Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 39

IV

IV.

I Do not think logic or common sense requires more than is given above, but orthodoxy is so slippery, so protean in its shapes; so unscrupulous, so plausible, and gifted with such astonishing powers of turning and twisting, that I feel impelled to track it into another region still. The best way to deal with divines is to admit (for argument's sake) their fundamental principles or assumptions, and then proceed to show their logical consequences. Now, the orthodox assure us that there exists a being whose nature is infinite, whose presence is everywhere; and these terms they use in their absolute or unlimited sense—at least they did in my orthodox days. Be it so, then; there is one infinite being; he must have or must be an infinite substance, no matter what that substance may be. Now every substance or being must necessarily occupy some space, since no real being can exist which is not more or less extended; and every being must fill space exactly commensurate with itself; indeed, we have no means of ascertaining or conceiving the size of anything except by ascertaining or conceiving the quantity of space it fills, that is, its extension in one, two, or three directions.

If the above be correct, an infinite being cannot occupy less than infinite space; all possible space must be so full of it that nothing more could be introduced anywhere; for if there be but space enough left for the insertion of one atom, molecule, or the smallest possible division of sub- page 18 stance, the being we are supposing must be less than infinite, which is contrary to the hypothesis. Now since an infinite being fills by itself or by its own substance all possible space, there can be no space left to be occupied by any other being or substance whatsoever, and thus we are inevitably led to the interesting discovery that there is no existence, no being, except the infinite one; that the orthodox God is alone, is everything, that nothing but itself exists or can exist, for there is no unoccupied space for it to fill. The divine, therefore, is reduced to this dilemma; either he must give up his infinite substance or all other substances; he must renounce his God, or deny existence to Nature, including himself. If we say that it is past denying that we and other beings do really exist, and that we occupy space commensurate with our substance—that being so, we occupy some of that space which an infinite being must have occupied if he had existed; therefore no infinite being exists. There is but one refuge for the divine from this conclusion, namely, to say that all Nature is but a part of God; though I do not suppose that any one will permanently abide in such a mental condition.

But let us allow the theologian his infinite God, and doing so, let us analyse the conception. An infinite God! Such a being must be an absolute solid, for all space must be filled to its utmost capacity by its substance. It must also be immovable. It would take infinite time for an infinite being to move, no matter at what rate he did it. In an absolute solid there can be no internal motion; in an infinite being no external motion is possible, for there is no space except what it already fills absolutely. Such a being could not feel, think, will, or act in any way; for it would take a whole eternity for a throb to pass through it. The thinking faculty or apparatus must be either located in a particular part, or else diffused through the whole; in either case thought would be impossible, except only a mere part of the being thought. There is no act, mental or physical, possible to any being but what takes time in its performance, and the said time must bear a certain ratio to the size, structure, organisation, or nature of that being. An infinite one, therefore, could not perform the most simple or elementary action without spending eternity in doing it, even on the supposition that it could do it at all.

An infinite God, then, must be helpless, thought-less, motionless; as void of sense as a block of marble. The page 19 conception is a conglomeration of the wildest absurdities; nay, it is not a conception, since none ever conceived it—it would take eternity to do so. The word God, as used by Pagans, generally meant something; in orthodoxy it stands for nought, a label covering the very darkest corner of the human mind, a word without meaning, a symbol symbolising nothing.

It is idle for the divines to appeal to spirit; for an infinite spirit must be a substance of some kind, and must fill infinite space, and must be infinitely powerless. Besides, What is spirit? "Breath, wind," say I. "Nay," replies the theologian, "it is something more refined; it has no weight, shape, colour, taste, smell, or sound." Exactly so; it is abstract. To find spirit I give the following receipt :—Take a man, remove his physical being—all that you can weigh, touch, taste, smell, see, or burn—in a word, all that is material. Next remove from him all that you can possibly conceive; persevere and exhaust the subject completely. Well, all that is left is spirit. Yes; that imponderable, immeasurable, intangible, inodorous, invisible, tasteless, soundless, and inconceivable nothing—this purest of abstractions-is the spirit or soul. The believer is heartily welcome to his "find." If his God is a spirit, we can only say, as Paul said of other Gods : "Now we know that an idol is nothing in the world," or, in the language of Jesus, we may say to the most devout: "Ye worship ye know not what"—in fact, Nothing.

If I am not vastly deceived, on all lines of intellectual inquiry, the orthodox belief leads inevitably to absurdity. I shall be glad to be corrected if I am in error, and if some one who is able will take the trouble to grind my notions to powder, I shall take it as a favour. I hate wrong ideas; they are amongst the foremost of human evils. Will someone, therefore, do his best to enlighten me, as I am sincerely trying to enlighten others?