WhyIamNotaChristian

anExaminationoftheGodIdeaandChristianity BertrandRussell [March6,1927] [ThelecturethatisherepresentedwasdeliveredattheBatterseaTownHallunderthe auspicesoftheSouthLondonBranchoftheNationalSecularSociety,England.Itshould beaddedthattheeditoriswillingtosharefullresponsibilitywiththeHon.Bertrand Russellinthatheisinaccordwiththepoliticalandotheropinionsexpressed.] Asyourchairmanhastoldyou,thesubjectaboutwhichIamgoingtospeaktoyou tonightis"WhyIAmNotaChristian."Perhapsitwouldbeaswell,firstofall,totryto makeoutwhatonemeansbytheword"Christian."Itisusedinthesedaysinavery loosesensebyagreatmanypeople.Somepeoplemeannomorebyitthanaperson whoattemptstoliveagoodlife.InthatsenseIsupposetherewouldbeChristiansinall sectsandcreeds;butIdonotthinkthatthatisthepropersenseoftheword,ifonly becauseitwouldimplythatallthepeoplewhoarenotChristiansalltheBuddhists, Confucians,Mohammedans,andsoonarenottryingtoliveagoodlife.Idonotmean byaChristiananypersonwhotriestolivedecentlyaccordingtohislights.Ithinkthat youmusthaveacertainamountofdefinitebeliefbeforeyouhavearighttocallyourself aChristian.Theworddoesnothavequitesuchafullbloodedmeaningnowasithadin thetimesofSt.AugustineandSt.ThomasAquinas.Inthosedays,ifamansaidthathe wasaChristianitwasknownwhathemeant.Youacceptedawholecollectionofcreeds whichweresetoutwithgreatprecision,andeverysinglesyllableofthosecreedsyou believedwiththewholestrengthofyourconvictions.

 WhatisaChristian? Nowadaysitisnotquitethat.Wehavetobealittlemorevagueinourmeaningof Christianity.Ithink,however,thattherearetwodifferentitemswhicharequite essentialtoanyonecallinghimselfaChristian.Thefirstisoneofadogmaticnature namely,thatyoumustbelieveinGodandimmortality.Ifyoudonotbelieveinthose twothings,IdonotthinkthatyoucanproperlycallyourselfaChristian.Then,further thanthat,asthenameimplies,youmusthavesomekindofbeliefaboutChrist.The Mohammedans,forinstance,alsobelieveinGodandimmortality,andyettheywould notcallthemselvesChristians.Ithinkyoumusthaveattheverylowestthebeliefthat Christwas,ifnotdivine,atleastthebestandwisestofmen.Ifyouarenotgoingto believethatmuchaboutChrist,Idonotthinkthatyouhaveanyrighttocallyourselfa Christian.Ofcourse,thereisanothersensewhichyoufindinWhitaker'sAlmanackand ingeographybooks,wherethepopulationoftheworldissaidtobedividedinto Christians,Mohammedans,Buddhists,fetishworshipers,andsoon;butinthatsensewe areallChristians.Thegeographybookscountsusallin,butthatisapurelygeographical sense,whichIsupposewecanignore.ThereforeItakeitthatwhenItellyouwhyIam notaChristianIhavetotellyoutwodifferentthings:first,whyIdonotbelieveinGod andinimmortality;and,secondly,whyIdonotthinkthatChristwasthebestandwisest ofmen,althoughIgranthimaveryhighdegreeofmoralgoodness. Butforthesuccessfuleffortsofunbelieversinthepast,Icouldnottakesoelastica definitionofChristianityasthat.AsIsaidbefore,intheoldendaysithadamuchmore fullbloodedsense.Forinstance,itincludedthebeliefinhell.Beliefineternalhellfire wasanessentialitemofChristianbeliefuntilprettyrecenttimes.Inthiscountry,asyou know,itceasedtobeanessentialitembecauseofadecisionofthePrivyCouncil,and fromthatdecisiontheArchbishopofCanterburyandtheArchbishopofYorkdissented; butinthiscountryourreligionissettledbyActofParliament,andthereforethePrivy CouncilwasabletooverridetheirGracesandhellwasnolongernecessarytoa Christian.ConsequentlyIshallnotinsistthataChristianmustbelieveinhell.

