,.

\
'

His view is Satkhyati or Yatharthakhyati which means that in knowkdgc

it is the existent real alone which is cognized, i.e., there is real object
corresponding to its co ntent. According to the doctrine of triplicatin n
or quintuplication, some particles of silver arc actually present in th e
shell and sn when the !-> h<.: 11 is mistaken for silver, silver is actually,
th ough partially, presented to consciou~ncss. When a white con ch is
seen yellow by a jaundiced person, the yellO\vncss of the hilc is actually
~ - transmitted to the conch through the rays of the eyes. The objects in a
dream are actually created by God to make the dreamer reap the fruits
.~ of his actions. I lcnce there is no ideal or suhjecti,·c element in error,
not even in such cases of illusion ,rhich arc called 'private' like yellow-
conch and dream-objects. Error is only partial knrmlcdgc and there _is
no logi.cal distinction between knm..-Icdge and error. The distinction is
merely practical. Error does not serve the practical interests of life like
knowledge ; though, unlike the pragmatists, Ramanuja admits and values
the cogniti\·e side of knowledge more than its practical side.

~ - Ramesh Sharma
\'Jl (Elecrrosrars)
Janki Devi Memorial College
New Delhi-110060

....
. METAPHYSICAL nEWS Mob. 9911444224

FHOJ\1 thc: ahove account tl:;·l·e things hccomc clear and all the three
arc clirectl y opposed to the .·\J vaitic position of Shankara. First,' all
.. .... . . ~no.wl.cdgc: involves.. distinctions and there is no unc1ilfercntiated pure
consciousness. Pure identity and pure difference arc alike unreal.
R:imanuja hcrc agrees with I lcgcl. Identity is alll'ays _qualified by
dilfcrcncc. Unity is ah,·ays in and tr.rough and b~causc of diversity.
. ..
"""~;
I
Pure being is pure nothing. Shankara is wrung in saying that Ilrahrnan
is pure difference less being. Brahman or Reality cannot be indeterminate,
undifferentiated, qualitylcss suhstance. It is detenajnatc and qualified
~'. (savishc~a). When the Upani~ads speak of Brahrrian as 'devoid of
i -
qualities', they only mran that Jlrahman has no bad qualities and not

"J
_that it has no qualities wl1atsoc,w. It is the ahode ~fall good qualities
and is the inca rnation of all pcrfl'ction. Hence Shankara's distinction
• l-
between Bral11nan and Is lwara, between higher and lower Brahman, is

'
') h

) IS
II
unw.1rrant cd :i nd unjustifiahlc. Orahman is God and He is not a formless
ide ntity, hut a 11 ln di \ idual, a Person. who i:.; ahrays qualified by matter
and ~o ul s ,, hich form I lis body. Secondl y. the self is di stinct from
kn m, lcdgl' It is undoubtedly an eternal sel f- consciou s subject, but it
t.
is al:,; o a self- lumihous substance possc.<,sing dharmahhi,ta-jM na as its

' I . cssentiaJ attribure. Hence the self is not pur<- 1.: onscin11!1,ness, but onlv
thl' eterna l subs tr,uu m of c11nsciousncss. All the individual souls ar~
rc.1I , pirit t1.1I rnhstance, whu.: h arc pervaded b) God and form JIt! body.
T /. •:y :m · ,1t 11m1t.: m n,111 ,rc J nd in liberation thn d,, no t rner~c in God,

345
 . _.
His view 1s Satkhyati or Yat art ah . Y
h- h kl1 ati wh•· ic edh rn<'ans
i.<· .. rlith at in knowl,.:dgc:
t-rt· 1s rea l objc:q
. . h . t t real ·1lone wh1 c is cogn1z , . . 1·
1t 1s t e ex1s
1. t O th e du ct ri nc o/ trip icati
d . en 1·t · c'0·nt·nt l\ccnrc 111g . n,
correspon
· mg
1· · to :; · .'
011e panic es o • •~ '
1 <..: I t· si
·l•·•·r ·m:' act
· l! ,tl l\-
· p resent 1 .
n th e1
or qumtup 1catwn, s ' . f .- . ·r rh n is anua lly
shell and so when th <.: !> hd! is n 11 stakcn •ir si1I t • " . h .'
though' partially,
• pn.:sc nrcJ to consc101 . 1sncss.
_ . \\ "hcn a 1•, 1 .11t, l'. cone ll1s
.seen }·ellow by a Jaundrced
. . person,, t h e. ye~.01 ... ,_ nf tlw . h1lc!is. actua
. 'I 11.- 1c.,. . . y
transmitted to the conch thro11g/i t I1e rays Of t hc e_ cs. I f .. .
-dream are actually created by ,oc to ma ·c t c . r·v, ·· 'l hl: O)Jects . ma
· (' i k h d c:rn ier r ed p t ic I u its
of his actions. Hence th ere is no idea l or su/_1jcct i1 t: L l('lllCHt error,
. n.ot even m !lJ1~h cases of 1/lus1<m ll'luch arc ea ct pr i Ia L
111•
. . - • · 11 l · · • t •' U c rl'llow- •

· conch
· and <heam· · · "'biects.
· · brnc . "· nn Iy pact"' · J knnn /nd • •nc '.·111d. there . .IS
no log;caJ d;St;nei;o~ hetwccn knnv ledge end cmoe. '/'I,, drntm '.t,nn "
merely practical. Error does not se rn: th e prac,; r:i / int,·,, ,rs of life like
knowledge; though! unfi kc th e pragmatists, Rim:in11_i.1,ll l 1: ir , and \·:du es .
the cognitive side of knuwlcJ gc more th an it s pr.1cr ic:1 I ~1,lc .

\'IT Ramesh Sharma

(Elecrrosrars)
· Ja n ki Devi Memorial College
META PHYS ! CA L \ . I EWS New Delhi-110060
Mob.9911444224
FHOJ\1 the above account th:-vc things hecom c clea r and all the three
ace d;ce,tly opposed to the ,<l,·aitic position nf Sh,nkaca. fost, .,U
knowledge ;nrnJ,cs dist;nctinns ,nd th<'iE ;,···nn U,iJiifcC~.;,;.,ed pure
consciousness. Pure id entity and pure difference a rc a lik e urireal.
Rim; nuja hcce sgccc, u ith II cgc I. l dent;., is ah,·, y, q uaJ;fi,d · hy
d;ffeceocc. Uuity ;, ,1,,,y, in ""' tf.cough and because uf div,;sitY:
Pu,e be;ng;, puce nothing. Sh, nkarn ;, ,ccung ;n say;ng· th,i Brnhman.
;s pu,e ddfe_rencclcss be; ng. Drnhman ' " Rea Ii ty cannot be ; ndctecmiOate,
und;ffecentfatcd, qualitvless substance. lt ;s dctcnnjnatc •nd qualified
(sav;she,a), When the llpanis,ds speak of Brnhman as 'dcvo;d of
quaJ;t;cs•, they only mean that Brnhm,n has nn bad qualities an_d not
J th,i ;t has no quaJi6es whatsoc.w. lt ;, the ahndc of all gond qu,J;t;cs
s
and ;s the ;ncam.,;on nf all pecfcctiun. Hence Shankaca's d;s,;nctinn
between Brnhmon and lsh,,ca, bcto een h;ghec and lnwcc Brahman, ;s
Ii unwacrnnted and unjus,ifiahlc. lirnhman ;s God and He ;, not a focmJcss
II
;dcn,;ty, hut an lnd;,-idual, a Pecson, o·ho ;, ahrn,·s qualified by mattcc t
is and wuJs wl,kh fonn His body. Secondly, the self ;s distinct from
t. f
knowledge . lt ;s undoubtedly an eternal self-conscious subject, but it
i:- ;s also a self-lum;noos subsrancc posscss;ng dhacmahhGta-jnrrna as its
111 esscnt;al attcihute. Hence the self ;s not puce consciousness, but only
, ... . .
. • 1, the cte<nal substcatum «f consciousocss. All the ;ndi,id ual souls aci
real spfritu,I substances wh;ch ace pc•c,adcd by r,,,d and fo cn , Jr;, body.
Ti,,-_, .tee ato,nic ;,, nat ucc and in libecation thn· dn not mccgc in c,,d,
.r
 '.
~nd an?thcr. It is an inner, i_nseparable, vital and organic relation. God
1s quc1l1ficd by matter and souls. 1 They form His body and are insepar-
able f ro ~1 a~d utterly dependent on Him. 2 Ramanuja defines a body as
that which 1s cont ro lled, supported and utilized for its purposes by a
sou l. :i Matter and ·souls arc called attributes (prakara) of God; they are
the co ntrolled (niy i rnya), the supported (dharya), the parts (amsha) and
~he accessory rneans_(§_h~a,} while God is their substance (prakari),
controller (ri:iyanta}, s.upport · (adhara), :the whole (amshi) and the
principal en.cl (she~i). They are eternal with God, but are not external
to him . God is free from all external differences - homogeneous (saja-
tiy~) as well as hete rogeneous (vijatiya), since there is nothing either
similar or dissimilar which is external to or other than Him. But He
pos~esses internal differences (svagata bheda) as His organic body !S
made of real and diverse elements like matter and souls. His relation
with them is natural (svabhavika) and eternal (sanatana). God is both
the material an d t he instrumental cause of the world. He is the immanent
as well as the transcendent ground of the world. He is immanent in the
whole world as its· inner controller (antaryatni) and yet in His essence
-He transcends the world.- His is a perfect personality. He is full of all
good qualities-Existence, Knowledge and Blis$; Trnth, Goodness and
Beauty; Lustre, Love and Power.
Ramanuja finds justification for his doctrine of the Absolute as a Triune
Unity in such following Upani~adic passages. The Shvetashvatara 4 says:
.. There...are three ..ultimate .existences,-=·the etemal-andaU-knowing and
all-powerful God, the e~ernal powerless soul and the eternal matter, and
these three cons.titute the Absoiute. The same Upani~ad further tells us:
This alone need be knq~n and there is nothing else to be known-that
there are th-rec entides, the_enjoyer (bhokta), tire enjoyed (bhogya) and
the mover (p~erita}, w:hich . constitute the Absolute. If a man -knows
these three he knows Brahman;&The same Upani~ad goes on: The One
God who runs through all beings, who is all-pervasive and who is the
of
immanent inner controller all beings is the Supreme Reality. There
is nothing greater _than He, there is nothing external to Him, He fills
the ,vho le u-niversc. The Taitiiriya tells us that all beings arise from,
live in and return to this Brahman. 6 God is the.soul of Nature and also
the so ul of souls. He is immanent and yet He is transcendent also. The
I3 rhada raQyaka describes Him as the running thread (sutra) which binds
togethe r all the wo rlds and all the souls. He is the immanent inner
controller (antaryami) of all. He is present in matter and yet He is
differe nt from matter; matter does not know Him; matter forms His
body; He cont rols matte r from with in ; He is the S u preme Soul, the
1
c h1.J .,, h,d vishiHa f shvara}:I. :? san·am p.aramapuru~er:ia sarvatman a svirthe niy:imya~1
<l h.i rvmn t:Khchhe;iata ik asvarOpam iti sarvam chetanichetanam t asya shariram, Shn•
B~.i .,a , 1!. 1, ,1. i sh ri. flh:i~ya, II, 1,9. 4 1, 9. $ f, 12 . 6 Ill , 1.

