FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51  
52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   >>   >|  
ppeals. He rejects religion, because religion is based on principles of imaginative ignorance. Bailly defines it as 'the worship of the unknown, piety, godliness, humility, before the _unknown_.' Lavater as 'Faith in the supernatural, invisible, _unknown_.' Vauvenargus as 'the duties of men towards the _unknown_.' Dr. Johnson as 'Virtue founded upon reverence of the unknown, and expectation of future rewards and punishments.' Rivarol as 'the science of serving the _unknown_.' La Bruyere as 'the respectful fear of the unknown.' Du Marsais, as 'the worship of the _unknown_, and the practice of all the virtues.' Walker as 'Virtue founded upon reverence of the _unknown_, and expectation of rewards or punishments: a system of divine faith and worship as opposed to other systems.' De Bonald as 'Social intercourse between man and the _unknown_.' Rees as 'the worship or homage that is due to the _unknown_ as creator, preserver, and with Christians as redeemer of the world.' Lord Brougham as 'the subject of the science called Theology:' a science he defines as 'the knowledge and attributes of the _unknown_;' which definitions agree in making the essential principle of religion a principle of ignorance. That they are sufficiently correct definitions will not be disputed, and upon them the Atheist is satisfied to rest his case. To him the worship or adoration of what is confessedly _unknown_ is mere superstition; and to him professors of theology are 'artists in words,' who pretend to teach what nobody has any conception of. Now, such persons may be well-intentioned; but their wisdom is by no means apparent. They must be wonderfully deficient of the invaluable sense so falsely called 'common.' Idolisers of 'thingless names,' they set at naught the admirable dictum of Locke, that it is 'unphilosophic to suppose names in books signify real entities in nature, unless we can frame clear and distinct ideas of those entities.' Theists of every class would do well to calmly and fully consider this rule of philosophising, for it involves nothing less than the destruction of belief in the supernatural. The Jupiter of Mythologic History, the Allah of Alkoran, and the Jehovah of 'Holy Scripture,' if entities at all, are assuredly entities that baffle human conception. To 'frame clear and distinct ideas of them' is impossible. In respect to the attribute of _unknowability_ all Gods are alike. They are all supernatural; and the merely natural
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51  
52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
unknown
 

worship

 

entities

 
science
 

supernatural

 

religion

 
distinct
 

punishments

 

rewards

 
expectation

called

 

founded

 

definitions

 
principle
 
reverence
 

Virtue

 

defines

 

ignorance

 
conception
 

persons


admirable

 

signify

 

intentioned

 

naught

 

suppose

 

unphilosophic

 

dictum

 

apparent

 

invaluable

 

falsely


common

 

thingless

 
deficient
 

wonderfully

 

wisdom

 
Idolisers
 

Jehovah

 

Scripture

 

Alkoran

 

Jupiter


Mythologic

 

History

 
assuredly
 

baffle

 

natural

 
unknowability
 

attribute

 
impossible
 
respect
 
belief