按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
matter must be joined together inseparably as body and soul to
one another。 Thus he will see God everywhere； not as those who
repeat phrases conventionally； but as people who would have their
words taken according to their most natural and legitimate
meaning； and he will feel that the main difference between him
and many of those who oppose him lies in the fact that whereas
both he and they use the same language； his opponents only half
mean what they say； while he means it entirely。。。 We shall
endeavour ＇sic＇ to see the so…called inorganic as living； in
respect of the qualities it has in common with the organic；
rather than the organic as non… living in respect of the
qualities it has in common with the inorganic。〃＇
CHAPTER VII
THE LIKENESS OF GOD
In my last chapter I endeavoured ＇sic＇ to show that each living
being； whether animal or plant； throughout the world is a
component item of a single personality； in the same way as each
individual citizen of a community is a member of one state； or as
each cell of our own bodies is a separate person； or each bud of
a tree a separate plant。 We must therefore see the whole varied
congeries of living things as a single very ancient Being；
of inconceivable vastness； and animated by one Spirit。
We call the octogenarian one person with the embryo of a few days
old from which he has developed。 An oak or yew tree may be two
thousand years old； but we call it one plant with the seed from
which it has grown。 Millions of individual buds have come and
gone； to the yearly wasting and repairing of its substance； but
the tree still lives and thrives； and the dead leaves have life
therein。 So the Tree of Life still lives and thrives as a single
person； no matter how many new features it has acquired during
its development； nor； again； how many of its individual leaves
fall yellow to the ground daily。 The spirit or soul of this
person is the Spirit of God； and its body…for we know of no soul
or spirit without a body； nor of any living body without a spirit
or soul； and if there is a God at all there must be a body of
God…is the many…membered outgrowth of protoplasm； the
ensemble of animal and vegetable life。
To repeat。 The Theologian of to…day tells us that there is a God；
but is horrified at the idea of that God having a body。 We say
that we believe in God； but that our minds refuse to realise
＇sic＇ an intelligent Being who has no bodily person。 〃Where
then；〃 says the Theologian； 〃 is the body of your God？〃 We have
answered； 〃In the living forms upon the earth； which； though they
look many； are； when we regard them by the light of their history
and of true analogies； one person only。〃 The spiritual connection
between them is a more real bond of union than the visible
discontinuity of material parts is ground for separating them in
our thoughts。
Let the reader look at a case of moths in the shop…window of a
naturalist； and note the unspeakable delicacy； beauty； and yet
serviceableness of their wings； or let him look at a case of
humming…birds； and remember how infinitely small a part of Nature
is the whole group of the animals he may be considering； and how
infinitely small a part of that group is the case that he is
looking at。 Let him bear in mind that he is looking on the dead
husks only of what was inconceivably more marvellous ＇sic＇ when
the moths or humming…birds were alive。 Let him think of the
vastness of the earth； and of the activity by day and night
through countless ages of such countless forms of animal and
vegetable life as that no human mind can form the faintest
approach to anything that can be called a conception of their
multitude； and let him remember that all these forms have touched
and touched and touched other living beings till they meet back
on a common substance in which they are rooted； and from which
they all branch forth so as to be one animal。 Will he not in this
real and tangible existence find a God who is as much more worthy
of admiration than the God of the ordinary Theologian…as He is
also more easy of comprehension？
For the Theologian dreams of a God sitting above the clouds among
the cherubim； who blow their loud uplifted angel trumpets before
Him； and humour ＇sic＇ Him as though He were some despot in an
Oriental tale； but we enthrone Him upon the wings of birds； on
the petals of flowers； on the faces of our friends； and upon
whatever we most delight in of all that lives upon the earth。 We
then can not only love Him； but we can do that without which love
has neither power nor sweetness； but is a phantom only； an
impersonal person； a vain stretching forth of arms towards
something that can never fill them…we can express our love and
have it expressed to us in return。 And this not in the uprearing
of stone temples…for the Lord dwelleth ＇sic＇ in temples made with
other organs than hands…nor yet in the cleansing of our hearts；
but in the caress bestowed upon horse and dog； and kisses upon
the lips of those we love。
Wide； however； as is the difference between the orthodox
Theologian and ourselves； it is not more remarkable than the
number of the points on which we can agree with him； and on
which； moreover； we can make his meaning clearer to himself than
it can have ever hitherto been。 He； for example； says that man
has been made in the image of God； but he cannot mean what he
says； unless his God has a material body； we； on the other hand；
do not indeed believe that the body of God…the incorporation of
all life…is like the body of a man； more than we believe each one
of our own cells or subordinate personalities to be like a man in
miniature； but we nevertheless hold that each of our tributary
selves is so far made after the likeness of the body corporate
that it possesses all our main and essential characteristics…that
is to say； that it can waste and repair itself； can feel； move；
and remember。 To this extent； also； we…who stand in mean
proportional between our tributary personalities and God…are made
in the likeness of God； for we； and God； and our subordinate
cells alike possess the essential characteristics of life which
have been above recited。 It is more true； therefore； for us to
say that we are made in the likeness of God than for the orthodox
Theologian to do so。
Nor； again； do we find difficulty in adopting such an expression
as that 〃God has taken our nature upon Him。〃 We hold this as
firmly； and much more so； than Christians can do； but we say that
this is no new thing for Him to do； for that He has taken flesh
and dwelt among us from the day that He first assumed our shape；
some millions of years ago； until now。 God cannot become man more
especially than He can become other living forms； any more than
we can be our eyes more especially than any other of our
organs。 We may develop larger eyes； so that our eyes may come to
occupy a still more important place in our economy than they do
at present； and in a similar way the human race may become a more
predominant part of God than it now is…but we cannot admit that
one living form is more like God than another； we must hold all
equally like Him； inasmuch as they 〃keep ever；〃 as Buffon says；
〃the same fundamental unity； in spite of differences of detail…
nutrition； development； reproduction〃 （and； I would add；
〃memory〃） 〃being the common traits of all organic bodies。〃 The
utmost we can admit is； that some embodiments of the Spirit of
Life may be more important than others to the welfare of Life as
a whole； in the same way as some of our organs are more important
than others to ourselves。
But the above resemblances between the language which we can
adopt intelligently and that which Theologians use vaguely； seem
to reduce the differences of opinion between the two contending
parties to disputes about detail。 For even those who believe
their ideas to be the most definite； and who picture to
themselves a God as anthropomorphic as He was represented by
Raffaelle； are yet not prepared to stand by their ideas if they
are hard pressed in the same way as we are by ours。 Those who say
that God became man and took flesh upon Him； and that He is now
perfect God and perfect man of a reasonable soul and human flesh
subsisting； will yet not mean that Christ has a heart； blood； a
stomach； etc。； like man's； which； if he has not； it is idle to
speak of him as 〃perfect man。〃 I am persuaded that they do not
mean this； nor wish to mean it； but that they have been led into
saying it by a series of steps which it is very easy to
understand and sympathise ＇sic＇ with； if they are considered with
any diligence。
For our forefathers； though they might and did feel the existence