Ij 347
 - - t I1e I mmortal. 1 Just as the spokes arc boun d toge·t hcr w__itl
:\ ntaryam1, • 1 •tn
<
the wheel, so also all the elements and all the souls are bou nd t' '
within this Atma n. 2 He is like fire ; th ey are like s parks. T hey ar -. '....
1
H e is their reality. They are true; He is their truth. Hence I le 1..
th e T rucst of the; true. a ·

IX
GOD
r:--1 Ra manuja 's account of God ' we tnav, notice three points of ,;, i, •.i•.. ·
. 1
tance. First, God is identified with ·the Absolute.- He is Brah m ;ll ' .. f l ', ,
th
Brahman must be a savi·she~a .or a qualified unity. God stands for .~ .
1
whole universe and matter and soul:, form His body, He bcin \; l.. •-'.-
soul. As the Absolute, the ultim~te unity-in-and-through-tri n it y , d u:
co ncrete Whole, God may be viewed through two stages- as c:1 : · ·
as effect. During the state of dissolution (pralaya); God rem ain ::- ~1 ' t'
cau se with ~ubtle matter and uncmbodied souls forming His body• T h('
\\'h o le universe lies latent i'n Him. Duririg the state of creatio n (,,; :-~1 ; ) f-
th e s ubtle matter becomes gross and the unembodied souls (except illl
f
nit ya and mukta souls) become embodied according t o their karmas. r n
this effect-state the universe becomes manifest. The former s ta t,.. is
ca lled the causal state (karal)avastha) of Bra):iman, while the lat te r '.- l -' l ' -
is th e · effect-state (karyavastha) of Ilrahman. 4 Secondly, God . is C(J ·1·1·· . _ _ -~
s idered as the immanent inner controller (antary.am1), the q-i.iJ.L;i,:(l
s ubs t ance (vishe~ya or prakari) who is in Himself change less and is th e
tinrn on:d Mover of this world-process. In His essence He docs n o t
s uffer c hange which is said to fall to the lot of His attributes ur m od es
o nly. Ramanuja makes no distinction between an attribute and a n 1c,, k.
Matter and souls may be ~alled either attributes or modes (prak :;1 ,;) .
They arc absolutely dependent on God and are inseparable from l lim.
They are His bo dy and He is their soul. Just as in the case of an or d in .1 1v
in d ivid ual only the body undergoes change while the soul is changdt·s:·,
simi larly it js only the body of G o d, i.e., the matter and the in<li\·idu ;-il
~ouls, tha t undergo changes and not God himself who is th e ir souL
J knee God i~ the unchanging co n t rolle r of all change and the limitations
of matter as well as the miseries an d the imperfections of the finite suub
dn not affect the essence of God. T hirdly, God 1s also transcende nt . l lc
j._ the pcrfcrt personality. He has a Divi ne body (aprakrtadeha,·ishi~.,a,.
Lnahodimcnt is not the can.Sc of bondage. It is ka r ma which is the c~~1: .
(lf hontl.i~ f~ncc (im.l, though embodied, 1s not bound, fo r I h: i ; t'i•
Lord uf Karma. 'f'hc first two points about< i"d are derived fr< ,!

ah prth:~) ll'lll tl j (han p(thil)J II01J1f04 }1Ul1 Prth1d na \ Ci.l..1 , }.U\i Prth1\ i &!-. -11 - .·
,1h prtJu\im 1111.,ro ,-;una,u, c» tc ijrmJ ari!an~;n~ arnrt.1h Ill , 7. : I I.
, :,:, , " up.10 1.>lt s~ n ,1•., .i "at,111ll 1u, ll , , . 20 . ;-11, d.> i,.i , J, p. l:li
 interpretation of the Upani~ads, while this point which is theistic in
character is the result of the .Bhagavata influence on Ramanuja. Rama-
nuja tries to fu se the immanent Upani~adic Absolute with the tran s-
cendent God of the Pa rk hara tra o r Bhagarata th eis m. God, as th e pe rfect
personality, is.dcrn id of all .de merits and possesses all merits. He has
infinite· knowkd~e and bliss. H e has a Divine body and is the c reator,
preserver ··a'nd destroyer of this uni ve rse. I-le.: h:-is His consort Lak~mi,
the -symbol of power a~d ~ ercy. ql_led .-~yai:ia or: Va$µde va.
He lives in His citadel Vaiku,gha which is made of Pure Sattva (shuddha
sattva) or Nityavibhuti . His qualities like knowledge, power and mercy
etc. are eternal, infinite, numbe rless, unlimited, undefiled and matchless.
"•.-: He is knO\~ledge to the ignor.irit, power to the powerless, mercy to the
gu~lty, grace to the afflicted, parental affection to the impure,. perennial
attachment to those who fear separation, nearness to those who pine to
see Him, and kindness toall. 1 ..Though One in Himself, He.manifests
Hi1"0,self in five form s in order to help His devotees. As the immanent
soul of the uni ve rse, He is Antaryami (first fo rm). As the transcendent
·personal Lord, Narayar:ia or Vasudeva, He is Para or Supreme (second
form). As . the creator, preserver and · destroyer; He reveals Himself
through four-fold Vyuha (third form); His manifestation as the Lord
. is called Vasudeva (this should be distinguished from the Para Vasudeva
of. whom this is the first manifestation). His manifestation as the ruler
of the cognitive aspect of the souls (buddhitattva or jivatattva) and as
the destroyer of this universe is called Sankar~ai:ia. His manifestation as
the rulerofthe emotional aspect of ·thesouJs· ·(manastattr:1)'and~Kthe ·····--·
creator of this universe is called Pradyurnna. His .manifestation as the
ruler of the volitional aspect of the souls (ahankaratattva) and as th e
preserver of this universe is called Aniruddha. All ·these four manifrsta-
t:ons are called Vyuha and they arc the partial ·a·nd incomplete manifes-
tations of the Supreme Lord (Para). \\'hen God _descends ~own on this
earth in the human or the animal form, He is called Vibhava or A vatara
(incarnation) (fourth form) . He does so in order to protect the good,
punish the wicked and restore the dh::irma, the Law.:! V1bhava is of two
kinds-primary (mukhya) when the Lord Himself descends, li~e Kr~Da,
and secondary (gaur:ia) when the souls arc inspired by the Lord, like
Shiva, Buddha etc. Of these only the former are to be worshipped by the
seekers for liberation. The fifth and the last form of God is when out of
His extreme mercy He takes the form of the h oly idols (archa~-atara)
enshrined in th e recognized temples like Shrirarygam so that His
de vo tees might get opportuniti es to serYc Him physically.

I •1•;1tt 1 ,H r .:1 .\,

t
p. 95 . Gi t5, IV, 8.
i1

X
. SELF

w E now cons1"de r R-amanuJa

- . , .
s concept10n ak_ara) or -- . C:--.
o f chit ~r the( individual
soul. Though the individual soul is an attribute or_~ode P~ tance in t--
God and forms part of His body, yet it is als~ a spin~~l s~ / ht. It is \
itself and is absolutely real. It is an eternal pomt of·spmt~~ ig bodied C-
beyon~ creati_on and destru~io_n. In the state ~f crea~ion, it 1~:~e.state \
according to its karmas, while m the state of d1ssoluti0n an~ 1 ·f ya) C:.-
of liberation, it remains· in itself. But in the state of dissolut~on (~r~a t~ i
· it is tinged with karmas so that in the next cycle of creation? it . as
·c and to become em bod"1e d m
descend .to t h e mun d ane hie · order · .reap
.. to d I

the fruits of its karmas. The relation of the soul and karma is sat _tc-· l
be beginningless. But in liberation, the soul shines in its pristine purity · IE
untouched by karma and therefore can never descend t~ the mundane
existence any more. Though it is eternal, real, unique, uncreated and f
imperishable, yet it is finite and individual, being only a part or mo_d e. L
of God. Hence it is regarded as atomic (ai:iu) in size. As an atomic poi ~ t •
of spiritual light, it is imperceptible, eternal and changeless. Thou?h it
is really subjected to earthly existence and to the various imperfect10ns ,
defects and miseries which the wordly life implies, yet these do not
affect its essence. In its essence it is changeless and perfect. Through
··· ··· · · ·all its births and deaths-which do not touch its essence-it maintains
its identity and essential nature. The soul is different from its body,
sense-orga ns , mind, vital b~eaths and even cognition. In samsara, it
wrongly identifi_es itself ,~iJh these due to ignorance and karma. There
are innumerable individual souls. They are essentially alike, like
the monads of Leibnitz or the jivas of the Jainas, and they differ only
in numbe r. Ra_!llanuja advocates qualitative monism and quantitative
p luralism of s o uls. The soul is conceived as a real knower (jnata), a real
agent (karta) and a real e njoyer (bhokta). Action and enjoyment are
rega rded as me~cl y different states of knowledge which is said to be the
e ssence of the s oul. The· soul is a self-luminous substance as well as a
se lf-co nsc ious s ubjec t. It manifests itself without the aid of knowledge
an d it is a lso self-conscious. It is the substance of its dharma-bhiita-
jiiana which is ca pable of contraction a n d expansion. It knows the
objects through its knowledge which reveals itself as well as the objects
to be known by t_he self. Knowle~ge e_ xists fo r the self and t h o u gh
knowledge shows Hsclf and th e obJect, 1t"'tan .know · neither . The self
alone ca ~ kno,_,· itself ~s ,,:ell as its object.' thou g h it can reveal only itself
and not its obJ~ct which 1s r~veale d• for 1t by knowle dge. Knowledge or
conscwu,;nes~ is not an acc idental property of th e self. It is its very

