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！
God The Invisible King
by H。 G。 Wells ＇Herbert George Wells＇
CONTENTS
PREFACE
1。 THE COSMOGONY OF MODERN RELIGION
2。 HERESIES； OR THE THINGS THAT GOD IS NOT
3。 THE LIKENESS OF GOD
4。 THE RELIGION OF ATHEISTS
5。 THE INVISIBLE KING
6。 MODERN IDEAS OF SIN AND DAMNATION
7。 THE IDEA OF A CHURCH
THE ENVOY
PREFACE
This book sets out as forcibly and exactly as possible the religious belief of the writer。 That belief is not orthodox Christianity； it is not； indeed； Christianity at all； its core nevertheless is a profound belief in a personal and intimate God。 There is nothing in its statements that need shock or offend anyone who is prepared for the expression of a faith different from and perhaps in several particulars opposed to his own。 The writer will be found to be sympathetic with all sincere religious feeling。 Nevertheless it is well to prepare the prospective reader for statements that may jar harshly against deeply rooted mental habits。 It is well to warn him at the outset that the departure from accepted beliefs is here no vague scepticism； but a quite sharply defined objection to dogmas very widely revered。 Let the writer state the most probable occasion of trouble forthwith。 An issue upon which this book will be found particularly uncompromising is the dogma of the Trinity。 The writer is of opinion that the Council of Nicaea； which forcibly crystallised the controversies of two centuries and formulated the creed upon which all the existing Christian churches are based； was one of the most disastrous and one of the least venerable of all religious gatherings； and he holds that the Alexandrine speculations which were then conclusively imposed upon Christianity merit only disrespectful attention at the present time。 There you have a chief possibility of offence。 He is quite unable to pretend any awe for what he considers the spiritual monstrosities established by that undignified gathering。 He makes no attempt to be obscure or propitiatory in this connection。 He criticises the creeds explicitly and frankly； because he believes it is particularly necessary to clear them out of the way of those who are seeking religious consolation at this present time of exceptional religious need。 He does little to conceal his indignation at the role played by these dogmas in obscuring； perverting； and preventing the religious life of mankind。 After this warning such readers from among the various Christian churches and sects as are accessible to storms of theological fear or passion to whom the Trinity is an ineffable mystery and the name of God almost unspeakably awful； read on at their own risk。 This is a religious book written by a believer； but so far as their beliefs and religion go it may seem to them more sceptical and more antagonistic than blank atheism。 That the writer cannot tell。 He is not simply denying their God。 He is declaring that there is a living God； different altogether from that Triune God and nearer to the heart of man。 The spirit of this book is like that of a missionary who would only too gladly overthrow and smash some Polynesian divinity of shark's teeth and painted wood and mother…of…pearl。 To the writer such elaborations as 〃begotten of the Father before all worlds〃 are no better than intellectual shark's teeth and oyster shells。 His purpose； like the purpose of that missionary； is not primarily to shock and insult； but he is zealous to liberate； and he is impatient with a reverence that stands between man and God。 He gives this fair warning and proceeds with his matter。 His matter is modern religion as he sees it。 It is only incidentally and because it is unavoidable that he attacks doctrinal Christianity。 In a previous book； 〃First and Last Things〃 （Constable and Co。）； he has stated his convictions upon certain general ideas of life and thought as clearly as he could。 All of philosophy； all of metaphysics that is； seems to him to be a discussion of the relations of class and individual。 The antagonism of the Nominalist and the Realist； the opposition of the One and the Many； the contrast of the Ideal and the Actual； all these oppositions express a certain structural and essential duality in the activity of the human mind。 From an imperfect recognition of that duality ensue great masses of misconception。 That was the substance of 〃First and Last Things。〃 In this present book there is no further attack on philosophical or metaphysical questions。 Here we work at a less fundamental level and deal with religious feeling and religious ideas。 But just as the writer was inclined to attribute a whole world of disputation and inexactitudes to confused thinking about the exact value of classes and terms； so here he is disposed to think that interminable controversies and conflicts arise out of a confusion of intention due to a double meaning of the word 〃God〃； that the word 〃God〃 conveys not one idea or set of ideas； but several essentially different ideas； incompatible one with another； and falling mainly into one or other of two divergent groups； and that people slip carelessly from one to the other of these groups of ideas and so get into ultimately inextricable confusions。 The writer believes that the centuries of fluid religious thought that preceded the violent ultimate crystallisation of Nicaea； was essentially a struggleobscured； of course； by many complexities to reconcile and get into a relationship these two separate main series of God…ideas。 Putting the leading id a part against evil。 The writer believes that these dogmas of relationship are not merely extraneous to religion； but an impediment to religion。 His aim in this book is to give a statement of religion which is no longer entangled in such speculations and disputes。
Let him add only one other note of explanation in this preface； and that is to remark that except for one incidental passage （in Chapter IV。； 1）； nowhere does he discuss the question of personal immortality。 ＇It is discussed in 〃First and Last Things；〃 Book IV； 4。＇ He omits this question because he does not consider that it has any more bearing upon the essentials of religion； than have the theories we may hold about the relation of God and the moral law to the starry universe。 The latter is a question for the theologian； the former for the psychologist。 Whether we are mortal or immortaea of this book very roughly； these two antagonistic typical conceptions of God may be best contrasted by speaking of one of them as God…as…Nature or the Creator； and of the other as God…as…Christ or the Redeemer。 One is the great Outward God； the other is the Inmost God。 The first idea was perhaps developed most highly and completely in the God of Spinoza。 It is a conception of God tending to pantheism； to an idea of a comprehensive God as ruling with justice rather than affection； to a conception of aloofness and awestriking worshipfulness。 The second idea； which is opposed to this idea of an absolute God； is the God of the human heart。 The writer would suggest that the great outline of the theological struggles of that phase of civilisatio