ANTHROPOMORPHIC THEISM 



fies us ; and, so far from consoling, it tends to 

 drive us to cynical despair. 



In spite of all the care observed in the word- 

 ing of the foregoing argument — a care directed 

 toward the bringing out of my entire thought, 

 and not toward the concealing of any portion 

 of it — the views here maintained will doubtless 

 by many be pronounced " covertly atheistical." 

 It must be reserved for the next three chap- 

 ters to demonstrate that they are precisely the 

 reverse, and that the intelligent acceptance of 

 them must leave us in an attitude toward God 

 more reverential than that which is assumed by 

 those who still cling to the anthropomorphic 

 hypothesis. At present we must be content 

 with noting that our choice is no longer between 

 an intelligent Deity and none at all : it lies be- 

 tween a limited Deity and one that is with- 

 out limit. For, as the foregoing discussion has 

 plainly shown, and as must appear from every 

 similar discussion of the subject in terms of the 

 Doctrine of Evolution, an anthropomorphic 

 God cannot be conceived as an infinite God. 

 Personality and Infinity are terms expressive of 

 ideas which are mutually incompatible. The 

 pseud-idea " Infinite Person " is neither more 

 nor less unthinkable than the pseud-idea " Cir- 

 cular Triangle." As Spinoza somewhere says, 

 Determinatio negatio est^ — to define God is to 



1 [This famous assertion occurs in Letter No. 50 of Spi- 

 227 