TheExistenceOfGod TocometothisquestionoftheexistenceofGod,itisalargeandseriousquestion,and ifIweretoattempttodealwithitinanyadequatemannerIshouldhavetokeepyou hereuntilKingdomCome,sothatyouwillhavetoexcusemeifIdealwithitina somewhatsummaryfashion.Youknow,ofcourse,thattheCatholicChurchhaslaidit downasadogmathattheexistenceofGodcanbeprovedbytheunaidedreason.Thisis asomewhatcuriousdogma,butitisoneoftheirdogmas.Theyhadtointroduceit becauseatonetimetheFreethinkersadoptedthehabitofsayingthatthereweresuch andsuchargumentswhichmerereasonmighturgeagainsttheexistenceofGod,butof coursetheyknewasamatteroffaiththatGoddidexist.Theargumentsandthereasons weresetoutatgreatlength,andtheCatholicChurchfeltthattheymuststopit. ThereforetheylaiditdownthattheexistenceofGodcanbeprovedbytheunaided reason,andtheyhadtosetupwhattheyconsideredwereargumentstoproveit.There are,ofcourse,anumberofthem,butIshalltakeonlyafew. TheFirstCauseArgument PerhapsthesimplestandeasiesttounderstandistheargumentoftheFirstCause.Itis maintainedthateverythingweseeinthisworldhasacause,andasyougobackinthe chainofcausesfurtherandfurtheryoumustcometoaFirstCause,andtothatFirst CauseyougivethenameofGod.Thatargument,Isuppose,doesnotcarryverymuch weightnowadays,because,inthefirstplace,causeisnotquitewhatitusedtobe.The philosophersandthemenofsciencehavegotgoingoncause,andithasnotanything likethevitalitythatitusedtohave;butapartfromthat,youcanseethattheargument thattheremustbeaFirstCauseisonethatcannothaveanyvalidity.Imaysaythat whenIwasayoungman,andwasdebatingthesequestionsveryseriouslyinmymind,I foralongtimeacceptedtheargumentoftheFirstCause,untiloneday,attheageof eighteen,IreadJohnStuartMill'sAutobiography,andItherefoundthissentence:"My fathertaughtmethatthequestion,Whomademe?cannotbeanswered,sinceit immediatelysuggeststhefurtherquestion,WhomadeGod?"Thatverysimplesentence showedme,asIstillthink,thefallacyintheargumentoftheFirstCause.Ifeverything musthaveacause,thenGodmusthaveacause.Iftherecanbeanythingwithouta

cause,itmayjustaswellbetheworldasGod,sothattherecannotbeanyvalidityin thatargument.ItisexactlyofthesamenatureastheHindu'sview,thattheworld resteduponanelephant,andtheelephantresteduponatortoise;andwhentheysaid, "Howaboutthetortoise?"theIndiansaid,"Supposewechangethesubject."The argumentisreallynobetterthanthat.Thereisnoreasonwhytheworldcouldnothave comeintobeingwithoutacause;nor,ontheotherhand,isthereanyreasonwhyit shouldnothavealwaysexisted.Thereisnoreasontosupposethattheworldhada beginningatall.Theideathatthingsmusthaveabeginningisreallyduetothepoverty ofourimagination.Therefore,perhaps,Ineednotwasteanymoretimeuponthe argumentabouttheFirstCause. TheNaturalLawArgument ThenthereisaverycommonargumentfromNaturalLaw.Thatwasafavoriteargument allthroughtheeighteenthcentury,especiallyundertheinfluenceofSirIsaacNewton andhiscosmogony.Peopleobservedtheplanetsgoingaroundthesunaccordingtothe lawofgravitation,andtheythoughtthatGodhadgivenabehesttotheseplanetsto moveinthatparticularfashion,andthatwaswhytheydidso.Thatwas,ofcourse,a convenientandsimpleexplanationthatsavedthemthetroubleoflookinganyfurther foranyexplanationofthelawofgravitation.Nowadaysweexplainthelawof gravitationinasomewhatcomplicatedfashionthatEinsteinhasintroduced.Idonot proposetogiveyoualectureonthelawofgravitation,asinterpretedbyEinstein, becausethatagainwouldtakesometime;atanyrate,younolongerhavethesortof NaturalLawthatyouhadintheNewtoniansystem,where,forsomereasonthatnobody couldunderstand,naturebehavedinauniformfashion.Wenowfindthatagreatmany thingswethoughtwereNaturalLawsarereallyhumanconventions.Youknowthat evenintheremotestdepthofstellarspacetherearestillthreefeettoayard.Thatis,no doubt,averyremarkablefact,butyouwouldhardlycallitalawofnature.Andagreat manythingsthathavebeenregardedaslawsofnatureareofthatkind.Ontheother hand,whereyoucangetdowntoanyknowledgeofwhatatomsactuallydo,youwill findthattheyaremuchlesssubjecttolawthanpeoplethought,andthatthelawsat whichyouarrivearestatisticalaveragesofjustthesortthatwouldemergefromchance. Thereis,asweallknow,alawthatifyouthrowdiceyouwillgetdoublesixesonlyabout onceinthirtysixtimes,andwedonotregardthatasevidencethatthefallofthediceis

