I don't know, do you?Ricker, Marilla M. (Marilla Marks)
Religion
I don't know, do you?
Ricker, Marilla M. (Marilla Marks)
Agnosticism; Free thought
Hence, with the exception of two or three denominations, to become a
professed Christian means to accept credulously and without question
a system of belief about Nature and man and the world which you would
deny in toto if you reasoned as you do about other things, and which
you do practically deny by re-explaining and refining it into anything
but what is stated. Down deep in your heart you do not, and never
did, believe it in the same honest way in which you form your other
opinions.
Think for a moment of the Christian idea of the world, its origin, its
shape, place, importance, and its final end. Does any man or woman who
has been through a common-school geography believe the ideas implied in
the common Christian dogmas regarding the world? We must remember that
the world taught in the geography is not the Christian world.
The world taught in the Christian dogmas is beneath the heavens--not a
rolling sphere flying through space. It is flat, and the sun and stars
pass over it daily. It is the chief object of God's creation on which
to place man. It is God's footstool, and his throne is Heaven above. He
created it just four thousand and four years before the Christian era
began. Now we _all_ know that this is _not_ true; that there is no up
nor down; that the earth is not the center; that it is _not_ flat; that
the sun does not go round it; that it is a very insignificant little
orb; that "up in Heaven" is an utterly meaningless expression; and that
the world is not a creation, but an evolution.
And yet thousands of people credulously cling to creeds which embody
the notions of barbarous or uncivilized ages.
Take the dogma of revelation. It tells us that the Bible is a
revelation of the will and wisdom of an omniscient God; that it is a
perfect and sufficient rule of faith and practise. What, in the name
of humanity, causes people to make such statements today? It is like
trying to light the house with a saucer of tallow in which a rag is
immersed, instead of using gas or electricity.
Take an example of this Bible. In Deuteronomy xiv: 21, we read, "Ye
shall not eat of anything that dieth of itself: thou mayest give it
unto the sojourner that is within thy gates, that he may eat it; or
thou mayest sell it unto a foreigner: for _thou_ art a holy people unto
Jehovah thy God." In Matthew vii: 12, we read, "Whatsoever ye would
that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them."
Why do you talk about the infallibility, the inerrancy, or even the
moral unity of a volume written by many hands at widely different
times? Are such people so ignorant that they have not read the Book
they are swearing by? Are they moral idiots and do not know the
plainest right and wrong? Are they scoundrels and have some deceitful
reason for urging such a book as an authority? Or are they the dupes of
their own credulity, clinging without thought to the beliefs in which
they have been reared? They are evidently not using commonsense in an
honest way.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account