35°
 ,•

essence. The self is of the nature of knowledge. It is the substance of

knowledge which is its essential and inseparable attribute. Knowledge
always belongs to the self and persists even in deep sleep and in libera--
tion. Knowledge does not manifest itself in dee p slecr for there are then
no objects _to be revealed. Knowl~dge is esse ntially infinite and all .
pervasive. ·While the .self is in bondage its kn owledge is obscured by it~:
karmas and therefore. functions in a restricted manner. \Vhen the sclt
obtains .liberation, all the -karmas- are destroyed an.cl ..there .remains -pc,--
impediment in the W<!-Y of knowledge.with the result that it becomes all -- ·
comprelrensive. The liberated soul becomes omniscient because it~
dharmabhuta-jnana is- restored to its original status ar:ic;i in the absenu
of karmic obstructions..~~mprehenqs all ·objects. Thus· ·the soul, though
atomic in.size, in infinite in·knowledge. Bliss also constit_utes the essence
of the soul. In ·its ~sence, it is anandarupa or ever bliss'fu.L The imper·
fections and rniseries.ot sarhsara, as has been pointed out above, do not
touch its essence. fn liberat.ion, "it enjoys infinite knowledge and ever-
lasting bliss. ft is the self-conscious 'I', the pure Ego and should b,
distinguished from the einpitical ego (ahankara) which is the resu~t ofthe
false identification of the soul with the not-soul, like body, senses, mind,
vital breaths etc. Though the individual soul is absolutely real,.yet it is
not independent. It is utterly dependent on God. It is an attribute or a
mode of God Who is its substance. It is the body of God \Vho· is ~t s
soul. It is supported by God, controlled by God and utilized by Go<l.
It is the ~upported (dharya) and ·God is its support (dharta). It)s, __t~~--........ .
; . controlled (niyamya) and God is ·itfl::o'nfrolle'r ..(riiyarita). It.is··the· means
(sh~a) and God is its end (she~i). It is a mode (prakara) and God is its
substance (prakari). It is a part (amsha) and God is the \Vhole (amshi).
It is the body (sharira) and God is its soul (shariri). And yet it is .a real.-.
agent and performs and reaps the fruits of its z.ctions. Its defects ancl
imperfections a!ld miseries do not affect God. Ramanuja tries to recon--
cile human freedom with Divine sovereignty. God is the master of the
Law of Karma. He is the inner controller of the soul. Yet the soul has
got freedom of will and God, as a self-determined Whole, does not
ir.terfere with it.
a Rarnanuja describes three classes of souls. To the first belong the ever-
e free (nitya-mukta) souls which ,rere ne\·cr bound . Th ey are eYer free .
from karma and prakrti and live in \"aikuQ!ha in constant ser \'ice of the
e Lord. They are She~a, Garu~a, \"i~vaksena etc. To th e second belong
s the Released or Liberated (mukta) souls who \rcre once bound but wh o
h obtained liberation through their aq ion,. kno\rledge and derntion. To
f ...Jhc third belo ng · the Ilou nd (h:iddha ). sn u.l:- \rho arc \\'andering in
:f · sanisiira on acc,,unt of ien,,rancc :!nd Ind kar111:1 s. These arc furrli ci
r
di,·idcd inro four class<:~; supr;r! 1uman, h:1111:rn. :mima l and immobile.
V
•
~- ' .

•
t'< iii

1
WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN

This lecture was delivered on March 6, 1927, at Battersea Town

Hall, under the auspice~ ..<:>f th~ . South London Branch of the
National Secular Society.·

As ·your C_hairman has told you, the subj ect about which I am
going to speak to you tonight i~ 'Why I am not a Christian·.
Perhaps it would be as well. firs.t·of all, to try to make out what
one means by the word 'Christian·. It is used these days in a very
Joose sense hy a great many people. Som e people mean no more
by it than a person who attempts to live a good life. In that sense
I suppose there would be Christians in all sects and creeds;
bu t J do not think that that is the proper sense of the word,
if only beca use it would imply that all th e people who arc not
Christia ns- all th e Buddhists, Confucians. Mohammedans, and
so o n- - are not trying to live a good life. 1 do not mean by a
Christian an y person w ho tri es to li ve decently according to his
lights. I think that you m usr have a certain amount of d efin ite
belief before rou have a right to call yo ursel f a Chr istian . The
word doe~ 11or han· qui te su ch j full -bl oockd .u1e;ming now ,1-; it

•
I• 2
WHy I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN

had in lh c. . t'Imes o f St Augu:,,t111

. e J.11d St T hrn11 a:,, Aquill ,1 " · lu thu-.,l'
days , if a man said that he WJ.S a Chri sti an 11 wa~ kn own w lut
he m~anl. _Yo u acc;e pt ed a \vho k coll ec ti o n ()r l rvL· d ~ whic h _
were se t .out With greal precision, and eve ry sin gle. :,,ylla~ik o f
th
ose creeds you believed with · d1;;- -~~hole strengt h of · yo ur
co nvicti o ns.

WHAT IS A CHRISTIAN?
Nowadays it is l~0t quite that. Vye h~ve to be a little more vague i_i 1
our m eaning of Christianity.. l think. ho~eve r, th at th crl' are tvvo
diffe rent items whi ch ar:e ·quite cssc11tial to anybodr c.i llin ::: !11111 -
self a Christian . The first js one of a dog m~ti c nJ.turv- namdy,
that y0u must believe in God and immortality. If y o u du not
believe in those two things, I do no t think that you can properly
call yourself a Christian . Then, . furth er than that, as the nam e
implies, you must have some kind of belief about Chri st. Thc
Mohamn1edans. for instance, also . believe in God an<l in
immortality, and yet they would not call chemselves C hrislia:ns·:I ·· ·
think you must have at the very lowest the belief that Christ was,
if not divine, at least the best and wisest of m en . If you are not
goin_g to believe that much ·a bout Christ, I do not think you have
any right to call yourself a Christian. Of course there is another
sense which you find in Whitaker's Almanack and in geography
books, where the population of the world is said to be divided
into Christians, Mohammedans, Buddhists, fetish worshippe rs,
and so on; and in that sense we are all Christians. The geo graphy
books count us all in, but that is a purely geogra13hical sense ,
which I suppose we can ignore. Therefore I take it that when l
tell you why I am not a Christian I have to tell you two different
things; first, why I do not believe in God and in in11nona.lity;
and, secondly, why I do no~ think that ·Christ was the best c1.nd
wisest of 1nen, although I grant Him a very high d egree of
m.0ra l gocrdn ~ss. •

•
 '
WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN 3
But fo r thr successful efforts of unbelievers in the past, I could
no t takl' sn elastic a d efiniti on o f Chri stianity as that. As I said
· befo re, i11 oidcn da ys it had a much m o re·full -blooded sense. For
instance , it concluded the bel.i ef in hell . Belief in eternal hell fire
- was an. esse ntial item o f Christian belief until pretty recent times.
· In this co untry·, as yo u know, it ceased to be an essential item
becau se o f a decisio n o f the Privy Council, and from that deci-
sion the Arch bisho p o f Canterbury and the Archbishop of York
dissent½d; but in this country our religion is settled by Act of
Parliament, and therefore the Privy Council was able to override
Their Graces and hell was no longer n·ecessary to a Christian.
Co nsequently l shall not insist that a Christian must believe
in h ell.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

To come to this question of the existence of God, it i~ c1,J~rg~ and
serious question, and if I were to attempt to deal with it in any
adequate manner I should have to keep you here until Kingdom ·
. .c·ome: ~o . d,.at yciu" 'have·to
·wiff excuse me if I deal with it in .
a somewhat summary fashion. You know, of course, tha_t the
<;:atholic Church has laid it down as a dogma that the existe~ce of
God can be proved ·by the unaided reason. That is a somewhat
curious dogma, but it is one of their dogmas. They had to intro-
duc·e··it because at one time the Freethinkers adopted the habit of
I . saying that there were such and such arguments which mere
reason might urge against the existence of God, but of course
th ey kne.w as a matter of faith that God did exist. The a_rguments
and the reasons were set out at great length, and the Catholic
Church felt that th ey must stop it. Therefore they laid it down
that th e ex istence o f God can be proved by the unaided reason,
and th cv had to set up what they consiclPrPd were arguments to
prove it'. The re are, o f course, a number o f them, but I shall take
only a fC?w.

•
4
\
1 t fl f IRS J C AU S( A~C,U f.. H N T A.

1-,,un I 1' du .H ~ll ll lt Ill "'

1
I'• 1h.tp th,"' " '''''' ,111 I t,a-
, un '• ' " .. c•· "' tlu ,
I , n•h111~
•I I I I I \ ( \ \11-.c ( h I \ 1:·1 Ul.llllltl l 1Ill I c,I ,.111 I •
laJ Ill th• \ \JIi l
, , ,.l..1- h,i-. .1 , ,1 11,, . Juel .1 , ) 1 11 1· ' ., tt , , il ut
, 0 ! I ,r,1 t .n1 , 1. 11
111111 ,·r ,m 11 111th, r )"" mu,1 ' " " ' • l ,111
' 1 1 h \t ;irrullH I 11 •
I 1r ,1 ( ll hl \ , , 11 ~ " ' ti , l\.l lll (> I t •· ..._ l "' "" 11 1
•I 1' n o ., .uh, ,. ~' .
I',,. ,I,,. 11 ll l .UI) ' ' ' ) 111111.. I 1 l . Thr 1,h1lP
1 I1 • 111 ,r pl 111., ,111 ,, 1, 11 ,1 q u11, " 1 1
I 11tt1\t1 l l l t M , , ,1 ntl 11
,,1 pl 1t 1, .111d ti,,. IIH 11 n l ,, I l\l' I1.6\t' )'
}t): •t i\ )'.
•
( l l\ \Jll
If Ill
<l 1 'I • H ' l ,u l . J j'H 1 ,,
tu, ,t '") 111111\' Id,,· 1h1 \ 1 , ht\ II " ' ' • I I
•1 •I·" th, r,· , n 11 .,, " J ,r, 1
11,
.
tl111, , ,111, I l l " ' ' d111 th J 1
' ••
ll ,~ '.,J\ tl,.11 , , lit II
t •1 1 , 11 11111 , .11111 ,1 tu , , 1I u l rt) I 1 · ' 1

I i;, J, J ,,11111~ 111 .11 1 J 11d " " · d, 1 .