regulatedbydesign;onthecontrary,ifthedoublesixescameeverytimeweshould thinkthattherewasdesign.Thelawsofnatureareofthatsortasregardstoagreat manyofthem.Theyarestatisticalaveragessuchaswouldemergefromthelawsof chance;andthatmakesthewholebusinessofnaturallawmuchlessimpressivethanit formerlywas.Quiteapartfromthat,whichrepresentsthemomentarystateofscience thatmaychangetomorrow,thewholeideathatnaturallawsimplyalawgiverisdueto aconfusionbetweennaturalandhumanlaws.Humanlawsarebehestscommanding youtobehaveacertainway,inwhichwayyoumaychoosetobehave,oryoumay choosenottobehave;butnaturallawsareadescriptionofhowthingsdoinfact behave,and,beingameredescriptionofwhattheyinfactdo,youcannotarguethat theremustbesomebodywhotoldthemtodothat,becauseevensupposingthatthere wereyouarethenfacedwiththequestion,WhydidGodissuejustthosenaturallaws andnoothers?Ifyousaythathediditsimplyfromhisowngoodpleasure,andwithout anyreason,youthenfindthatthereissomethingwhichisnotsubjecttolaw,andso yourtrainofnaturallawisinterrupted.Ifyousay,asmoreorthodoxtheologiansdo, thatinallthelawswhichGodissueshehadareasonforgivingthoselawsratherthan othersthereason,ofcourse,beingtocreatethebestuniverse,althoughyouwould neverthinkittolookatitiftherewasareasonforthelawswhichGodgave,thenGod himselfwassubjecttolaw,andthereforeyoudonotgetanyadvantagebyintroducing Godasanintermediary.Youreallyhavealawoutsideandanteriortothedivineedicts, andGoddoesnotserveyourpurpose,becauseheisnottheultimatelawgiver.Inshort, thiswholeargumentfromnaturallawnolongerhasanythinglikethestrengththatit usedtohave.Iamtravelingonintimeinmyreviewofthesearguments.Thearguments thatareusedfortheexistenceofGodchangetheircharacterastimegoeson.They wereatfirsthardintellectualargumentsembodyingcertainquitedefinitefallacies.As wecometomoderntimestheybecomelessrespectableintellectuallyandmoreand moreaffectedbyakindofmoralizingvagueness. TheArgumentFromDesign Thenextstepintheprocessbringsustotheargumentfromdesign.Youallknowthe argumentfromdesign:everythingintheworldismadejustsothatwecanmanageto liveintheworld,andiftheworldwaseversolittledifferentwecouldnotmanageto liveinit.Thatistheargumentfromdesign.Itsometimestakesarathercuriousform;for

instance,itisarguedthatrabbitshavewhitetailsinordertobeeasytoshoot.Idonot knowhowrabbitswouldviewthatapplication.Itisaneasyargumenttoparody.Youall knowVoltaire'sremark,thatobviouslythenosewasdesignedtobesuchastofit spectacles.Thatsortofparodyhasturnedouttobenotnearlysowideofthemarkasit mighthaveseemedintheeighteenthcentury,becausesincethetimeofDarwinwe understandmuchbetterwhylivingcreaturesareadaptedtotheirenvironment.Itisnot thattheirenvironmentwasmadetobesuitabletothem,butthattheygrewtobe suitabletoit,andthatisthebasisofadaptation.Thereisnoevidenceofdesignaboutit. Whenyoucometolookintothisargumentfromdesign,itisamostastonishingthing thatpeoplecanbelievethatthisworld,withallthethingsthatareinit,withallits defects,shouldbethebestthatomnipotenceandomnisciencehavebeenableto produceinmillionsofyears.Ireallycannotbelieveit.Doyouthinkthat,ifyouwere grantedomnipotenceandomniscienceandmillionsofyearsinwhichtoperfectyour world,youcouldproducenothingbetterthantheKuKluxKlan,theFascisti,andMr. WinstonChurchill?ReallyIamnotmuchimpressedwiththepeoplewhosay:"Lookat me:Iamsuchasplendidproductthattheremusthavebeendesignintheuniverse."I amnotverymuchimpressedbythesplendorofthosepeople.Moreover,ifyouaccept theordinarylawsofscience,youhavetosupposethathumanlifeandlifeingeneralon thisplanetwilldieoutinduecourse:itismerelyaflashinthepan;itisastageinthe decayofthesolarsystem;atacertainstageofdecayyougetthesortofconditionsand temperatureandsoforthwhicharesuitabletoprotoplasm,andthereislifeforashort timeinthelifeofthewholesolarsystem.Youseeinthemoonthesortofthingtowhich theearthistendingsomethingdead,cold,andlifeless. Iamtoldthatthatsortofviewisdepressing,andpeoplewillsometimestellyouthatif theybelievedthattheywouldnotbeabletogoonliving.Donotbelieveit;itisall nonsense.Nobodyreallyworriesmuchaboutwhatisgoingtohappenmillionsofyears hence.Eveniftheythinktheyareworryingmuchaboutthat,theyarereallydeceiving themselves.Theyareworriedaboutsomethingmuchmoremundane,oritmaymerely beabaddigestion;butnobodyisreallyseriouslyrenderedunhappybythethoughtof somethingthatisgoingtohappeninthisworldmillionsandmillionsofyearshence. Therefore,althoughitisofcourseagloomyviewtosupposethatlifewilldieoutat leastIsupposewemaysayso,althoughsometimeswhenIcontemplatethethingsthat peopledowiththeirlivesIthinkitisalmostaconsolationitisnotsuchastorender lifemiserable.Itmerelymakesyouturnyourattentiontootherthings.

