關於愛，我是個小學生。

The Emotional Factor
As I said before, I do not think that the real reason why people accept religion has anything to do with argumentation. They accept religion on emotional grounds. One is often told that it is a very wrong thing to attack religion, because religion makes men virtuous. So I am told; I have not noticed it. You know, of course, the parody of that argument in Samuel Butler's book, Erewhon Revisited. You will remember that in Erewhon there is a certain Higgs who arrives in a remote country, and after spending some time there he escapes from that country in a balloon. Twenty years later he comes back to that country and finds a new religion in which he is worshiped under the name of the Sun Child, and it is said that he ascended into heaven. He finds that the Feast of the Ascension is about to be celebrated, and he hears Professors Hanky and Panky say to each other that they never set eyes on the man Higgs, and they hope they never will; but they are the high priests of the religion of the Sun Child. He is very indignant, and he comes up to them, and he says, "I am going to expose all this humbug and tell the people of Erewhon that it was only I, the man Higgs, and I went up in a balloon." He was told, "You must not do that, because all the morals of this country are bound round this myth, and if they once know that you did not ascend into Heaven they will all become wicked"; and so he is persuaded of that and he goes quietly away. 

 That is the idea -- that we should all be wicked if we did not hold to the Christian religion. It seems to me that the people who have held to it have been for the most part extremely wicked. You find this curious fact, that the more intense has been the religion of any period and the more profound has been the dogmatic belief, the greater has been the cruelty and the worse has been the state of affairs. In the so-called ages of faith, when men really did believe the Christian religion in all its completeness, there was the Inquisition, with all its tortures; there were millions of unfortunate women burned as witches; and there was every kind of cruelty practiced upon all sorts of people in the name of religion. 

You find as you look around the world that every single bit of progress in humane feeling, every improvement in the criminal law, every step toward the diminution of war, every step toward better treatment of the colored races, or every mitigation of slavery, every moral progress that there has been in the world, has been consistently opposed by the organized churches of the world. I say quite deliberately that the Christian religion, as organized in its churches, has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. 

非理性因素
如前所述，人們信仰宗教的真實原因同論證根本沒有什麼關係。他們信仰宗教是由於非理性的原因。人們常說，攻擊宗教是錯誤的，因為宗教使人更有道德。有人這樣對我說過，我並不接受。大家都知道巴特勒寫的《重遊埃瑞璜》對這種論調的嘲諷。還記得他在書中提到，有個叫希格斯的人來到一個遙遠的地方。他在那裏度過一段時間以後乘氣球逃離了那個地方。二十年以後，他又舊地重遊，發現那兒出現一種新宗教，說他希格斯已經升天，並崇拜他為「太陽王子」。他發現紀念他升天的節日即將到來，他聽到漢基和潘基兩位教授在交談，說他們未嘗目睹希格斯的尊容，也永遠不願碰到他；但他們是「太陽王子教」的大祭司。希格斯勃然大怒，就走到他們面前去對他們說：「我要揭露這一切騙人的鬼話，我要告訴埃瑞璜的人民，我不過是凡人希格斯，我是乘氣球騰空而去的。」別人卻對他說：「你可不能這樣做，因為這個國家一切的道德準則都是同這一神話聯繫在一起的、他們一旦知道你並沒有升天，便會一下子全變得邪惡了。」他被說服，悄悄地走了。

這意思就是說，如果不堅信基督教，我們都會變邪惡了。我倒覺得，有這種想法的人才邪惡。大家可以看到這類怪事，就是歷史上無論什麼時期，只要宗教信仰越狂熱，對教條越迷信，殘忍的行為就越猖狂，事態就變得越糟糕。在所謂宗教信念的時代裏，當人們虔誠地信仰基督教義時，就出現了宗教裁判所和與之俱來的嚴刑，於是也便有數以百萬計的不幸婦女被當作女巫燒死，在宗教的名義下，對各階層人民實施了各種各樣的殘酷迫害。

環顧今日的世界，你會發現世界上人類的情感稍微有一點進展，刑法有任何改進，緩和戰爭的每一步驟，改善有色人種待遇的每一步驟，奴隸的解放和道德的進步，都曾受到世界上有組織的教會持續的反對。我可以很慎重地說：「基督教作為有組織的教會，從過去到現在都依然是世界道德進步的主要敵人。」

【論證與主張】

【主張】「人們信仰宗教的真實原因同論證根本沒有什麼關係。他們信仰宗教是由於非理性的原因。」主張待證。

【論證】「這意思就是說 (R)，如果不堅信基督教 (C)，我們都會變邪惡了 (W)。」If R is true, then if ~C, then W. What is R? R is a piece of literary works. R maybe false, so ~C then W maybe false. 羅氏否認以自欺欺人的態度來面對宗教。我深表認同。不過，前面數段，以他所寫的主張與論證看來，似乎並非如此。

【主張】「環顧今日的世界，你會發現世界上人類的情感稍微有一點進展，刑法有任何改進，緩和戰爭的每一步驟，改善有色人種待遇的每一步驟，奴隸的解放和道德的進步，都曾受到世界上有組織的教會持續的反對。」這是非常嚴重的指控，過去於中古歐洲時期政教迫害百姓的慘劇、贖罪券的迂腐，令人髮指。時至今日，若此一情勢方興未艾，那基督宗教某些組織真該好好檢討了；因自身行為的不檢點，妨礙他人正確認識真理，其罪大莫甚矣！

【問題與意見】這一段是我一路讀來感觸最深、也是最為同情羅氏的地方了。世上有許多宗教的存續，不都是國家以「保護古文明思想傳統及習俗」為由，而延續至今？如非洲、紐澳、大洋洲等地部落及少數民族的文化保護計畫皆屬之。身為白人強權的羅氏，自難免有優越心理，在歸納眾多民間信仰後，欲以一超脫跳躍的框架來概念化這普世人類存在之信仰本能，這是可以理解的。然將基督及聖經思想體系與之一概而論，則其疏漏也明；因為光從聖經的成書與  耶穌受難的歷史真確性而言，基督思想就不應被歸為「宗教」，而極有可能是道德倫理的規範公設。我為何不直說基督教呢？因為我也不想和羅氏文中所謂之 ｢基督教徒｣ 混為一談；我也唾棄上述行為，但我也不是甚麼好人；我只知道：我是個罪人，我信仰  上帝、  耶穌基督的救贖、與聖靈及聖經的教誨，我願意奉獻一生，為主而活，如此而已。套用一句 George Clooney 在 From Dusk Till Dawn 裡的一句台詞：｢ Maybe I'm a bastard, but I'm not a fking bastard. ｣ 語雖粗鄙，但頗有一針見血之莞爾，我心戚戚啊。

【待續】