,1,ng l I 11 ' ' '
I'" u11 th " ' r) ,crt
•
. ){ l l h {" ,H'-' l II ll II I
dth h Ill Ill', 111 11 1<I. I l or .1 I •t•\! 11 111• .&u t I 1 ' "
. I g1 . 1 JI ._. ,"~h t, ,·n I n ·i l
ol l Iw I 1r,1 ( .111,,·. \lt1( d 01h <1\). ell l It J 1.: r:, •

Jn h 11 ::inu n Mill' , Au tnh1n ~rJp h) . ,w d I tlH' rc tnund th t '-' 11

l l ' t1 1...,· ·~I } fJ tl\C' r I J U )!h l n w d 1c\l the q t1t'~l 1on, '' \\' Ito 1nadt.· ll lt' '

1.. Jllll' H !· · ,Hhwc n .· d. ~m u ' 11 1111 111 c d1at d)' !>ug~c, t~ l hl..' l u rth ,·r
<j l l t' 'i ll P ll , " \ \'h o l ll J (.k God 1 " . T h al \'l.' r) "mrk -.t.' nh. l\l
... l11 n, e d !lit' . J '- I :-. ll ll th 111k . tlw fall aq 111 l h~ ar ~ t 11 11 (> n l u l l lw
Ft r.;; r l ·J u.:;e II e , c q d u n g m u-.1 hJ, l' .1 Ctl tN.' . th\.'. n t it,J m u, t h a,,
.1 t.11l '> l.' ii th er e t.Jll hi.' an}th 1.ng w1th o\ll a u u -;i:- , ll tna) 1u,l a,

,, l'll lw th e ,, orl d a~ God. '> u that tht: rc cJ nno t ht· ,H \ 'y va\1dtl) 111
rlu1 .1rg urn en1 . Ir i~ cxJ etl} o f th e s.tllll' 11arun.' .1 ::- the H mc\ u'-,
Y i t' \\·, lh,11 rh e wo rld reseed upo n a11 d epham and th e elepha nt

rl'SteJ upon a to rm b t·: ;rnd " he n che) 'I.ltd, ' H o w abo ut liw
w n oise ?· th e [ndiau s,11d , ·supposl.' \\ C cha nge chc ~u bjcct. ' Tlw
Jrg umell( b reall y no be tte r than chaL There 1s no reason why t ht::
w o rl d co ukl no t hJSl.' co m e into bei11g witho ut a cause; no r, o n
th e o rhe r hand , is th e re an r reaso n why it should n o t have always
exist ed . There is n o reaso n to suppose that th ~ ,.vorld h ad a
begi111~ing Jl all . The idea _rlnt thin gs must luve a beginn ing i~
n_•d l1y d ut· w che povcn r o f our inugin ation. There fo re , pcrh.ips.
n,

•
 ,-
WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN 5
1
f
l need no
. .
t wa<; te an y m o re ti.me upo n tll" ar~ 11111 c: nt abo ut the
Rames h Sharma
First Cau se.
1[ . !
!
(Ekcrros r.11 ,)
Jan k1 Devi 1\.1 ,: n'l o ri,1 1 Co llege
New D e lhi - 11 0060
is THE NATURAL LAW ARGUMENT
M ob. 9911444224

.~s
at
i ~hen the re is a very comni~n argum e n t fr()11 1 na tural law. Tha!
)-
was a favourit e argum ent all through th e e ig htee nth ce ntur y,
n especially und e r the influ e nce of Sir Isaa c 0, cwton and hi s cos -
)-
1~ogony. Pe6ple _observed the plan ets go ing round the sun
it · according to the law -of gravitation, and th cr_ tho ught that God
n had give11 ·be hest to these planets to 111 0 \T in th at parti cular
· fashion; and that was ·why th ey <lid so . Th.{1 wa c; , of co urse, a
5l
conveni e nt and simple· explanati o n tl1 Jt .,, 1\ t·d 1h c 111 th e tn )Ublc
n
. oOoo~ing any· furth er for explanati o ns of I he law o ! grav itati o n.
Nowadays
.
we explain the law of gravitati. on in a soni ewhat com -
j
plicated fashion that Einstein has imrodu ccd. I do not propose to
·g ive you a lectu_re on . the law of gravitati o n as interpreted by
Einstein, because that agaih would take so m e time; at any rate,
• you no longer have the sort of natural law that you had in the
Newtonian system, vvhere;·for some-reason·tl1at nobody could · ·
understand, nature behaved in a uniform fashion. We . now find
that a great many things we thought were natural laws are really
human conventions. You know that even in the remotest <tepths
of stellar space there are still three feet to a yard. ·That is, _no
doubt, a very remarkable fact, but you would hardly call it a: law
of nature. And a great ·many things that have been regarded as
laws of nature are of that kind. On the othe r hand, where you
can get down to any know"ledge of whJ.t ato m s actually do, you
will find they are much less subject to law than people thought,
and that the laws at which you arrive are statistical averages of
just the son that would emerge from chance. There is, as we all
know, a Jaw that if you throw dice you w ill get double sixes only
about once in thirty-six tiJ:TieS, and we do not regard that as
.. evide11ce rha.t the fall ofthe dice is .reg ulJ.t e d by design; on the

•
I 6 WHY I AM NOi" A CHR I ST I A N

__ __ . . e w e ~houl d min k
\ ~p
I
~o
er;~- - ~- 1 ,. - h:. d ouble-··· -~- Ll.lT! c: r;:: , t n i urn . as
. •• · - • • • •: · - • " : -~ ·,
L!la: L,..:;::: ~,·as desig n . Tne Ia·, \·_, o f narure ar
e oi that son
_ -uc h as ·"
~"
'4
- · I a,·e rage--> =-
reg a:- :i; a. gn:.a: m.anr of th~IT' - Thcr are stausuca akes ch.is
\ ':? :.i..~ c:P.Jergc from the lav:s of c h ance; and ~ l m h . •o r- \j
. s1 ,·e t an H i ,
w h ole business of n.acural ~ nuc h . Jess 1mpres
· _ the moment-
rr. f::-! 1 ,.._ -25_Q ui te apart fro m t!Ln, "vhtch represents ·b I . dea
. the ,, o e i -l.
a.,· sw.c:: o f science that mar c h anoe comorrov., '...
. . ":
ilia: ::2 tu ,a.l laws 1mplr a law-give r 15 due CO a COLll'
natw-2. ! an d human laws. Hwnan laws are behests comm.an
- •usion berween
din ·
g
'
rou (0 beha..·e a certain war, in whi c h way )OU m
. . a)· choose to '
beh;,:.·e . o r rou may choose no r co be ha,·e; b ut na
tural laws are a
dc,:::- i:-- : n ;-i o f how things do in faq be h a,·e, and being a m e re
c'::sc ri ~,:i-::,., o f "'·hat they rn fa: t do . ; ·uu canno t arg ue th.at ther_e
"'- '
...._
m us.: ue somebody . "·ho tol<;l th e m lO d o that, be cause ~.-en
l!,r1
supp '.:>s: n g thar there , ,·e re rou arc: then faced \\ith the quesnon.
·v:hr d id God issue just those natural Ja,•,;s and no others ?' If you
sa;· tha : H e did it simply from His own good pleasure. and ...,.__
wichom anr reason , rou then find that there is something which
is n m su b ject ro law, and so your_train of uatmal..lav~:. is in ter-
rupreci . ·1r rou sar: a~ ~ o re orthodo x theologians do. that in all
the la\':5 v:hich Go d issues He h_~_d a r eason for gi\ing· those laws •
ra ther than others- the reason. of course. being lO ~reate the
besi un i \·e rse, although rou·\,.;ould never th ink it co look at i t -
if 1here was a reason for the laws •sµjc h God g ave, then God
.-
H imself ,-..·as su bject co law, and therefore you do n ot g e t any
a-:·, ·an:ag e by imrod_ucing God as· an i.mer me<liar y. You h ave
r1.:.a lly a law outside and a ~ceri.o r ro the di ,·ine edicts, and God
-
\:

c'.: j-.:.> r;r.J_t sen ·e rou r purpose, because He is. not the u ltimate law - 'I

g i ·:c>r In -,,h()n, this "vhole arg umem abouc natural law no longer
£' ::..~ .,,::, chmg Ith: rhe st rength that i£ used co haYe. I am rravelhng
,:,:; ::. u :!1e m m y re,·iew of lhe arguments. The argumen ts that
ar<: t,")t:d frir che ext.scene~ of God change their ch ara nc>r as tirne
;t•~:,, w Ther wer..: ar fi rst hard , intell ec tual arg uments embody-
i~:.,: l < H.,u:1 qt.:.:t' ddinHr 1·31 !.Jci b . A~ \':.:· co me to m ,)dern umes
 WHY I AM N O T A. C HII I Sfl AN
7

thq become 1e.., . , fl ''> \ll'tt Jhl e 111t ell e\.111 J II ) and III in · .111 I 111 m·
,t!kucd h)' a k111d of 1nor,\l1\mg , ·a x u t' lll' '-"