 TheMoralArgumentsForDeity NowwereachonestagefurtherinwhatIshallcalltheintellectualdescentthatthe Theistshavemadeintheirargumentations,andwecometowhatarecalledthemoral argumentsfortheexistenceofGod.Youallknow,ofcourse,thatthereusedtobeinthe olddaysthreeintellectualargumentsfortheexistenceofGod,allofwhichwere disposedofbyImmanuelKantintheCritiqueofPureReason;butnosoonerhadhe disposedofthoseargumentsthanheinventedanewone,amoralargument,andthat quiteconvincedhim.Hewaslikemanypeople:inintellectualmattershewasskeptical, butinmoralmattershebelievedimplicitlyinthemaximsthathehadimbibedathis mother'sknee.Thatillustrateswhatthepsychoanalystssomuchemphasizethe immenselystrongerholduponusthatourveryearlyassociationshavethanthoseof latertimes. Kant,asIsay,inventedanewmoralargumentfortheexistenceofGod,andthatin varyingformswasextremelypopularduringthenineteenthcentury.Ithasallsortsof forms.OneformistosaythattherewouldbenorightandwrongunlessGodexisted.I amnotforthemomentconcernedwithwhetherthereisadifferencebetweenrightand wrong,orwhetherthereisnot:thatisanotherquestion.ThepointIamconcernedwith isthat,ifyouarequitesurethereisadifferencebetweenrightandwrong,thenyouare theninthissituation:isthatdifferenceduetoGod'sfiatorisitnot?IfitisduetoGod's fiat,thenforGodhimselfthereisnodifferencebetweenrightandwrong,anditisno longerasignificantstatementtosaythatGodisgood.Ifyouaregoingtosay,as theologiansdo,thatGodisgood,youmustthensaythatrightandwronghavesome meaningwhichisindependentofGod'sfiat,becauseGod'sfiatsaregoodandnotbad independentlyofthemerefactthathemadethem.Ifyouaregoingtosaythat,youwill thenhavetosaythatitisnotonlythroughGodthatrightandwrongcameintobeing, butthattheyareintheiressencelogicallyanteriortoGod.Youcould,ofcourse,ifyou liked,saythattherewasasuperiordeitywhogaveorderstotheGodwhomadethis world,orcouldtakeupthelinethatsomeoftheagnostics["Gnostics"CW]tookup alinewhichIoftenthoughtwasaveryplausibleonethatasamatteroffactthisworld thatweknowwasmadebytheDevilatamomentwhenGodwasnotlooking.Thereisa gooddealtobesaidforthat,andIamnotconcernedtorefuteit.

