The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 07 (of 12): Dresden Edition—DiscussionsIngersoll, Robert Green
Religion
The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 07 (of 12): Dresden Edition—Discussions
Ingersoll, Robert Green
Free thought
I do not confess that God reveals himself in Nature as an infinite God,
without mercy. I do not admit that there is an infinite Being anywhere
responsible for the agonies and tears, for the barbarities and horrors
of this life. I cannot believe that there is in the universe a Being
with power to prevent these things. I hold no God responsible. I
attribute neither cruelty nor mercy to Nature. Nature neither weeps
nor rejoices. I cannot believe that this world, as it now is, as it has
been, was created by an infinitely wise, powerful, and benevolent
God. But it is far better that we should all go down "with souls
unsatisfied" to the dreamless grave, to the tongueless silence of the
voiceless dust, than that countless millions of human souls should
suffer forever.
Eternal sleep is better than eternal pain. Eternal punishment is eternal
revenge, and can be inflicted only by an eternal monster.
Mr. George A. Locey endeavors to put his case in an extremely small
compass, and satisfies himself with really one question, and that is:
"If a man in good health is stricken with disease, is assured that a
physician can cure him, but refuses to take the medicine and dies, ought
there to be any escape?"
He concludes that the physician has done his duty; that the patient was
obdurate and suffered the penalty.
The application he makes is this:
"The Christian's 'tidings of great joy' is the message that the Great
Physician tendered freely. Its acceptance is a cure certain, and a
life of eternal happiness the reward. If the soul accepts, are they not
tidings of great joy; and if the soul rejects, is it not unreasonable on
the part of Colonel Ingersoll to try and sneak out and throw the blame
on God?"
The answer to this seems easy. The cases are not parallel. If an
infinite God created us all, he knew exactly what we would do. If he
gave us free will it does not change the result, because he knew how we
would use the free will.
Now, if he knew that billions upon billions would refuse to take the
remedy, and consequently would suffer eternal pain, why create them?
There would have been much less misery in the world had he left them
dust.
What right has a God to make a failure? Why should he change dust into
a sentient being, knowing that that being was to be the heir of endless
agony?
If the supposed physician had created the patient who refused to take
the medicine, and had so created him that he knew he would refuse to
take it, the cases might be parallel.
According to the orthodox creed, millions are to be damned who never
heard of the medicine or of the "Great Physician."
There is one thing said by the Rev. Mr. Talmage that I hardly think
he could have intended. Possibly there has been a misprint. It is the
following paragraph:
"Who" (speaking of Jesus) "has such an eye to our need; such a lip to
kiss away our sorrow; such a hand to snatch us out of the fire; _such
a foot to trample our enemies_; such a heart to embrace all our
necessities?"
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