THE ARGUM ENT FROM DES IGN

11111
Th e ll l'X l .,tq1 11\ till', p nK L'" " bring<, 11 -. 10 1h t Jr)l\11111111 lr
dc~ ign. You all ~11ow llw ar x 11im· 111 Imm dl'"in t " ' f) d1111~ in
th r wo rl d ,.., matk )ll '-1 . , n tl, at WL' t ,111 lllJll.l XL' 1, 1 li,1 111 du·
world, and ,r llw wrnld \\ J\ (' \'t' f ~ (l l11tk d1 tl l'rl' lll \\ I' l(lllld ll()t
manage tn li vr 111 11 Tlw " 1l w ar~u11wm from d, , ,gn ll ,onw
a ti1rn.' '> take-. a r ,11h n L t111 0 11 , lur111. l or 111 .., 1,11111. 11 1 , Jl f 111·d d 1J I

L' rabb it<; haw ,,l11t l' 1,111 , 111 P 11k 1 tn he 1 ,\\) t11 ,Ii 1, 11 I dn 11111
l' know ho,, r ,1 h h1 1-. , , rn ild , tl·,,· d1 ,ll ,1ppl 1, 1t1 11 I Jll , ,h'1

ll a r g u111 ~ 111 tu p.ir{l1lr YP 11 .ill ~11 0 ,, Voh ,11 n ·.., r, 1111r ~. tl1Jt n il\ 1

l, ously the 110'-l' wa'> de,1gncrl to be sud\ a<; 10 111 '-PL't 1ad1·-. Th,11
j sort of parody ha, turned ou t tn be not m·c1 rl) ..,o ,, 11k ul thL·
:i mark as it mi ght have see med i'11 th e eig hteent h t r ntuq. h l'la lN '
I

1 since the time of Darwin we und erstand much h l'l ll r ,, h) Ii, 1nx
creatures arc adap1 ed to their. environmem It 1-. not that dw1r
environment was made to be suitable to them. hut lhat th ey
s grew t<? he suitable to it, and that is the basi~ nl adap tat1011 Th1..•re
is no ev idence of design about it.
When you co me to look into thi s argument from dl.'~1g11. It i,
a most astoni shing thin g that peopk ca11 hd 1t•vc that th1 ~ world.
with all the things that arc in it, with all its cklcct,;, should be th e
best that omnipotence and omniscience ha, bee n able tu prn-
ducc in millions of years. I really cannot bcli..:vr 1t. Do you th111 k
that, if you were granted omnipotence ,rnd omni sucncc and
mi.llio ns of years in which to perfect your world. you cou ld
produce nothing better than the Ku -Klu x-Kl an or the Fascists?
Moreover, if you accept the ordinary la"vs of science , you have to
suppnc;e that human life and life in general on thi s pLrnct will dit>
out in due co urse: it is a stage i11 the rl ecay of th r solar srte111 ;
at a certain ~tage ~f decay you ge t th e sort (l co ncliti~11:-. of
 .
8 WHY I AM N OT A C HRISTIA N

I I · i n pro1nplJ',ll t, J11 d
1empcrJ ture and <in l()rt h "'11 t h ,, r, · " 111 tJ >' .,,.·-,win
I ii , ,, h, ,It- -,o 1,u '

-
I
tltcr(' 1~ld c lorJ:- horrtime i11 th t' I t t· i> H . ' JI iii 1,
,· l111 11t 1H l
I
Yuu \ Cl' 111 1hl' 1111H ill thl· -,ml , >I t 1111h l"
tt· nd1 11 g- s1 Hm·t hi11g dead mid, and li klc,, I will
• ' a I • J J II d peop I ' .
I am told d1 Jt th at sun of Yt l'\\ 1, < cpn:-.., , llt g, d I .
. I I I ' }' woul no t ><
some time, tell you that if th ('}' hcltevrc t tat I t(
. , ,;rnsc. No 1>°C1>
able to gl) 01 1 I.Jv111 g Do no r b t lll'\C 1t; 11 "' a 11 Jl< 11 • . f
,e n 111 dl1 011, o
rea ll y worr1c'> 111uch ahou t wh at i:- go111~ to iapJ I
· . g much abo ut
years hr nce Even if they thin k th ey arc \\ Orryt n
Th '}' are worr ll'C1
that , they arc reall y deceivin g th e111-.eIve\. . c
· a,. 111crcly bv J
about something much more ,n undJ1 ll' , 1ir 1l 11 1 ,
had d1gest1 nn. hut nobody _i::. rl·al! } -.cnou -.l } n- 11ckrcd un h,ipp}
11
br the thought ·or-~ome1h111 g th at ,., going LO lt app_cn Ill ~ ,.,
or . .
world m,lliom r ears hence. Th crdon:. altl10ug I II 1s O l
I . . re) lJf ',l'

a gloomy viC'w to suppose that life ,vi ii die mn - at least I ~up

pose \ve mar '>ay so. ahhough sometim es when I con1empl aiL·
th e th ing:i th at people do ~i th th eir li\'l''i I 1li ink it i, al1110~ 1 a
~onsolation- u ,.., 11 0 1 such as w n.: ndcr li fe rnbl'rable. It merely
m ake:- you tu rn ro ur attention 10 Olh er things

THE MORAL ARGUMENTS FOR DEITY

Nm...- \\'l' reach one stage fu rd1 t· r 1n what I , hall ca ll 1hr ut tl·I
lcc1ual d ~tl' f11 that thl' Thei<;l'i ha\'f• Jlladc 111 th eir argu111 e 111 a
ti<>ns. and w1' < Otlll' to what an· calkd tl H· nt()ral arguments fr,r
thl· C'Xl\ll'fl l 1: of (ind You all know. of rnu r~t· , 1h,ll L11~re used to
ht• 111 1lw nld dJ}'' three mtelle(lua l argum<:1ll'I fo r the cx ist('ll u :
uf Cod. all nl which were d1 spowcl ()r b} !111,na11u<'l Kau t rn
th1 • Cr111qur til Puff Rl'Oson: but 111 > \ 0< 111t·r lw l hr d1spoM.'d o l
th o , \· u :,:um•·nh th,rn ht mve n11:d ,l JW\\ one . •, flloral argunw m .
.,nd tlw q1rn 1· <( nw11m·rl l11 m ffr w;i ., ltk,· 111.111)' pt',lpk 111
11,t , ll, •r 1ntl llllll•·: , Iv· W,h ',( 1·pt1! ,ii !.,:t Ill , : . .. r,11 lliJ Hl·r ~ h1.

lwlw•,•·d t111phrn h Ill tlw m1,n11. dut '1 1 h.1 I tlllhd:x d .,· L
1:1 ,th, r· i :; i 1, i: 11! ,_,r,1• 1 •• •· 11 •I l ... : If • • • • \ <l , • I ' f
·.·•
t 1 & &
 WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN
9

ernplus ise-the im mensely stronger hold upo n us that our very

early associati ons have than those of later times.
Krnt, as r say, invented a new moral argument for the exist-
cncL: of God , and that in varying form s was extremely popular
duri.ng thcirineteenth century'. It has all sorts of forms. One form
is to say that there would be no right or wrong unless God
existed. I am not for the moment concerned with whether there
is a difference between right and wrong, or whether there is not:
that is another question . The point I am concerned with is that, if
yo u are quite sure there is a difference between right and wrong,
rou are then in this situati on: is that difference due to God's fiat
o r i, it not? If it is du e to God's fiat, then for God Himself there is
no difference between right and wrong, and it is no longer a
significant statement to say that God is good. If you are going to
say, as theologians do, that God is good, you must then say that
right and wrong have some meaning which is independent of
God's fiat, because God's ~ats are good and not bad independ-
ently of the mere fact that He made them. If you are going to say
. that,y()u_y,rill then haye t() say thaLi.t_i_~ r:i()t_gi:ily through God that
ri ght and wrong came into being, but that they are in their
essence log i_c_ally anterior to God.- You could, of course, if you
liked, say. that tl1ere was a superior deity who gave orders to the
Go·J wh o mad e this world, or could" take up the line that some of
the gnostic, took up- a line which I often thought was a very
plausible one- tb at as a matter of fact this world that we know
wa-; made by the-devil at a moment when God was not looking.
Th ere is a good deal to be sa id for that, and I am not concerned
t o refut e it.

THE ARGUMENT FOR THE REMEDYING

OF INJUSTICE
Thl'll 1hnv I \ a11<>tli cr vc·r r curi ou~ fo rm of 111ora l argument.
\ ·; :11d 1 I'> 1111 ·, tht'} \ J}' th at ti ll' l 'X ht <' ll ( 1' o t' Cud i-, rt·q uirvd 11 1
 lQ WHY I AM NOT A CHRI ST IAN

O
f th is un ive rse
order to bring justice int0 lhe world. ln the part d SLiffer
th
that we know there is great injustice, and often c goo hi ch of
. . d h dly kn ow--. w
and ·o ften the wicked pmsper,
. an
. . . one ar . g to l1ave 1-ustice
those is the.
more annoyrn Q; but
_ S) - -
1f
·
y~t.1• arc
· ·
goin. - ·a rutorc
· . 1,-1re·ro
'
··
in the universe as _a wh ole you have to· suppose 1I1
t there
redres·~ the balance of li fe here on earth. So they say : that
must be a God , and. th ere must be heaven 111
and .hel .l_. cryor cuern.ous
.
in th~-long run ther.e may be justice. That 1s a. v . f
·· · · · ti fi c po int 0
argument. If you looked at the matter from a sCJe n ,.
1
vi ew, you w~uld say : 'After all, I know only this worl d· do not
know about the r:est of th e un iverse, but so far ·as o·n c cJn argu_c
15
at all on probabilities unt' w~uld say that probabl y tl w, ,vo rld
th
a fair sample, .and if. there is injusti ce here th e odcb are at ·
0
there is' injustice elsew here also.' Suppos ing you go t a crate ~
oranges. that you opened , and you found all· the to p · layer of
5t
orange~ bad, yoti woul d not argue: 'The underneath o nes mu
be good, so as to redress the balance.' You would say : ' Probably
the whole lot is a bad consignment ' ; and that is reall y what a
scientific person would argue.abo.ut ..the. universe .. He would say, ·
'Here we find in this world a great deal of injustice and so far .as
that goes that is a reason fo r suppos ing that justi ce does not
rule in the world; and therefore so far as it goes it affo rd s a
moral argument against deity and not in favour o f o ne.•· Of
course I know that the sort of intellectual arguments th at I have
been talking to you about are not what really moves peo pl e.
What really moves peopl e to believe in God is no t any intel-
lectual argument at all. Most people beli eve in God hecause they .
have been taught fro m earl y in fa ncy to do it, and that is the
mai n reason.
Then I think that th e nex t most powerful reason 1-.., l1 1c w ish
fo r safety , a son of fee ling that there is a bi g bro ther \.,·ho wi ll
loo k after you. That plays a very profou nd ran i11 in fl 11E·ncing
peopl e's des ire fo r a beli ef i11 God .
.-