 TheArgumentForTheRemedyingOfInjustice Thenthereisanotherverycuriousformofmoralargument,whichisthis:theysaythat theexistenceofGodisrequiredinordertobringjusticeintotheworld.Inthepartof theuniversethatweknowthereisagreatinjustice,andoftenthegoodsuffer,and oftenthewickedprosper,andonehardlyknowswhichofthoseisthemoreannoying; butifyouaregoingtohavejusticeintheuniverseasawholeyouhavetosupposea futurelifetoredressthebalanceoflifehereonearth,andsotheysaythattheremust beaGod,andthattheremustbeHeavenandHellinorderthatinthelongrunthere maybejustice.Thatisaverycuriousargument.Ifyoulookedatthematterfroma scientificpointofview,youwouldsay,"Afterall,Ionlyknowthisworld.Idonotknow abouttherestoftheuniverse,butsofarasonecanargueatallonprobabilitiesone wouldsaythatprobablythisworldisafairsample,andifthereisinjusticeherethenthe oddsarethatthereisinjusticeelsewherealso."Supposingyougotacrateoforanges thatyouopened,andyoufoundallthetoplayeroforangesbad,youwouldnotargue: "Theunderneathonesmustbegood,soastoredressthebalance."Youwouldsay: "Probablythewholelotisabadconsignment;"andthatisreallywhatascientificperson wouldargueabouttheuniverse.Hewouldsay:"Herewefindinthisworldagreatdeal ofinjustice,andsofarasthatgoesthatisareasonforsupposingthatjusticedoesnot ruleintheworld;andthereforesofarasitgoesitaffordsamoralargumentagainst deityandnotinfavorofone."OfcourseIknowthatthesortofintellectualarguments thatIhavebeentalkingtoyouaboutisnotreallywhatmovespeople.Whatreally movespeopletobelieveinGodisnotanyintellectualargumentatall.Mostpeople believeinGodbecausetheyhavebeentaughtfromearlyinfancytodoit,andthatisthe mainreason. ThenIthinkthatthenextmostpowerfulreasonisthewishforsafety,asortoffeeling thatthereisabigbrotherwhowilllookafteryou.Thatplaysaveryprofoundpartin influencingpeople'sdesireforabeliefinGod.

TheCharacterOfChrist InowwanttosayafewwordsuponatopicwhichIoftenthinkisnotquitesufficiently dealtwithbyRationalists,andthatisthequestionwhetherChristwasthebestandthe wisestofmen.Itisgenerallytakenforgrantedthatweshouldallagreethatthatwasso. Idonotmyself.IthinkthatthereareagoodmanypointsuponwhichIagreewithChrist agreatdealmorethantheprofessingChristiansdo.IdonotknowthatIcouldgowith Himalltheway,butIcouldgowithHimmuchfurtherthanmostprofessingChristians can.YouwillrememberthatHesaid:"Resistnotevil,butwhosoevershallsmitetheeon thyrightcheek,turntohimtheotheralso."Thatisnotanewpreceptoranew principle.ItwasusedbyLaoTseandBuddhasome500or600yearsbeforeChrist,butit isnotaprinciplewhichasamatteroffactChristiansaccept.Ihavenodoubtthatthe presentPrimeMinister,forinstance,isamostsincereChristian,butIshouldnotadvise anyofyoutogoandsmitehimononecheek.Ithinkyoumightfindthathethoughtthis textwasintendedinafigurativesense. ThenthereisanotherpointwhichIconsiderexcellent.YouwillrememberthatChrist said,"Judgenotlestyebejudged."ThatprincipleIdonotthinkyouwouldfindwas popularinthelawcourtsofChristiancountries.Ihaveknowninmytimequiteanumber ofjudgeswhowereveryearnestChristians,andtheynoneofthemfeltthattheywere actingcontrarytoChristianprinciplesinwhattheydid.ThenChristsays,"Givetohim thataskethofthee,andfromhimthatwouldborrowoftheeturnthounotaway."This isaverygoodprinciple.Yourchairmanhasremindedyouthatwearenotheretotalk politics,butIcannothelpobservingthatthelastgeneralelectionwasfoughtonthe questionofhowdesirableitwastoturnawayfromhimthatwouldborrowofthee,so thatonemustassumethattheliberalsandconservativesofthiscountryarecomposed ofpeoplewhodonotagreewiththeteachingofChrist,becausetheycertainlydidvery emphaticallyturnawayonthatoccasion. ThenthereisoneothermaximofChristwhichIthinkhasagreatdealinit,butIdonot findthatitisverypopularamongsomeofourChristianfriends.Hesays,"Ifthouwiltbe perfect,goandsellthatwhichthouhast,andgivetothepoor."Thatisaveryexcellent maxim,but,asIsay,itisnotmuchpracticed.Allthese,Ithink,aregoodmaxims, althoughtheyarealittledifficulttoliveupto.Idonotprofesstoliveuptothemmyself;

