France -- Social life and customs -- 19th century -- Fiction; French fiction -- Translations into English
“But if the physical world seems inexplicable, the moral world presents
still stronger arguments against God. Where, then, is progress? If all
things are indeed moving toward perfection why do we die young? why do
not nations perpetuate themselves? The world having issued from God and
being contained in God can it be stationary? Do we live once, or do
we live always? If we live once, hurried onward by the march of the
Great-Whole, a knowledge of which has not been given to us, let us act
as we please. If we are eternal, let things take their course. Is the
created being guilty if he exists at the instant of the transitions? If
he sins at the moment of a great transformation will he be punished for
it after being its victim? What becomes of the Divine goodness if we are
not transferred to the regions of the blest--should any such exist?
What becomes of God’s prescience if He is ignorant of the results of the
trials to which He subjects us? What is this alternative offered to man
by all religions,--either to boil in some eternal cauldron or to walk
in white robes, a palm in his hand and a halo round his head? Can it
be that this pagan invention is the final word of God? Where is the
generous soul who does not feel that the calculating virtue which seeks
the eternity of pleasure offered by all religions to whoever fulfils
at stray moments certain fanciful and often unnatural conditions, is
unworthy of man and of God? Is it not a mockery to give to man impetuous
senses and forbid him to satisfy them? Besides, what mean these ascetic
objections if Good and Evil are equally abolished? Does Evil exist?
If substance in all its forms is God, then Evil is God. The faculty of
reasoning as well as the faculty of feeling having been given to man
to use, nothing can be more excusable in him than to seek to know the
meaning of human suffering and the prospects of the future.
“If these rigid and rigorous arguments lead to such conclusions
confusion must reign. The world would have no fixedness; nothing
would advance, nothing would pause, all would change, nothing would be
destroyed, all would reappear after self-renovation; for if your mind
does not clearly demonstrate to you an end, it is equally impossible to
demonstrate the destruction of the smallest particle of Matter; Matter
can transform but not annihilate itself.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account