L
I \I, I IY I AU r, () t A ( H IIISflA'l
1I

I
lHl'- 11\~AClf~~OI C.Hfi,)l
I ti 1\, " , 11 1, 1 .l\ .t I ,-. \\ u I, 1, 11 , 1 t11pt l \\ l11d1 I n lw 11 11t 111~
1," ,t , 1 111(' ~uth, ,, nd, I 11! \\I t! Ii, lt.1t11rn.1l1,h, .111d d1JI 1, d, ·
~ \lc-,• i ,11 "hl du r I lm ,1
1
,,.1'
1h« I, , 1 .111ci WC-\\ l\l'' l pf 11 wn II I',
~('1\1 r,dh 11Lt·11 l111 pt ,\lll1'1.I 1h11 \\ 1 , lll ll .ill .ign•1• 111 ,H 1li ;i1 \\J ', ,,,

l dn 111 >l 1m ,('It I !1 11 11~ 1\u1 th '" .,r, .1 ~ood 1t1JII} 1'" 1111 , 11po11
,, h11 I I ..1~rt ,. "1th l ' h11:,t ., ~r, d, .ii 11 1o rt· th rn tl u• pr olt•,,111}'
Jt

I
Chr l'•ll•'"' do I d1' 11 01 l no\.\ ll1.1 t I ( mild gn " 1tl 1 111 111 .ill ti ll'
,,.l\ . hut I could)!<'" 1th H,m ll llll h la rthl.'r th.111111 0,1 pr11h ,,111g
( hr,,u.111, on You \\all rt11w111li,·r th .it l fr ,.11d 'Rl'\1,1 n< •I l' \. il ,
hut ,, I. .-.cl(•,~•r \h.111 ,1 1\11\' 1t. · •it tll} ra gh1 c.lH·1·~. 1urn 11> 1111 11
1lu 1 I lf ,1l,o · Thu h 1. JI J n, ·.. ru l'pl or .1 m·,, pr1 11 u ph II
\\J , " ·J Ii} L11> T1 1• an I Buddh t . ,111~ fi,·c: or !11>. hundn:d y1•Jr-,
b, ti,r,· Chri,t. ~Ul ll 1, 11111 .l l'r111u pk wl11d1 ,h ,1 111J1t\.' r n l

I l.1d l hra-,1 ,an~ Jtll' Pl I ltJ\1.' ll •l dnu l,1 th,ll Il l{' prl'\(' lll Prilll l'
~\t1mt1..·r • fnr 1115111 111.. l' . ".i 111•ht ,11" ~ r1.· Chris1i.111. but I shoul d
• I

11111 ,u h,._e any o f )Oll 10 >"' ,m.t \1 111 l1.· hin1 1111 rn,r d1t:rk I
1h1nl you 1mgh1 hud ti t 11 h, th, 111\!llt tl11 ~ text w;l', Intended in J
n~ur,ltJ \ t.' wnw
·rhc·n tht n· 1~ .rnothl'T po1rH ,, hh ii I romidc-r ,, exccllcn1 You
\\!In rt·mrmber chit Chrt,1 ~1rl 'Jud~l' 1101 le~J y1.• lx- judged ..
Th 11 pr 11\l tpk t du not thml )(,u \•. <ntld find w.1r.. po pular in th\.·
b\•, t• >Hrt\ ,,( l1m4tt1Jn tounm~, I han· known m Ill)' umc 1.~111w
.- uu,nh(- r ,,t
,udgt."' ,._ ho \\ l'fl' \ \;q t•arnt~l Clm , tiJm . .1nd llwy
Jt(i;W nf th<'m kit th,u tht·} ~,er,· J( (Ill~ contr'1ry lo n, w~udn
1,1 pl 11) \\hJ1tli") tlici TlwnC'hn,,~.1), '(j11,,• 1,Jh1mtha1
,._i, .;h ,her, .inri h >fn him rliJt \\·ml<i borro,, o l th(~· wrn ,.,>t
tt 111 ..v. ,,.• · Th~t , 1 H'r 1 ,;ti'~ I pnw tplt·
, u , trnun.atJ h l tt1111n1!•· I , m thAl \\ l .lh' 1K,1 lwre m ul~
r)I !1·, t .. f c..&htl t1• Ip 'f', mg ,ti H tlw 1... f 1•~·1wut dn
1 ,·

n , ,h f•lill(hl ,r. h '-i, .11 .,. t,t lu,~1. d1">1r.il1,• ,. \\.I, h, tut11
12 WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN
o chat one m u<;r
th
away from him that would borrow of ee, fs } . . country -art
_ . s o l 11s
assume that the Liberals and Conscrvauvc . . teachin g of
. . .. . . -with t 11e
con~posed of people who do 1~ot agree hatic~lY _tiJJfl _aw_ay
Chnst, because they certainly did very emp ·
on that occasion: · · .· . I .5 ·. w h.IC h I think has a
Then there is one other maxim of C 1n c pular among
· ·5 very po -
great deal in it, but I do not find that ll, 1 · wilt be perfect,
th
some of our Christian friends . He says: If 9u ,. Tl1at is a very
h · poor·
go and sell that thou hast, and give to t e . · . d. All these .
· l pracnse ·
excellent maxim, but, as I say, it is not muc 1. I'1 1 difficul t to
I think, are good maxims, although th_ey-are _a ~t elf·· but then
them myse ··
live up to. I do not profess to live up to . ·
- - . c Chrisnan.
after all, 1t 1s not quite the same th1~1g as ior a

DEFECTS IN CHRIST'S TEACHING

· • · I come to cer-
. Having--granted the excellence of these maxims,
• . . · • · ·1 . h grant either th e
tam pomts m which I do not believe t at one can ·
. .· · . odness of .Chnst- as
super1anve wisdom or the super auve go 1 .
depicted in the Gospels; and here I may say that is n_ot
concerned with the historical question. Historically It is 9 uJte
douhtfuf whether Christ ever existed at all.. and if He did we
do no'f know anything about Hi~. so that I am not concerned
with the historical question. which is a very difficult one. I am
concerned with Christ as He appears in the Gospels, taking the
Gospel narrati ve as it stand s. and there one does find so me
things that do not seem to he very wise. For one thing,- He
certainly thought that His second coming would occur in doud s
of glory before th e death of all the people who were living at
that tim e. There arc a great man y texts that prove that. He says .
fo r instance : 'Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till
the Son of Man be come.' Tlwn He says: 'There arc some stancl -
ing lwrc ,.,,·hil h :-.hall not tastr death till the S0 11 of Ma n co nH:'S
Int() !Ji .., kin ~drn n'; a1u-l then· arc a lo t of p1accs \\'h crv it is q uit~

•
 W 11 ¥ I " M N l) I " ( 11 H I f, I I /\ N
n
lil-,1r th,ll I ll' b1 l1,' \1•d d1 .11 111 , w , 111 11 1 \ 1111 111 1); w11 ,dd
1
li ,q 1p l ' ll
1
d111111 ~ 111 \ l1lt' lll l\l' 111 111,11 1) 11 1\' ll lt\1 1)~'. 11," \ \. ,l ', 1l 1t• l11 ·1i ,·I ,ii
111 , r .1rl11•1· 1111 111\\1 '1, , ,111,l 11 \\ ,,., tl tt· l>,1\1\ , d ,1 ):nnd dr,d ,d 111 -.
111rn ,\l li '.H 11111 ~~ \\' lll'II 11 ,· ,,11d . ''i',1k1• 111, tl 11 1t1 \•h1 1111 tl w 111 111
111\\',' ,\I HI th lll ~!:- (){ tlt .11 :-,ul't, ll \V ,\1, \ 1·rr 1.11·~,.J.y-t1r( ,\11 ',l' J k
th1111~~l\l th ,11 th \' M'Ul ll d \ 1111 1111 ~~ \\',\ \ g11111 >: 1,1 111• V1'1}' :-,tH ll\ , ,\llcl
'
\ tlh\l ,Ill n 11l111,ll) 111111,d ,111 \· .111.d r:-. d,d 11 c,t I il llltl I l, ,,v, •, ,,-. ,,
111,1tt1'r pf l'.11 t , ~11 11w11 , 1)111 1· l 'lu·~-;11.111 -; wlll 1 did lwl1 t'V1· 1h ,ll tlir

I :-.l'1·1111d 11l11\111~~ \\',\ )-. 11u111111 1·111. ·1 k!lt'\\ ., p,11 , 1111 who fr 1~:l11 r 11 l' d
hi s ( (ll\~l'\'~,\li u 11 ll'IT il 1lr hy 11' 11111 ~ tl1 r 11111\.1( till' ~l'l'O lld 10111 111 ).!
w ,l !> \'l'l' )' i111111i1\\·111 i11d1·\·d , li ,11 d1 q · \\ 1·rv 111 1,1 It 1 u 11 ,11lvd w lw11

tht' )' l'ou11tl tl1.1r h\· " ·'' 11l.1111i 11 ~: 1r1•1·, 111 Ii,, )!,11d1·11 T l11 · 1-.1r l>
l 'l! ri--11,111, did ri -.tl lr h\·11 1•\1· ll, .1 1, tl 1111'\ d,d ,ti l\ l,111 1 Ir, 1111 ,\ II( l,
thin ~:- ,1s pl.11111 11~ 11\•1•:-, 111 1111·11 ~.m l1·11 ,. !iv, ,111, 1· tlt ry d,d .1rn·pt
fro111 Chri ~l tit,· h1•li 1-1' 1lt .11 till' s1·11111d 1\11 1111 1~ " ·'' i1111111111 ·11t. l11
th,ll l'l'S\ll'Cl r k .1rl r I It' \\'cl \ 11() ( sn wi,t· '"' ', ()I ll\ ' ot lt t· r pt'I >pk li ,lV( '
br 1·11, ,111d hl' w.1, t·1•rt:1i11l )' no t s11pn l.111v,,I) ,, •1s1• .
Ramesh Sharma
(E l,· c·1ros1111 , )
J1nk1 Dcvt ~kmorn1I C,,lkge
THE MORAL PROBLEM N,•w l> 1· lh1 • l l006Q
M,1b. lJ\1 1144,l 22 4