butthen,afterall,Iamnotbywayofdoingso,anditisnotquitethesamethingasfora Christian. DefectsInChrist'sTeaching Havinggrantedtheexcellenceofthesemaxims,IcometocertainpointsinwhichIdo notbelievethatonecangranteitherthesuperlativewisdomorthesuperlative goodnessofChristasdepictedintheGospels;andhereImaysaythatoneisnot concernedwiththehistoricalquestion.Historically,itisquitedoubtfulwhetherChrist everexistedatall,andifHedidwedonotknowanythingaboutHim,sothatIamnot concernedwiththehistoricalquestion,whichisaverydifficultone.Iamconcernedwith ChristasHeappearsintheGospels,takingtheGospelnarrativeasitstands,andthere onedoesfindsomethingsthatdonotseemtobeverywise.Foronething,hecertainly thoughthissecondcomingwouldoccurincloudsofglorybeforethedeathofallthe peoplewhowerelivingatthattime.Thereareagreatmanytextsthatprovethat.He says,forinstance:"YeshallnothavegoneoverthecitiesofIsraeltilltheSonofManbe come."ThenHesays:"Therearesomestandingherewhichshallnottastedeathtillthe SonofMancomesintoHiskingdom";andtherearealotofplaceswhereitisquiteclear thatHebelievedHissecondcomingwouldhappenduringthelifetimeofmanythen living.Thatwasthebeliefofhisearlierfollowers,anditwasthebasisofagooddealof Hismoralteaching.WhenHesaid,"Takenothoughtforthemorrow,"andthingsofthat sort,itwasverylargelybecauseHethoughtthesecondcomingwasgoingtobevery soon,andthatallordinarymundaneaffairsdidnotcount.Ihave,asamatteroffact, knownsomeChristianswhodidbelievethesecondcomingwasimminent.Iknewa parsonwhofrightenedhiscongregationterriblybytellingthemthatthesecondcoming wasveryimminentindeed,buttheyweremuchconsoledwhentheyfoundthathewas plantingtreesinhisgarden.TheearlyChristiansreallydidbelieveit,andtheydid abstainfromsuchthingsasplantingtreesintheirgardens,becausetheydidacceptfrom Christthebeliefthatthesecondcomingwasimminent.InthisrespectclearlyHewas notsowiseassomeotherpeoplehavebeen,andhecertainlywasnotsuperlatively wise.

TheMoralProblem Thenyoucometomoralquestions.Thereisoneveryseriousdefecttomymindin Christ'smoralcharacter,andthatisthatHebelievedinhell.Idonotmyselffeelthatany personthatisreallyprofoundlyhumanecanbelieveineverlastingpunishment.Christ certainlyasdepictedintheGospelsdidbelieveineverlastingpunishment,andonedoes findrepeatedlyavindictivefuryagainstthosepeoplewhowouldnotlistentoHis preachinganattitudewhichisnotuncommonwithpreachers,butwhichdoes somewhatdetractfromsuperlativeexcellence.Youdonot,forinstance,findthat attitudeinSocrates.Youfindhimquiteblandandurbanetowardthepeoplewhowould notlistentohim;anditis,tomymind,farmoreworthyofasagetotakethatlinethan totakethelineofindignation.Youprobablyallrememberthesortsofthingsthat Socrateswassayingwhenhewasdying,andthesortofthingsthathegenerallydidsay topeoplewhodidnotagreewithhim. YouwillfindthatintheGospelsChristsaid:"Yeserpents,yegenerationofvipers,how canyeescapethedamnationofhell."ThatwassaidtopeoplewhodidnotlikeHis preaching.Itisnotreallytomymindquitethebesttone,andthereareagreatmanyof thesethingsabouthell.Thereis,ofcourse,thefamiliartextaboutthesinagainstthe HolyGhost:"WhosoeverspeakethagainsttheHolyGhostitshallnotbeforgivenhim neitherinthisworldnorintheworldtocome."Thattexthascausedanunspeakable amountofmiseryintheworld,forallsortsofpeoplehaveimaginedthattheyhave committedthesinagainsttheHolyGhost,andthoughtthatitwouldnotbeforgiven themeitherinthisworldorintheworldtocome.Ireallydonotthinkthatapersonwith aproperdegreeofkindlinessinhisnaturewouldhaveputfearsandterrorsofthissort intotheworld. ThenChristsays,"TheSonofManshallsendforthHisangels,andtheyshallgatherout ofHiskingdomallthingsthatoffend,andthemwhichdoiniquity,andshallcastthem intoafurnaceoffire;thereshallbewailingandgnashingofteeth";andHegoeson aboutthewailingandgnashingofteeth.Itcomesinoneverseafteranother,anditis quitemanifesttothereaderthatthereisacertainpleasureincontemplatingwailing andgnashingofteeth,orelseitwouldnotoccursooften.Thenyouall,ofcourse, rememberaboutthesheepandthegoats;howatthesecondcomingHeisgoingto dividethesheepfromthegoats,andHeisgoingtosaytothegoats:"Departfromme,

