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