Thl'll y0 u t:u n11.: . ll) 111o r,1l q 11 cstil)11~. Th,·n· ,~ ( )Ill' · vrry sc-rio 11 s
dckct to lllY mind 111 Chri st's 111o r,1I char.i nn. and (l; ,ll _is tl1;\l I k
lidkvcc\ in htll . I do not 111 ysdf' kd tlt ,u ;t'11 y pns·,H1 who is n.:all)1
prolo undl y hu111,uw c.111 lwli cw in l.'Vl' rL1 stin~ · puni sh1.rw111.
Christ Cl' rt,linl y dS dC'pi Clt'd in till' Co,; pl' ISdid believe in cve rl as t--
ing .punishn1 t' III, and 0 11t: does find rt·pl\Ht·dly ,, vi ncli'UiVl' fpr y
:ig:iinst th ost~peo ple whom l1tld tHll lhle 11 !() His prt~c hin ~- ,lll
s atti tudc whi ch ·is nc)t 111 Ku n1111 u11 wi th' prc~1rhrrs, hut · v,d1i ch
.l dors Sl)t111:wl1.:H detr.1l'l i'r1.1111 s1qwrl:iti\'\' t'X.t\ ·lk11cc . Yuu dn 1mt .
fo r inst.111n' . fi nd tlw au it uck in SmT:llt:s. \'nu !ind him quite
II b!t111d ,111 d urh.1111' 1ow.1rd s th C' pco pk \\' liu wnulcl not listr 11 LO
him; ,rn<l it is, to Ill}' mind. far 1111.11'1 ' wo rth y ul' ,i sagt· tu t c1 ~c th ,tl
:s line th .111 tu ;-~ kt· 1hi.:- l1 lll: ol' i11di ~11.11i <.111 . You pro h,1bly .111
t' rr rn e11ilwr tl w son ,ii' 1hl11 ~ :-i lh.ll ~,)cr ,11 ,·, w .1 :-; s.1ying \\'l11·11 Ii,-
r
I ',

14 WHY, AM NOT A CHRISTIAN e g e n era 11 y d 1.d say to

. 111·ngs Dl al - h
was dying , and the sort of t .
eo,plc w ho did n o t agree with hun . I .· L sa id: 'Ye serpents, ye
P Yo u w ill fi nd that in th e G ospels· C 1flS . f
e the damnation o hell ?'
. h ·an ye escap
.k H is preac lung. . I .
generation o f vipers, ow c t 1s n ot
l10 did not 1I e
That was said to peop l e w d the re are a great many
. l best wne, an r ·1·
really to my mind quite t ie . O f co urse , the 1am1 1ar text
1
of these things about hell. There Gs,l t· 'Whosoever· speaketh
l J-Ioly 10s .·
about th e sin against tie b forgiven him neither in
. shall not e
against the Holy Gh ost it , That text has caused an :?
Id of come.
. this world nor in th e wor . h world, for all sorts of
unspeakable amount O
f misery m t e
rnrnitted the sin against
· t
l
. . . d that they I1ave co I
people have unagme . Id no t b e forgiven th em
d I10 0 ght that it wo u .
the Holy Gho st , an t d . e ·1 really do nonhink I
. h . 1. Id or in the worl to com . . .
I • e1t er mt u s w o r ., ree of kindliness m his nature
that a perso n with a proper deg .
r d t rrors of tbal sort into the world. . '
I
would have put 1ears an e h . .
. 'Th s n of Man shall send 1ort c
His angels
Then Chnst says: · e o . . ,
,L' r!J,.. m~ ~· h h c of Hi·s kingdom all thmgs that offend
1,n ; 11 •
,-¥J?-SI _t1n::f s a 11 gat er ou . . . ,
•. :, ·and them ·Which do iniquity, and shall. cast them ~nto a furnace
·.._.........,.,... ··~ffi;~; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth ; and He goes
1

on about the wailing and gnas-l.1ing of teeth. It comes in one

verse after another, and it is. quite manifest to the reader that
there i~ a, certain pleasure in contemplating wailin·g and gnash-
ing of teeth, or else it would not occur so often. Then you all, of
course, remember .about the sheep and the goats; how at the
second coming to divide the sheep and the goats He is going to
say to the goats: 'Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting
fire.' He continues: 'And these .shall go away into everlasting
fire.' Then He says again : 'If thy hand offend thee, cut it off; it is
better for th ee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands
to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched~ where
the wonn di eth no t and the fire is not quenched. ' He reoeats that
·again and again also. I must say that I think all this doct~ine that
hell -fife is a ptrnishme11tfors ii1, i~ a ·doctrin; of cruehy. I~ is a

•
 WHY I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN 15
doClrine that put cruelt · l J
• Y mto t 1e wo rl d an d g,:l \ L' th e wo rl
gene rations of cruel torture; and the Chri st of the c;o . , pels, if
You could
. n1s chrom.. c lers
•·cake. Him as · tr· · m. wo u 11
· repres1...·11t H1 c
certainly have to be considere~ partly responsihl e fo r that.
There are other things of -less - im-p onance . The re is the
instance of the Gadarene ·s.wine where it certainly was not very
kind to the pigs to put the_devils into them and m ake them rush
. down the hill-. to the se.a,., .You must remember that He was
omnipotent, and H~ could have made the devils simply go away;
. but He chooses to send ~he.m into the pigs. Then there.':i's the
curious story of the fig-tree, which always rather pu zzled me.
You remember what.happened abo~t the fig -tree. ·1-k was hun -
gry; and seeing a_ fig-tree afar off having leaves , He cam e if haply
He might find anything thereon; anq. when He came to it He

II found nothing but leaves, for the time of figs was not yet. And ·.
Jesus answer~d and said unto it: "No man eat fruit of th ee here-
after for ever," ... and Pet~r ... saith unto Hirn : "Master, behold
t the fig-tree which thou cursedst is withered away".' This is a
very curious ·scory, because it was no.t...t.he .. righttime ..ofyearfor.
figs, and you really could not blame the tree. I cannot myselffeel
that either in the matter of wisdom or in the matter of virtue
Christ stands quite as high as some other people kno wn to his-
tory. I think I ~hould put Buddha and Socrates above Him in
those respects.

THE EMOTIONAL FACTOR

As I said before, I do not think that the real reaso n why people
accep t r e ligion has anything to do with argum entatio n. They
acce pt re ligion on e motional grounds. One is often told that it is
a ver y wrong thing to attack religion, because religio n makes
men vii tuous. So I am toid; I have n o t no ticed it. Yo u kn mv, o f
cou rse, the parod y of that argumenr- in Samuel Bu lle r 's book. •
fn.,\v110n .Revisited. Yo u will remember t h,ll i11 Ert1\'hJn th e n' is J

•
16 W HY I AM N OT A C H RI S TIA N
11 0
t·1e r Sl}'-'
' gg~ , v Ito arn.n•<; 1n a re 1110 l<' c(lun tr y · an1..-\
L! 1
-
c ertJin .- l
1n a 1 ..1 ·
ti
,l
)l lfl ,

in g so111e urn c t here li e C'-l ap• ·.., from that Lou nLr)
- - an d f., 11 1..\, J.
l vve n ty years late r hl· lon w . . had. lll that cuu ntr} , of tht..'
. . . h I d che n aI111.:
n ew re Iig 10 11, rn \\' ic I he 1~ vvorslnppcd un e r f111 h
·Sun Cl11·td ' • and 1t · 1s
· s,wl · that he- J<scend cd --:--- H ,,·en. Hl' d he
111t0 . c.
L

- f- l · 1-. brated. an
1I1.1 t t I1e Fc ast o t 1c Ascc 1b 1011 i'- about to be cc L l ..
. ·I1 0 thef th,ll t H. }
I1c.:irs Pro f<:S '-O r s I lan\. . y a11d P,rn ky <.,J.)' to eac H·
n ever $Ct eyt!s o n the n1Ji1· H tg\,.., and they ho 11e they never wi { ·
t:, · • 1·1d.
11 l-C
but th ey are th e hi gh p ri est<- of th e n.·ltg1on o f the Su n C .
. . d' d l sa)''- ' l atll
1s very Ill 1gnant , an d h e co mc<. up to th e m , an ie ·
- · . . I f Erew h o n
g01ng to e xpose all tl 11 .; humhu~ ..111 (! tell the pcop e O · . .
' th ,ll i t \\' J<; onl y I. th e 111..1 11 I l!g..: -. . and I ,,ynt up 111 a h ,ill0 1..) il
H e wa·s to ld : 'Yo u m w,l 1101 tlP
th ,H, bccaw,c J.ll the Ill ~)fah l
11

thi s co u1ur y a rc b o u nd rou11tl thh Ill) ti·,. a11d 1f they onct:· knu ,,· -
.,.._ l

that you did n o t asce nd I mo he,1\CU they wi ll all bcnHn e-

w ic ked '; and so h e is pe Vitk1dcd o f 1!1at and h e goes qu it>tl)'
,:
aw ay . """"-
Th at is th e id ea- th.1t ,~-l' shou ld all be wi c ked if we d id not - t
h o ld to the C hri st-i.-an relig io n -. It see m s to me tha.i the people
w ho have h eld to it h an:' hce n fo r th e m ost pan e xt remely
wi cked . Yo u find thi s curio us fac t, tl~at the m o re inte nse has been
the religio n of any p eriod and th ~ m ore· profou nd has been th e
d o gmatic be lie f, the greate r h as been th·e cr uelty and the wo rse
has been the s tate of affairs. In the so -caHed ages of fa ith , wh e n
m en reall y did b e lieve the Chri stian reli gio n in. all its com pk te -
n ess, there w a s th e Inqui siti on-. wi th its to r tutcs: the re w e re
mi llio ns of un fo rtunate w o m e n hurnt as witches:_and _tlw rc wa..s
e ve r y kind o f crue lt y p ract ised upo n all sorts of people in the
n am e of relig io n .
You find as yo u look J roun<l rhe \\'Orld that every Slngk hit of
p rogress in h u man e feeling. evcrr im pro,-en1ent in the criminal
law, eve r~ step towJ rds li1E' d iminution of ·wa.r. ~\"~rr ,tf'p
towa rds better treat.rne nt of the coloured races, or cTery 1niti~a-
tion of slaver y, e,·c ry mo r(1l progress tha t th1:.·n, has bc~n in ~lw

