceptions and half truths. This is a great example of the phrase "Tell a lie big enough and long enough, so when you tell the truth no-one will believe you". A fine read for the mentality liberated and the intellectually acute.
I am interested in literature that stimulates the mind and questions the culture of a society. To question, is the path to wisdom. I highly recommend this book.
I am interested in literature that stimulates the mind and questions the culture of a society. To question, is the path to wisdom. I highly recommend this book.
May 14, 2013
Although I wish there were more citations for some of the assertions made by Ingersoll, I though this book was a very interesting read.
I've read many critiques of the bible as an inspired work, and this one adds some new insights and research points to further a reader's deconstruction of how the bible was put together and some of the historical inaccuracies it contains.
Overall, worth a read.
I've read many critiques of the bible as an inspired work, and this one adds some new insights and research points to further a reader's deconstruction of how the bible was put together and some of the historical inaccuracies it contains.
Overall, worth a read.
November 6, 2016
An absolute must read
This is an absolute must read for anyone seeking the truth behind the bible and the Christian faith. This short book is well written and just as relevant today as it was in the late nineteenth century.
This is an absolute must read for anyone seeking the truth behind the bible and the Christian faith. This short book is well written and just as relevant today as it was in the late nineteenth century.
October 28, 2012
great book, great writer, enjoyed this!
October 28, 2016
Outstanding
Honest, blunt and terse. This is a short and simple critique of the Bible. There are no reference or footnotes and it doesn't need any.
Honest, blunt and terse. This is a short and simple critique of the Bible. There are no reference or footnotes and it doesn't need any.
June 6, 2022
An excellent book everyone should read.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews