Not Guilty: A Defence of the Bottom DogBlatchford, Robert
Philosophy
Not Guilty: A Defence of the Bottom Dog
Blatchford, Robert
Criminals; Free will and determinism
If man did not invent, nor create himself; if man did not create "the
power" bestowed upon him by God; if man did not bestow that power upon
himself, how can man be responsible for the power or for its acts?
God not only created man; He created the material of which man was made,
and the laws of the universe into which man was introduced.
God is the "First Great Cause": He created all things: the evil and the
good. How can God blame man for the effects of which God is the cause?
For the defeat of all Christian apologists it is not necessary for me to
add another word; the argument is invincible as it stands. But for the
reader's sake it may be as well to deal rather more fully with what
may be to him a new and startling idea. Let us then return to Mr.
Chesterton's plea.
God is said to give to man a "power": a power which, Mr. Chesterton
says, God "made out of Himself." And this power will create thoughts,
will create actions as God creates stars.
But we see that man cannot create the thoughts nor cause the actions
until God gives him the "power." Then it is the "power" that creates
the thoughts or acts. Then it is not man, but the "power"--the power God
made out of Himself and bestowed upon man--that creates the thoughts or
acts. Then the "power" is a kind of lord or ruler made by God, and put
by God over man, as a rider is placed upon a horse, or a pilot on a
ship. Then man is no more responsible for the acts or the thoughts of
this ruling power than a horse is responsible for the acts of a jockey,
or a ship for the acts of a pilot.
In fact, the "power" given by God to man is only another name for the
"will of God," or the "power of God"; and if man's acts are ruled, or
created, by the will or power of God, how can God justly punish man for
those acts?
If God created man as well as this imaginary "power" which God is said
to give to man, God is responsible for the acts of both.
It is claimed by others that man is responsible to God for his acts
because God gave him "reason," or because God gave him a "conscience,"
or because God gave him a "will" to choose.
But these words, "conscience," "reason," and "will," are only other
names for Mr. Chesterton's imaginary "power."
Let us be careful to keep our thoughts quite clear and unentangled. If
we speak of "will," or "power," or "reason," as a thing "given to man,"
we imply that "will," or "power," is a thing _outside_ of man, and not a
part of him.
Having failed to saddle man with responsibility for himself, our
opponents would now make him responsible for some "power" outside
himself. The simple answer is that man made neither himself nor his
powers, and that God made man and the power given to man; therefore God
and not man is responsible. Conscience and reason and the "power" are
rulers or guides given to man by God. God made these guides or rulers.
These guides must be true guides, or false guides: they must be good or
bad.
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