•
 WHY I AM N O T A C HR I S TIAN l]

world, has hcC' n con °' i"t l ,Ill 1). "PP 0 " 1·d 11)' tl u· orgJ111 wcl c·1iun h1 ·,
o,f t lH' wur c .. I ~ay c1u it t. dl·I1I1l.rlll 1·I) t IIlll II n· ( .IIr 1.., 11,111 rl•Ii p, o 11 •
. 11
as nr~a 111sed
. m its· ClHlrl IH, -. . IIJ\ Iw1 •11 J11cl \ ltll ,.., 1lw prtrt•> ,p ii
f'n emy 01 mor.il pmgn:~'i 111 llw we,rid

HOW THE CHURCHES HAV E RETARDED PROGRESS

Yo u may tl1111k that l dill goin g too t.,r wh~11 J ~J)' th at that ,.., ~ull
so. I do not think th at I am Take O ll l' fa ct Yo11 will bcc1r ,, 1th 11 11 ·
if I m ention il. It is no t a pl e,1c;rn1 1:,u. hut th <' Churd1 r.., <.01111wl
· one to menti on fans th at arr 1101 ph'ac;a 11 t Suppo-,m~ th .it 1n t111 ,
world that we· liVl' in tod ,t)' an IIH ' XJll' rl CII U.'O gi rl ,., tll Jrrt \'cl to d
syphiliti c lll clll, in th at LJ \l' th e (',1 t liolr t Church <;J)''- ' Tli1<. '" cln
indi ssoluble ~c1cramcnt. You ,11 u,1 \tJ}' wgcthn fo r ld l' · A11u 11 0
steps of an y sort must be tJkrn hr that woman w preve nt bcr-.t•lf
from giving birth to syphilittc children. That is what th e C tthnli l
Church says. I s~y that th.it is fi end ish cruelty. and no body whosl'
natural sympathi es have no't been war ped by dog m a, o r wl10\l'
moral nature was no t absolutely dead to all se nse of suffern1~.
could m~lintain that it is right and proper that that state of thin g1.i
should continue ..
That is onltarl' exa111ple. There are agreat ma11y ways i11 whi ch
at the present ~om ent the Church, ·b r its insistence upo n what it
chooses 10 call morality, inflicts upon · all sort s of peo ple
undeserved and unnecessary suffering. And of course, as we
know, it is in it.s major part an opponent still of progress and of
improvement in all the ways that diminish suffering in the
world, because it has chosrn to label as morality a certain narrow
set of rules of conduct which have nothing to do with human
happiness; and when you say that this or that ought to be done
because it would make for human happiness, they think that has
nothing to do with the matter at all. 'What has hmnan happiness
to do with morals? The object of morals is not to make people
happy .' • .

. .
 ~.
11 WrlY I IIM N () f I< C.. IHll l~· 111N
Wlf'r I MA fl,.,., A, r._,. • 16 ·H .t, H J~
f CAI~ TH I') FOU N OATION or r~rr IGION
11
111i,l-1• , ,,,. 1,,-.,; w,, 11n M( rh<- v,,n1fl, 11n"1 ff,, ,~ , srA VJ w--"4 "" _,.
1\ e ll,:lun 1, h 111.cd. I 1ld11k, pnmMilY and ,w11 ,ily 111111 11 ,,,;i r. •~ wnli , ~,,,., " " It w,11 •tJII l>t> l_,ct wr tJJr, v;iut , t - oc.ha• f tl" ..
Jlilrl ly thl' 1r-1ru r ,,f rltc 1111knnw11 :a11II p 3nly, iJ 'i f l, .ivc ~.1 .J, "'''
1 111 ,1/J •· ,,t
It lo .a ll 0,-ei>e ~W'" I\ W""' wurH ,.-w tM ,-,,x,wlt-lJZ""'•
w 111 h t0 lt!d 1h ;1 t yy 11 havc ,, kl 11d o(dcler l,11111 11~1 w h o wl ll 1>t1t11d lr.1111 1111 11 ,.,, ,1 11111,,11, t• Z ' ' • ll ilnP t lflf 1t•~ tf ,-c grerfuf fou.,,._IIPS
l1y )' Ott ht all yo 11 r 11 m 1hlc1 111 ,d rli ~Jllll f•~. f?r> ,11 la rh o L,,u l~ f tl w
11 .i l t.1'!1 rl H' I'~''• or,, lr1 u,t1 ny, r, f ,1 ,,, fr,.p 111wfJ1rou- vf ,J.,- ,-v-,_n th
w l,111,~1ltl11i,1 w fo.i , o l'th c ni yi, ti•, low,, fi •.i t nf, lt •fc,H, li•ar 1J I d c.:11 h ._ IIIIJ'fOd ln11g "K" 1,-y 1w1on. 11t ;, w ,, It n r;.('.Jb • '"·u~ ,,vtJ,- ....A ',.-1
,I f,- p , • II Ll ••ll1x,' 1JI (• ft 1.wi-tf • t,,,r..e f,,r Ill« ( ulUfl' , ,-.o! v .- k,ll'l ,,..,. I'.
J;>ar Iii 11tc flil t•c 111 of c nu•hy , ,J ud rlt t!rc•li ,n · II 1,, u n ' w,md t•r II
.,11 rl w 1111 w 1,,w111d.1 .i p.i..51. 1h ,1 1. t, ,t,.,.<l, v;h i•b .,,e ,, ,...,_ villi t,.. f.u
t'l'l 1c lty anti rt•ll ~ 111 n h;i~ )( <lll tl 11 ,, nd ju h.i ud It Is l;c, a 11t c ( N II
rs ,11 11tc· l,,1 ~J.., o l tho se rwo ilt lll )l li. , 11 11t1s world w,, t·a u n o w 1111 r p ~ncd l,y rl1P f11tur1: tllll.1 011 r in tdllf_c!fY" ,.., ,., c_r"'1ff'
l,c9 111 a ll11lc "' 111 ,dl"rs r,1 1td rlilt l)' li, 111 11 1 .a 11 11 ,e to 11, u wr rit e (" l,y
h e lp o f scle n, e, w hldi ha,11 l<• rn·:•, Ir • w,,y Sll.' I' l, y .,, c p a~ai 11111 rl w
C l11l s-tl.i11 1r ll gt<>1t , ,11,1 ,1 111 ~1 tl l!' C ltu rd ie!i , ,111d ., g.:i t11 , t rh.c np110 .,
ltlo11 of -a ll tl1 4• , ,Id p n·cq•LS. Sdct1 1.l' c..Jn· h t' ljl 111, 1,, ~!rl ove r thl .,
c.ro1vc n fear 111 wl11d1 m .ank lud h a~ llvrd /or su 111,1 11y }Jf' 11 cr.t1lu11 s. -..~
,, .... .
• M..1m;,
,,,,,...,,
I
,
Sc:lc11,·c c ;111 1ca( h us . 11 1111 f lltluk our ow11 l1 c ,11•1s c J11 t c.i c It Uij , 11 l 1 J,.r;.~ t ,. ,_,_,,......,
..,...,
h J, 1 • ~- - '- ~ -
ln n J:cr w lvok f'P llfl d fr>r 101:igl 11ary s uppn rti, , 11 0 ln n~ t·r ,,. l11v1•111 M r,6 ... 11 ~
11 lll es In Lh c s ky , hu1 r.11h:•r 111 look 10 0 11 r 11w11 l'll 11r1s l1 c•rf• lw luw
10 11111 kl' this wo, lrl d (it place 111 five In, lns 1ead u l tla l' sort n f
pl.1cc !hill the c hu r c. h c s 111 a ll th ese cc•111ur h's l1 ;1Vl' m ad e 11 I
WHAT WE MU ST DO
We WJUI 10 s ta n d 11po 11 011r ow11 foe 1 J ud look f.1 lr a 11cl i.quJ rc• ,JI
th e world - It:, ~oo d fa Lt, , ll :, b,1d fa c.:1s . 11 ~ l·wa 111 il's , Jud 1, ~
u~llnc~; sec 1111• w o rl d ,ii. 11 b . .J tHf l,c 111H ,d r,ii cl o f ir. c ,,11 qu, ·r
th e· world by li 11 L·lll~1' 11 Lt' , a nd 11 0! ,ni>n-ly by h c l11g sl.1v1,lil y
1, 11hd 11 cd !Jy tlw h .: rr,>r 1ha1 eu111cs fro m 11. T h e w h o h- 1..011 ce p1l o 11
of<.iod ha CCJII LeJHlt,11 d e rive d fro m tl w a 11 cl t•111 O n c 111 .1I d c , p u 1-
l'.>J1I ~. It is a , ·,11 1u •p11 u 11 qttll c 1111wu rrhy c,( free 111 c n . Wh e n yrn 1
h ea r p t·oplc 111 d1urd1 d1'11J ~in~ 1h c r11sclw1- a11d :,,l yi 11 8 1h a1 th f'y
,ire 1111\l'r.ihl, · ,l 1111 1·r ~. ,ind JII tlw res t of lt, IL s c•c 111s 1..1.1n1 c111p1 l!Jll-
,J11d 11 u1 w1 )llll)' 111 w ll' rl•, p1 •cli 11g hu1.!!.i 11 l1 £•i 11 g ~. W ,· 01 1g l, 1
II • , 1,11 11 1111• .1 1, d l11uk 11 1l' woil d frJnk ly i11 t l1 c- l.1 u .: . W e <itt ~ ht IP
•