Ingersoll and the Incoherence of God-Conceptsby William B. Lindley
People without a belief in God often take a rather weak position in discussing the subject with believers. They talk about evidence, claiming that the evidence they know of so far is not enough to compel their belief. They listen patiently to the believers' claims and consider the question open, perhaps never to be closed. A stronger position is, first, to insist on a clear idea of what or who the believer thinks God is, and, second, to examine the believer's concept of God for coherence, to check that the concept is free of internal contradictions. If there are contradictions, the concept is logically impossible, an oxymoron, a so-called "square circle". One can then dismiss that concept of God as certainly nonexistent and the believer as irrational. One commonly-held idea of God is that He is a male person but not a biological entity. That is not exactly like a square circle; it is more like a triangle that is not a geometrical entity or a senator who is not a political entity. Robert Green Ingersoll was fully aware of such incoherences and commented on them. It is a pleasure to share his insights here.
[RGI] (I)t is impossible for a man to conceive of a personal God, other than as a being having the human form. No one can think of an infinite being having the form of a horse, or of a bird, or of any animal beneath man. It is one of the necessities of the mind to associate forms with intellectual capacities. The highest form of which we have any conception is man's, and consequently, his is the only form that we can find in imagination to give to a personal God, because all other forms are, in our minds, connected with lower intelligences. It is impossible to think of a personal God as a spirit without form. We can use these words, but they do not convey to the mind any real and tangible meaning. Every one who thinks of a personal God at all, thinks of him as having the human form. Take from God the idea of form; speak of him simply as an all-pervading spirit - which means an all-pervading something about which we know nothing - and Pantheism is the result. Source: Dresden Edition, Vol. 2, p. 94 Religion is supposed to consist in a discharge of the duties we owe to God. In other words, we are taught that God is exceedingly anxious that we should believe a certain thing. For my part, I do not believe that there is any infinite being to whom we owe anything. The reason I say this is, we can not owe any duty to any being who requires nothing - to any being that we cannot possibly help, to any being whose happiness we cannot increase. If God is infinite, we cannot make him happier than he is. If God is infinite, we can neither give, nor can he receive, anything. Anything that we do or fail to do, cannot, in the slightest degree, affect an infinite God; consequently, no relations can exist between the finite and the Infinite, if by relations is meant mutual duties and obligations. Some tell us that it is the desire of God that we should worship him. What for? Why does he desire worship? Others tell us that we should sacrifice something to him. What for? Is he in want? Can we assist him? Is he unhappy? Is he in trouble? Does he need human sympathy? We cannot assist the Infinite, but we can assist our fellow-men. We can feed the hungry and clothe the naked, and enlighten the ignorant, and we can help, in some degree at least, toward covering this world with the mantle of joy. I do not believe there is any being in this universe who gives rain for praise, who gives sunshine for prayer, or who blesses a man simply because he kneels. The Infinite cannot receive praise or worship. The Infinite can neither hear nor answer prayer. An Infinite personality is an infinite impossibility. Source: Dresden Edition, Vol. 2, pp. 276-7 In the Episcopalian creed God is described as follows:
Think of that! - without body, parts, or passions. I defy any man in the world to write a better description of nothing. You cannot conceive of a finer word-painting of a vacuum than "without body, parts, or passions." And yet this God, without passions, is angry at the wicked every day; this God, without passions, is a jealous God, whose anger burneth to the lowest hell. This God, without passions, loves the whole human race; and this God, without passions, damns a large majority of mankind. This God without body, walked in the Garden of Eden, in the cool of the day. This God, without body, talked with Adam and Eve. This God, without body, or parts met Moses upon Mount Sinai, appeared at the door of the tabernacle, and talked with Moses face to face as a man speaketh to his friend. This description of God is simply an effort of the church to describe a something of which it has no conception. Source: Dresden Edition, Vol. 2, pp. 361-2
Table of Contents | 1993 Issues | Subscribe Credit card Orders call: 800-321-9054 or fax: (619)676-0433 Truth Seeker is published by Truth Seeker Co., Inc. (ISSN 0041-3712) © 1996 |