Agnostic.com

2 2

LINK I think many of us would agree with Mr. W. H. Mallock

"If theists will look the facts of the universe steadily in the face: What they will see will astonish them. They will see that if there is anything at the back of this vast process, with a consciousness and a purpose in any way resembling our own—a being who knows what he wants and is doing his best to get it—he is instead of a holy and all-wise God, a scatter-brained, semi-powerful, semi-impotent monster. They will recognise as clearly as they ever did the old familiar facts which seemed to them evidences of God's wisdom, love, and goodness; but they will find that these facts, when taken in connection with the others, only supply us with a standard in the nature of this Being himself by which most of his acts are exhibited to us as those of a criminal madman. If he had been blind, he had not sin; but if we maintain that he can see, then his sin remains. Habitually a bungler as he is, and callous when not actively cruel, we are forced to regard him, when he seems to exhibit benevolence, as not divinely benevolent, but merely weak and capricious, like a boy who fondles a kitten and the next moment sets a dog at it, and not only does his moral character fall from him bit by bit but his dignity disappears also. The orderly processes of the stars and the larger phenomena of nature are suggestive of nothing so much as a wearisome Court ceremonial surrounding a king who is unable to understand or to break away from it; whilst the thunder and whirlwind, which have from time immemorial been accepted as special revelations of his awful power and majesty, suggest, if they suggest anything of a personal character at all, merely some blackguardly larrikin kicking his heels in the clouds, not perhaps bent on mischief, but indifferent to the fact that he is causing it...."

  • W. H. Mallock
Reignmond 7 Dec 6
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

was he the one who advocated speaking for others?

Looking briefly at what I can find of him, if I had met him I would probably have regarded him as being a right-wing bigot.

0

I would ask from whence this came? Just looking him up - he was an RC, and wrote much in favor of the Roman Catholic church. He was also anti socialism.

It is quoted in [gutenberg.org] as coming from his Religion as a Credible Doctrine; pp. 176-8, published by Chapman & Hall in 1903: [catalogue.cclibrary.org.au]

The link for the ebook from which this was quoted is posted, but here is a link to a free audio version.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:698959
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.