yecursed,intoeverlastingfire."Hecontinues:"Andtheseshallgoawayintoeverlasting fire."ThenHesaysagain,"Ifthyhandoffendthee,cutitoff;itisbetterfortheetoenter intolifemaimed,thanhavingtwohandstogointohell,intothefirethatnevershallbe quenched,wherethewormdiethnotandthefireisnotquenched."Herepeatsthat againandagainalso.ImustsaythatIthinkallthisdoctrine,thathellfireisa punishmentforsin,isadoctrineofcruelty.Itisadoctrinethatputcrueltyintothe world,andgavetheworldgenerationsofcrueltorture;andtheChristoftheGospels,if youcouldtakeHimashischroniclersrepresentHim,wouldcertainlyhavetobe consideredpartlyresponsibleforthat. Thereareotherthingsoflessimportance.ThereistheinstanceoftheGadareneswine, whereitcertainlywasnotverykindtothepigstoputthedevilsintothemandmake themrushdownthehillintothesea.YoumustrememberthatHewasomnipotent,and Hecouldhavemadethedevilssimplygoaway;butHechosetosendthemintothepigs. Thenthereisthecuriousstoryofthefigtree,whichalwaysratherpuzzledme.You rememberwhathappenedaboutthefigtree."Hewashungry;andseeingafigtreeafar offhavingleaves,HecameifhaplyHemightfindanythingthereon;andwhenhecame toitHefoundnothingbutleaves,forthetimeoffigswasnotyet.AndJesusanswered andsaiduntoit:'Nomaneatfruitoftheehereafterforever'....andPeter....saithunto Him:'Master,beholdthefigtreewhichthoucursedstiswitheredaway.'"Thisisavery curiousstory,becauseitwasnottherighttimeofyearforfigs,andyoureallycouldnot blamethetree.Icannotmyselffeelthateitherinthematterofwisdomorinthematter ofvirtueChriststandsquiteashighassomeotherpeopleknowntoHistory.IthinkI shouldputBuddhaandSocratesaboveHiminthoserespects. TheEmotionalFactor AsIsaidbefore,Idonotthinkthattherealreasonthatpeopleacceptreligionhas anythingtodowithargumentation.Theyacceptreligiononemotionalgrounds.Oneis oftentoldthatitisaverywrongthingtoattackreligion,becausereligionmakesmen virtuous.SoIamtold;Ihavenotnoticedit.Youknow,ofcourse,theparodyofthat argumentinSamuelButler'sbook,ErewhonRevisited.Youwillrememberthatin ErewhonthereisacertainHiggswhoarrivesinaremotecountry,andafterspending

sometimethereheescapesfromthatcountryinaballoon.Twentyyearslaterhecomes backtothatcountryandfindsanewreligioninwhichheisworshippedunderthename ofthe"SunChild";anditissaidthatheascendedintoheaven.Hefindsthatthefeastof theAscensionisabouttobecelebrated,andhehearsProfessorsHankyandPankysay toeachotherthattheyneverseteyesonthemanHiggs,andtheyhopetheyneverwill; buttheyaretheHighPriestsofthereligionoftheSunChild.Heisveryindignant,andhe comesuptothem,andhesays:"Iamgoingtoexposeallthishumbugandtellthe peopleofErewhonthatitwasonlyI,themanHiggs,andIwentupinaballoon."Hewas told,"Youmustnotdothat,becauseallthemoralsofthiscountryareboundroundthis myth,andiftheyonceknowthatyoudidnotascendintoheaventheywillallbecome wicked";andsoheispersuadedofthatandhegoesquietlyaway. ThatistheideathatweshouldallbewickedifwedidnotholdtotheChristian religion.Itseemstomethatthepeoplewhohaveheldtoithavebeenforthemostpart extremelywicked.Youfindthiscuriousfact,thatthemoreintensehasbeenthereligion ofanyperiodandthemoreprofoundhasbeenthedogmaticbelief,thegreaterhas beenthecrueltyandtheworsehasbeenthestateofaffairs.InthesocalledAgesof faith,whenmenreallydidbelievetheChristianreligioninallitscompleteness,there wastheInquisition,withallitstortures;thereweremillionsofunfortunatewomen burnedaswitches;andtherewaseverykindofcrueltypracticeduponallsortsofpeople inthenameofreligion. Youfindasyoulookaroundtheworldthateverysinglebitofprogressofhumane feeling,everyimprovementinthecriminallaw,everysteptowardthediminutionof war,everysteptowardbettertreatmentofthecoloredraces,orevermitigationof slavery,everymoralprogressthattherehasbeenintheworld,hasbeenconsistently opposedbytheorganizedchurchesoftheworld.Isayquitedeliberatelythatthe Christianreligion,asorganizedinitschurches,hasbeenandstillistheprincipalenemy ofmoralprogressintheworld. HowTheChurchesHaveRetardedProgress

