I answered: “There is nothing too sacred for examination by honest reason, and a devout common sense. I was afraid, when this conversation commenced, that something might be said to displease, if not to offend you, but you asked me straightforward questions, and I have told you in reply what I believe and do not believe. I know that such expressions, as I have used, might shock many, and they might wonder that I was not killed instantly by fire from heaven, or be stricken with paralysis, for uttering them. Yet, I have no fear of either. I have weighed these subjects, and thought of them for years with the utmost reverence and fear of God, and with devout prayer to Him for light and help, so I do not speak lightly or in haste. I am just as jealous of my faith in the God I worship, and try to obey, as you can be of yours. As to one of the expressions I used, do you not make as strong and plain statements against the heathen notion of gods, when you are preaching in the bazars?”
“Yes,” he answered, “we do use strong expressions when we are speaking against idolatry, for ours is the only and true God.”
I replied, “Your own conception of God, you believe to be the true one, but what about those of other men? Can they not also have their ideas about God, and be as honest as you are? The trouble is that Christians ‘reduce their God to a diagram, and their emotions to a system,’ and then demand that everybody else shall believe and feel as they do, or be considered not orthodox, heretics and infidels.”
He did not reply to this, but said, “I am sorry that you do not know Jesus as your Saviour, and feel that his blood washes away your sins.”
I answered, “I do know Jesus, but I prefer to trust the Infinite God, my Heavenly Father, as my Redeemer and Saviour. I want no one, not even an angel from heaven to come between me and God. If my father, God over all, cannot, or will not save me, who else can? As to the blood. Blood of any kind is offensive to me. I shudder at the sight of it. And the idea of washing or cleansing anything with it is so contrary to my reason, and repugnant to my feelings, that I cannot think of it without repulsion.”
“But, it was shed as an atonement for us,” he suggested.
“Take it in that light,” I replied, “It is assumed that God, the Creator and Preserver of men, is a pitiless tyrant; that his wrath must be appeased, or bought off by sacrifice. At first the fruits of the field were given to Him, then the blood of animals. Then the notion grew until the blood of something higher than that of a common animal was deemed necessary, the blood of men, and then the blood of a god. How was it to be got? It must come from heaven, of course, and finally resulted in the notion of an incarnation of God in a woman, a horrible thought to me. The whole idea is heathenish, brutal and debasing. Everything of this kind, whether in the Bible, or elsewhere, is of man’s own invention, degrading the Infinite God to a creature like to their own depraved natures. Take the better thoughts of the Bible, and God is a spiritual being, delighting in spiritual worship, and caring only for the intents and purity of the heart, but this was not satisfactory to mankind. It was too pure and simple to suit their coarse, corrupt natures, but they must put in a lot of mysterious rubbish of their own, to suit a god of their own devising, and with tastes like theirs. It was more pleasant for the ancient Hebrews to atone with hecatombs of burnt offerings for their transgressions, than to practice purity and justice. It is far easier for people, at the present time, to accept the creeds, perform the sensuous, pleasant ceremonies of the church, and believe their salvation, however sinful they continue to be, will be obtained in some vicarious way, than to save themselves by living pure and upright lives.
“Men are never satisfied, unless they reach the extreme, always delighting in the mysterious.
“What do these notions of men teach? That God created men, with power to violate His laws, and then became vengeful and full of wrath, that they did just what He gave them power to do, and was ready to damn them all, for doing just what they could not help doing? Man’s explanation of the matter does not correspond with the character of God, as given by these same men. They describe Him as omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, a God of infinite wisdom, love and tender mercy. It is stated that God made man, and pronounced him good, but the creeds teach that God afterward found out that He had made a mistake, that His work was evil. He discovered, when too late, that man, whom He had made good and upright, would violate His laws, which was a surprise to Him, and He must find out some excuse, so as to avoid the execution of His own laws.
“The whole story is a muddle, evolved from superstition and ignorance, in fact, the whole scheme is of man’s invention, not from the highest ideals of mankind, but from the lowest instincts of the human race. It degrades the character of the Almighty, and places Him on a level with the most ignorant human brute of a tyrant. They make their god, not mine, in the likeness of sinful men, fashion him, giving him their hates and revenges, and in their arrogance, assuming that they know all about him, demand that all the world should bow down and worship this image of their own manufacture.