THE DEVIL.

I have nothing new to offer on this old subject, and I therefore warn

the reader not to expect any wonderful revelations. The Devil is not

an object of recent discovery. He is as old as the hills. Everybody

seems to know him, and he seems to know everybody. It would therefore

be in vain for me to attempt to give any information respecting

this old friend. However, as there are some thoughts which persist

in bolting into my mind regarding old Nick, I have concluded to jot

them down for those who have a taste for devilish reading.

It was always a question that greatly perplexed me, when a boy, why

God should create the Devil. I never could see it in any other light

than that of an egregious blunder. Why should an infinitely good being

create an infinitely bad being? Why did not the Creator make all of

his creatures perfect? Why did he not save them from being lost? Why

did he form man to place him in the garden to be tempted and ruined

when it was in the Creator's power to prevent his fall? Why did he not

create him so good and so strong that it would be impossible for him

to do wrong? Why was the Serpent (the Devil) made so much stronger and

wiser than man? If Adam had only been made a great deal stronger, and

the Serpent less seductive, the human race might have had a glorious

and brilliant career. But as it was a powerful serpent-devil on the

one hand, and on the other, a weak-headed know-nothing man, is it

not clear that better results could not have been expected?

Why did not the author of the red man (Adam) tell him that he was

going to have a severe temptation?--that he was soon to meet his great

adversary? It is highly probable that Adam could have made a better

showing if he had only been advised of the situation in time. But as

it was he did not have a fair chance. It would have been no more than

justice to have told Adam and Eve all about the Serpent-devil which

was hid away somewhere in the garden like a snake in the grass. It

would have been only fair to have posted on all the fences and walls

about the garden, this sign, "Adam and Eve, Beware of Snakes!" This

would have given them a chance for their lives. Poor Adam and Eve! They

were not a bad lot, but were transplanted too early, and were nipped

in the bud by the great original Serpent, who was acting according

to his nature and circumstances, and therefore we cannot find it

in our hearts to be too severe on his Satanic Majesty. If Satan was

great, it was not won by his own powers, he had greatness thrust upon

him. Let us be just; let us give the Devil his due. I have no doubt

but he has grievances, if there were any court where he could offer

his complaints.

The Creator made both man and Serpent-devil, knowing just what would

and must come to pass, and he did it all for his own glory. He

also made hell for his own glory. Surely the Lord's ways are not

our ways. For no Modoc Indian would entertain such a design toward

his children, no matter how bad they might be, or how vicious his

own nature.

We cannot think of a creator without seeing that he as the author of

all things, is responsible for good and evil, for right and wrong,

for ignorance and knowledge, for truth and error. Man is therefore, no

more responsible for his nature than a steam engine is responsible for

its defects. The defects must be attributed to the maker in both cases.

Adam knew good and evil without eating of the tree of knowledge. He

had a brain, and his thoughts were imperfect; sometimes they were

relatively correct, and then again they were wholly wrong or in

error. This was knowing good and evil, therefore he knew good and evil

without eating of the prohibited fruit, just as surely as he had a

brain. The tree of knowledge is a very childish story. Knowledge does

not grow on trees, nor does much of it exist in heads which entertain

such fables as a divine revelation.

Man was created with a brain to do his thinking and knowing, and by

its very nature of knowing he must know good and evil, and yet he

is cursed for knowing good and evil. As well might the Creator give

the bird wings, toss it in the air and then damn it for flying. But

even supposing the story to be true, namely, that the fruit of the

tree made one to know good and evil, why should such desirable fruit

be forbidden? What would the world be without the knowledge of good

and evil? Man cannot know good without also knowing evil. They are

inseparable. God himself knows good and evil, and if it is good for

him to have such knowledge, then it surely must be good for you and

me. The love of knowledge is the fountain of life. Man must have

knowledge or his life is a mere cipher. All hail then to Mother Eve,

who first tasted of the tree of knowledge, who first quenched her

thirst at this fountain from which the whole race of thirsty souls

have delighted to drink. Mythology abounds in stories about the gods;

about their imperfections and weaknesses, but this account of the

Serpent-devil and the tree of knowledge is the silliest fable of

all, and has entailed indescribable misery upon the human race. The

prohibition of knowledge has left an inherited twist in human

nature. Even now in the afternoon of the nineteenth century mankind

does not know much--and it is largely due to this first commandment

not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Has not the

church always prohibited knowledge? Has she not stood in the way of

every great reform? Knowledge is not important. Only believe. Believe

in the Bible, but believe it only as the priest explains it.

It seems that the Serpent-devil knew more about the nature of man,

and what would result from his eating the fruit of the tree of

knowledge than God did. Jehovah told Adam in plain terms, that if

he ate of the fruit of that tree he would die that very day. But

the Serpent-devil told Eve (in French I suppose) that she and her

"hubby" would do no such a thing, but on the contrary it would be

a great blessing to them, and that they would become as gods (there

were lots of gods in those days and many of them "no great shakes"),

knowing good and evil. It turned out just as the Serpent-devil had

told Mother Eve; they did not die. And when God saw what Adam and Eve

had done he called a conclave of gods, and after due deliberation

voted to drive them out of the garden penniless, to live upon the

cold charities of an unfriendly world. And this is the same God who

commands us to forgive and to love our enemies. That would not be

god-like, and therefore I hold the commandment invalid.

In this august assemblage of the celestial hosts, one of their number

assigns the reasons for expelling Adam and Eve from the garden in these

words: "Behold the man (and woman) has become as one of us to know

good and evil." (Gen. 3 : 22.) Here we see it is a surprise to the

gods that man had become as one of them, knowing good and evil. Yet

these gods are supposed to know all things from all eternity to all

eternity. Do the gods forget things as we poor mortals do?

The Serpent had told Eve just what would happen, and God told Adam

just that which did not happen. The Serpent said: "For God doth

know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened,

and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Ye shall not surely

die." (Gen. 3 : 5, 4.) The Serpent gave it straight, and God made a

mistake to say the least. In all this story about the fall of man,

the Devil appears to be a better friend of man than his Creator.

The Serpent was in reality not the enemy, but the friend of man. He

spoke words of truth and encouragement to Adam at a time when he needed

good counsel. It is not to be forgotten that he spoke the truth. The

poisonous tongue of malice has called him the father of lies, but this

saying is a lie itself--and a bald-headed lie of sufficient antiquity

to be itself most appropriately called the father of lies. The Devil,

Lucifer, is the light-bearer, the truth revealer; but the world at

large has an impression that there is a screw loose somewhere, and

have unwittingly ascribed the evil to the Devil, when a very slight

study of his character and deeds will show that "the Devil is not

half as black as he is painted."

The next account we have of him is in the book of Job (not a Hebrew

writing), where he appears under the title of Satan. It is to be

borne in mind that he has many names. In the book of Genesis we left

him a serpent with a curse pronounced upon him: "Because thou hast

done this thou art cursed above all cattle [what kind of cattle is

a snake?] and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly thou

shalt go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life." (Gen. 3 :

14.) Prior to the great fall of Adam and Eve, when they fell upward

and became as the gods, it seems the Serpent had always hopped along

erect, on the tip end of his tail, but because he had divulged some

court secrets, he was condemned to crawl upon his belly the rest

of his natural life (which is, I should remark, uncommonly long);

but in the book of Job he says of himself that he has been "walking

up and down in the earth." Who told him to get up? Was he not cursed

to go on his belly for all time to come? How could he walk? A snake

has no legs. When, where, how, and by whom was this transformation

of a hideous serpent into a prince-like man, accomplished? I don't

know. Perhaps it is a sort of Santa Claus story, coming down to us

from the childhood of the race. All peoples have similar traditions

which spring from early myths. Our Devil story will have to get in

line and march in the procession of fables. There are many people,

and people of the very best kind, who do not have any Devil. He

has left them and gone on a permanent vacation. On the other hand,

there are folks who could not feel happy if they thought there were

no Devil. To all such, who may read this, I would ask a few questions

which if they will intelligently answer, I shall be greatly obliged.

Did the Serpent talk? How could he speak without having the

vocal organs necessary to human speech? Who taught him the use of

language? What language did he speak? Was it French? I merely suggest

the French, as Adam and Eve took French leave of the garden. Did the

Serpent reason like a man? How could he with such a small head and not

even a spoonful of brains, know so much more than Adam and Eve? Yea,

he even knew more than God himself--for God did not know, or else

he fibbed, that man would not die if he ate the forbidden fruit. He

did not seem to know that man would become as the gods by partaking

of this tree, but the Serpent knew all this and possibly much more;

but how could so much superior knowledge be crowded into so small a

head? Some of our congressmen with domes of unusual dimensions do not

know as much as this inexperienced Serpent did. How are we to account

for this? Let some devilishly wise man explain to a benighted world

why Satan has been so wickedly traduced.

In the book of Job we have a second account of the Devil: "Now there

was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the

Lord, and Satan came also among them. And the Lord said unto Satan,

Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the Lord and said, From going

to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. And the

Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there

is none like him in the earth, a perfect and upright man, one that

feareth God and escheweth evil? Then Satan answered the Lord and said,

Doth Job fear God for naught? Hast not thou made a hedge about him,

and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? Thou

hast blest the work of his hands and his substance is increased in

the land. But put forth thine hand now and touch all that he hath,

and he will curse thee to thy face. And the Lord said unto Satan,

Behold all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not

forth thy hand. So Satan went from the presence of the Lord." (Job 1 :

6-12.) Then follows an account of the destruction of the cattle and

children of Job, and yet he would not curse God. Satan then suggested

that to afflict him in person would bring out his weakness and deeply

hidden wickedness. Job was tormented with boils, and three gratuitous

advisors, and did not curse God, but came very nearly giving his

counselors a cuss word or two. They exasperated him beyond measure.

Now while it must be admitted that the Devil does not show up to

as great advantage in this fable as he does in that relating to the

tree of knowledge, yet we should not jump to our conclusions. Let us

review this Job story.

We are surprised at the dignified manners of Satan. He walks in with

lordly airs among the sons of God. No one present said to him, "Get

out of here." He struts around in the gay company as one of them. We

hardly know how to understand such familiarity possible between the

sons of God and Satan. If, however, the sons of God in those days

were no better than the sons of God are in these, it is not in the

least surprising that Satan should conduct himself as well as the

best of them. But why did God permit him to do these cruel things to

Job? In a certain book by God, we are told to "resist the Devil and

he will flee from thee." This would have been splendid medicine for

the doctors who prescribed it. Satan did not come there so far as

we see to work any temptation. It was God who set up the temptation

before Satan. He began by asking Satan what he thought of Job. What

mattered it what his opinion of Job might be? Why should his opinion

be asked? Was it not showing respect to him? God should have said,

"Get behind me Satan."

Satan had seen many men who could not stand in the hour of trial,

and not knowing Job he took him for a man of that kind; God, however,

knew Job to be a "perfect" man and ought to have protected him from

all evil. Yet he did nothing of the kind, but on the contrary, clothed

Satan with power of destroying his cattle and children, and afflicting

him with tormenting boils. We see then that it is not Satan who is

responsible for the sufferings of the patient man, but God himself,

who first shows respect to Satan's presence and his opinions, then

gives him power by which he does a monstrous wrong to a good man

and his family. But if Satan's part is bad God's is worse. He is

the author of all of Job's miseries. If God had been just, he would

not have led off to his Satanic Majesty with such a temptation as to

ask him his opinion of Job. It was immaterial what his opinion was;

but it was all important that if there were a God in Israel that he

should protect and honor the "perfect" man, Job.

But aside from the barbarities of this myth, look at its childish

absurdities. How could the omniscient, whose eyes are in every place,

beholding the evil and the good, need to ask Satan where he came

from! Was not God, the omnipresent, everywhere on earth? If Satan had

been going up and down the country would he not of necessity have met

God again and again? Obviously these great opponents must have often

met. Again, it was useless for God to ask Satan what his opinion of

Job was, or would be after he tested him, as he knows all things past,

present, and to come, in heaven, earth and hell (I mean hades). It

is evident that Satan's opinion is not needed or cared for, because

after all the trials Job suffered were ended, there is not one word

given as to what Satan's opinion of Job was, and yet in the beginning

of the story this seems to be its sole object. After Job suffers a

long time from bodily sores and "miserable comforters" Satan vanishes

from the scene in a very obscure way, and God blesses Job with twice

as much as he had before. He had more sheep, more camels, more oxen,

and more asses. He became father of seven sons and three daughters,

the same number of sons and daughters that were slain by Satan,

instigated by God. Why were these ten innocent persons murdered? Had

they no rights that a just God was bound to respect? Shall not the

judge of all the earth do right? Certainly he ought to. But in this

case the judge pleads guilty of this crime. In reply to Satan God

says: "Although thou movedst me against him to destroy him without

cause." (Job 2 : 3.) Here is an unqualified confession of wronging

Job and his children without a show of justice; and even the cattle,

I imagine, would protest against the outrageous slaughter perpetrated

on them. If these asses were like Balaam's, I am sure they would

enter suit for damages.

"So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning,

for he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a

thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses. He had also seven sons

and three daughters." (Job 42 : 12, 13.) It is clear that the Lord

had nothing to do whatever with these blessings. Job had had sheep,

camels, oxen, asses, and children before, without any assistance from

the Lord; and if he secured a similar stock of cattle and a family

of children it was by his own management and husbandry.

But supposing them a gift from God as damages sustained by Job at

the hand of Satan through the instigation of God, yet they could

not assuage his grief for the loved ones ruthlessly torn from his

embrace. It is easy to see that this story is nothing more than

an oriental tale--a myth. It is wanting not only in fact, but it

teaches very bad morals. There is nothing ennobling in it. 1. God

had no moral right to permit Satan to come unrebuked into the company

of the sons of God. An earthly father teaches his children to avoid

"evil communications," but on this occasion the heavenly father did

not scorn the company of Satan, but treated him respectfully. 2. Again,

the infinite being would not need to ask the Devil what his opinion of

Job was, for he would know beforehand. 3. The infinitely good being

would not want the Devil's opinion--nor would he value it a straw,

if it were given before it was asked. 4. The infinitely just ruler

of the universe would not give the great adversary of man and God

such diabolical power over that "perfect and upright man" Job. Nor

would he have permitted the three "miserable comforters," reeling

mentally under the blind staggers of a blind theology, to have added

more torment to that imposed by his Satanic Majesty. Nor would he

have permitted him to murder the seven sons and three daughters, as a

mere matter of experiment in testing Job's staying powers. All this

is so horrible that the afterthought of more camels and asses, as a

compensation is an insufficient patch to cover the unqualified wrongs

done to the man of Uz. Even Job does not shine as conspicuously in

all this as he should. Job ought to have protested with all his might

and main against both God and Devil, that his individual rights were

invaded. He should have taken a change of venue, to have a hearing

before some other god, where there was a slight hope of securing more

justice. But he didn't and the consequence is we are all advised,

when suffering the outrageous wrongs of despotism, to "be patient

like Job." It has been a great evil to the human family that Job

was no "kicker;" it has opened wide the flood gates of tyranny, and

transfused the cowardly blood of sheep into the veins of men. Oh,

that Job had kicked and taken an appeal, what an inspiration it would

be to the fold of God now, to resist the shears of the fleecers! to

rebel against the rule of robbers!

Some questions to be answered by the man who pounds the Bible and

claims to understand the Greek scriptures:

A handbook of Freethought · 第 165 / 221 题