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！
especially than He can become other living forms； any more than
we can be our eyes more especially than any other of our
organs。 We may develop larger eyes； so that our eyes may come to
occupy a still more important place in our economy than they do
at present； and in a similar way the human race may become a more
predominant part of God than it now is…but we cannot admit that
one living form is more like God than another； we must hold all
equally like Him； inasmuch as they 〃keep ever；〃 as Buffon says；
〃the same fundamental unity； in spite of differences of detail…
nutrition； development； reproduction〃 （and； I would add；
〃memory〃） 〃being the common traits of all organic bodies。〃 The
utmost we can admit is； that some embodiments of the Spirit of
Life may be more important than others to the welfare of Life as
a whole； in the same way as some of our organs are more important
than others to ourselves。
But the above resemblances between the language which we can
adopt intelligently and that which Theologians use vaguely； seem
to reduce the differences of opinion between the two contending
parties to disputes about detail。 For even those who believe
their ideas to be the most definite； and who picture to
themselves a God as anthropomorphic as He was represented by
Raffaelle； are yet not prepared to stand by their ideas if they
are hard pressed in the same way as we are by ours。 Those who say
that God became man and took flesh upon Him； and that He is now
perfect God and perfect man of a reasonable soul and human flesh
subsisting； will yet not mean that Christ has a heart； blood； a
stomach； etc。； like man's； which； if he has not； it is idle to
speak of him as 〃perfect man。〃 I am persuaded that they do not
mean this； nor wish to mean it； but that they have been led into
saying it by a series of steps which it is very easy to
understand and sympathise ＇sic＇ with； if they are considered with
any diligence。
For our forefathers； though they might and did feel the existence
of a Personal God in the world； yet could not demonstrate this
existence； and made mistakes in their endeavour ＇sic＇ to persuade
themselves that they understood thoroughly a truth which they had
as yet perceived only from a long distance。 Hence all the
dogmatism and theology of many centuries。 It was impossible for
them to form a clear or definite conception concerning God until
they had studied His works more deeply； so as to grasp the idea
of many animals of different kinds and with no apparent
connection between them； being yet truly parts of one and the
same animal which comprised them in the same way as a tree
comprises all its buds。 They might speak of this by a figure of
speech； but they could not see it as a fact。 Before this could be
intended literally； Evolution must be grasped； and not Evolution
as taught in what is now commonly called Darwinism； but the old
teleological Darwinism of eighty years ago。 Nor is this again
sufficient； for it must be supplemented by a perception of the
oneness of personality between parents and offspring； the
persistence of memory through all generations； the latency of
this memory until rekindled by the recurrence of the associated
ideas； and the unconsciousness with which repeated acts come to
be performed。 These are modern ideas which might be caught sight
of now and again by prophets in time past； but which are even now
mastered and held firmly only by the few。
When once； however； these ideas have been accepted； the chief
difference between the orthodox God and the God who can be seen
of all men is； that the first is supposed to have existed from
all time； while the second has only lived for more millions of
years than our minds can reckon intelligently； the first is
omnipresent in all space； while the second is only present in the
living forms upon this earth…that is to say； is only more widely
present than our minds can intelligently embrace。 The first is
omnipotent and all…wise； the second is only quasi…omnipotent and
quasi all…wise。 It is true； then； that we deprive God of that
infinity which orthodox Theologians have ascribed to Him； but the
bounds we leave Him are of such incalculable extent that nothing
can be imagined more glorious or vaster； and in return for the
limitations we have assigned to Him； we render it possible for
men to believe in Him ； and love Him； not with their lips only；
but with their hearts and lives。
Which； I may now venture to ask my readers； is the true God…the
God of the Theologian； or He whom we may see around us； and in
whose presence we stand each hour and moment of our lives？
CHAPTER VIII
THE LIFE EVERLASTING
Let us now consider the life which we can look forward to with
certainty after death； and the moral government of the world here
on earth。
If we could hear the leaves complaining to one another that they
must die； and commiserating the hardness of their lot in having
ever been induced to bud forth； we should； I imagine； despise
them for their peevishness more than we should pity them。 We
should tell them that though we could not see reason for thinking
that they would ever hang again upon the same…or any at all
similar…bough as the same individual leaves； after they had once
faded and fallen off； yet that as they had been changing
personalities without feeling it during the whole of their
leafhood； so they would on death continue to do this selfsame
thing by entering into new phases of life。 True； death will
deprive them of conscious memory concerning their now current
life； but； though they die as leaves； they live in the tree whom
they have helped to vivify； and whose growth and continued well…
being is due solely to this life and death of its component
personalities。
We consider the cells which are born and die within us yearly to
have been sufficiently honoured ＇sic＇ in having contributed their
quotum to our life； why should we have such difficulty in seeing
that a healthy enjoyment and employment of our life will give us
a sufficient reward in that growth of God wherein we may live
more truly and effectually after death than we have lived when we
were conscious of existence？ Is Handel dead when he influences
and sets in motion more human beings in three months now than
during the whole； probably； of the years in which he thought that
he was alive？ What is being alive if the power to draw men for
many miles in order that they may put themselves en
rapport with him is not being so？ True； Handel no longer
knows the power which he has over us； but this is a small matter；
he no longer animates six feet of flesh and blood； but he lives
in us as the dead leaf lives in the tree。 He is with God； and God
knows him though he knows himself no more。
This s