YoumaythinkthatIamgoingtoofarwhenIsaythatthatisstillso,IdonotthinkthatI am.Takeonefact.YouwillbearwithmeifImentionit.Itisnotapleasantfact,butthe churchescompelonetomentionfactsthatarenotpleasant.Supposingthatinthis worldthatweliveintodayaninexperiencedgirlismarriedtoasyphiliticman,inthat casetheCatholicChurchsays,"Thisisanindissolublesacrament.Youmuststay togetherforlife,"andnostepsofanysortmustbetakenbythatwomantoprevent herselffromgivingbirthtosyphiliticchildren.ThisiswhattheCatholicchurchsays.Isay thatthatisfiendishcruelty,andnobodywhosenaturalsympathieshavenotbeen warpedbydogma,orwhosemoralnaturewasnotabsolutelydeadtoallsenseof suffering,couldmaintainthatitisrightandproperthatthatstateofthingsshould continue. Thatisonlyanexample.Thereareagreatmanywaysinwhichatthepresentmoment thechurch,byitsinsistenceuponwhatitchoosestocallmorality,inflictsuponallsorts ofpeopleundeservedandunnecessarysuffering.Andofcourse,asweknow,itisinits majorpartanopponentstillofprogressandimprovementinallthewaysthatdiminish sufferingintheworld,becauseithaschosentolabelasmoralityacertainnarrowsetof rulesofconductwhichhavenothingtodowithhumanhappiness;andwhenyousay thatthisorthatoughttobedonebecauseitwouldmakeforhumanhappiness,they thinkthathasnothingtodowiththematteratall."Whathashumanhappinesstodo withmorals?Theobjectofmoralsisnottomakepeoplehappy." Fear,TheFoundationOfReligion Religionisbased,Ithink,primarilyandmainlyuponfear.Itispartlytheterrorofthe unknownandpartly,asIhavesaid,thewishtofeelthatyouhaveakindofelderbrother whowillstandbyyouinallyourtroublesanddisputes.Fearisthebasisofthewhole thingfearofthemysterious,fearofdefeat,fearofdeath.Fearistheparentofcruelty, andthereforeitisnowonderifcrueltyandreligionhavegonehandinhand.Itis becausefearisatthebasisofthosetwothings.Inthisworldwecannowbeginalittleto understandthings,andalittletomasterthembythehelpofscience,whichhasforced itswaystepbystepagainsttheChristianreligion,againstthechurches,andagainstthe oppositionofalltheoldprecepts.Sciencecanhelpustogetoverthiscravenfearin

whichmankindhaslivedforsomanygenerations.Sciencecanteachus,andIthinkour ownheartscanteachus,nolongertolookaroundforimaginarysupports,nolongerto inventalliesinthesky,butrathertolooktoourowneffortsherebelowtomakethis worldafitplacetolivein,insteadofthesortofplacethatthechurchesinallthese centurieshavemadeit. WhatWeMustDo Wewanttostanduponourownfeetandlookfairandsquareattheworlditsgood facts,itsbadfacts,itsbeauties,anditsugliness;seetheworldasitisandbenotafraid ofit.Conquertheworldbyintelligenceandnotmerelybybeingslavishlysubduedby theterrorthatcomesfromit.ThewholeconceptionofaGodisaconceptionderived fromtheancientorientaldespotisms.Itisaconceptionquiteunworthyoffreemen. Whenyouhearpeopleinchurchdebasingthemselvesandsayingthattheyare miserablesinners,andalltherestofit,itseemscontemptibleandnotworthyofself respectinghumanbeings.Weoughttostandupandlooktheworldfranklyintheface. Weoughttomakethebestwecanoftheworld,andifitisnotsogoodaswewish,after allitwillstillbebetterthanwhattheseothershavemadeofitinalltheseages.Agood worldneedsknowledge,kindliness,andcourage;itdoesnotneedaregretfulhankering afterthepastorafetteringofthefreeintelligencebythewordsutteredlongagoby ignorantmen.Itneedsafearlessoutlookandafreeintelligence.Itneedshopeforthe future,notlookingbackallthetimetowardapastthatisdead,whichwetrustwillbe farsurpassedbythefuturethatourintelligencecancreate. BertrandRussell