god the known and god the unknown-第5章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
chair; if the chair were a reasonable living person; who was
actively and consciously engaged in helping the man to attain a
certain end; unless; that is to say; we are to depart from all
usual interpretation of words; in which case we invalidate the
advantages of language and all the sanctions of morality。
〃All things shall again become unity〃 is intelligible as meaning
that all things probably have come from a single elementary
substance; say hydrogen or what not; and that they will return to
it; but the explanation of unity as being the 〃unity of
multiplicity〃 puzzles; if there is any meaning it is too
recondite to be of service to us。
What; again; is meant by saying that 〃the soul of the world is
the Divine energy which interpenetrates every portion of the
mass〃 ? The soul of the world is an expression which; to myself;
and; I should imagine; to most people; is without propriety。 We
cannot think of the world except as earth; air; and water; in
this or that state; on and in which there grow plants and
animals。 What is meant by saying that earth has a soul; and
lives? Does it move from place to place erratically? Does it
feed? Does it reproduce itself? Does it make such noises; or
commit such vagaries as shall make us say that it feels? Can it
achieve its ends; and fail of achieving them through mistake? If
it cannot; how has it a soul more than a dead man has a soul; out
of whom we say that the soul has departed; and whose body we
conceive of as returning to dead earth; inasmuch as it is now
soulless? Is there any unnatural violence which can be done to
our thoughts by which we can bring the ideas of a soul and of
water; or of a stone into combination; and keep them there for
long together? The ancients; indeed; said they believed their
rivers to be gods; and carved likenesses of them under the forms
of men ; but even supposing this to have been their real mind;
can it by any conceivable means become our own? Granted that a
stone is kept from falling to dust by an energy which compels its
particles to cohere; which energy can be taken out of it and
converted into some other form of energy; granted (which may or
may not be true) also; that the life of a living body is only the
energy which keeps the particles which compose it in a certain
disposition; and granted that the energy of the stone may be
convertible into the energy of a living form; and that thus;
after a long journey a tired idea may lag after the sound of such
words as 〃the soul of the world。〃 Granted all the above;
nevertheless to speak of the world as having a soul is not
sufficiently in harmony with our common notions; nor does it go
sufficiently with the grain of our thoughts to render the
expression a meaning one; or one that can be now used with any
propriety or fitness; except by those who do not know their own
meaninglessness。 Vigorous minds will harbour 'sic' vigorous
thoughts only; or such as bid fair to become so; and vigorous
thoughts are always simple; definite; and in harmony with
everyday ideas。
We can imagine a soul as living in the lowest slime that moves;
feeds; reproduces itself; remembers; and dies。 The amoeba wants
things; knows it wants them; alters itself so as to try and alter
them; thus preparing for an intended modification of outside
matter by a preliminary modification of itself。 It thrives if
the modification from within is followed by the desired
modification in the external object; it knows that it is well;
and breeds more freely in consequence。 If it cannot get hold of
outside matter; or cannot proselytise 'sic' that matter and
persuade it to see things through its own (the amoeba's)
spectacles…if it cannot convert that matter; if the matter
persists in disagreeing with it…its spirits droop; its
soul is disquieted within it; it becomes listless like a
withering flower…it languishes and dies。 We cannot imagine a
thing to live at all and yet be soulless except in sleep for a
short time; and even so not quite soulless。 The idea of a soul;
or of that unknown something for which the word 〃soul〃 is our
hieroglyphic; and the idea of living organism; unite so
spontaneously; and stick together so inseparably; that no matter
how often we sunder them they will elude our vigilance and come
together; like true lovers; in spite of us。 Let us not attempt to
divorce ideas that have so long been wedded together。
I submit; then; that Pantheism; even as explained by those who
had entered on the outskirts only of its great morass;
nevertheless holds out so little hope of leading to any
comfortable conclusion that it will be more reasonable to occupy
our minds with other matter than to follow Pantheism further。 The
Pantheists speak of a person without meaning a person; they speak
of a〃 him〃 and a 〃he〃 without having in their minds the idea of a
living person with all its inevitable limitations。 Pantheism is;
therefore; as is said by Mr。 Blunt in another article;
〃practically nothing else than Atheism; it has no belief in a
personal deity overruling the affairs of the world; as Divine
Providence; and is; therefore; Atheistic;〃 and again; 〃Theism
believes in a spirit superior to matter; and so does Pantheism;
but the spirit of Theism is self…conscious; and therefore
personal and of individual existence…a nature per se; and
upholding all things by an active control; while Pantheism
believes in spirit that is of a higher nature than brute matter;
but is a mere unconscious principle of life; impersonal;
irrational as the brute matter that it quickens。〃
If this verdict concerning Pantheism is true…and from all I can
gather it is as nearly true as anything can be said to be which
is predicated of an incoherent idea…the Pantheistic God is an
attempt to lay hold of a truth which has nevertheless eluded its
pursuers。
In my next chapter I will consider the commonly received;
orthodox conception of God; and compare it with the Pantheistic。
I will show that it; too; is Atheistic; inasmuch as; in spite of
its professing to give us a conception of God; it raises no ideas
in our minds of a person or Living Being…and a God who is not
this is non…existent。
CHAPTER V
ORTHODOX THEISM
We have seen that Pantheism fails to satisfy; inasmuch as it
requires us to mean something different by the word 〃God〃 from
what we have been in the habit of meaning。 I have already said…I
fear; too often…that no conception of God can have any value or
meaning for us which does not involve his existence as an
independent Living Person of ineffable wisdom and power;
vastness; and duration both in the past and for the future。 If
such a Being as this can be found existing and made evident;
directly or indirectly; to human senses; there is a God。 If
otherwise; there is no God; or none; at any rate; so far as we
can know; none with whom we need concern ourselves。 No conscious
personality; no God。 An impersonal God is as much a contradiction
in terms as an impersonal person。
Unfortunately; when we question orthodox theology closely; we
find that it supposes God to be a person who has no material body
such as could come within the range of any human sense; and make
an impression upon it。 He is supposed to be of a spiritual nature
only; except in so far as one part of his triune personality is;
according to the Athanasian Creed; 〃perfect man; of a reasonable
soul and human flesh subsisting。〃
Here; then; we find ourselves in a dilemma。 On the one hand; we
are involved in the same difficulty as in the case of Pantheism;
inasmuch as a person without flesh and blood; or something
analogous; is not a person; we are required; therefore; to
believe in a personal God; who has no tr