object；　here　this　present；　indwelling　Christ　retreats　two　thousand　years　to　a　small　corner　of
  Palestine；　and　is　an　individual　historically　manifested　far　away　at　Nazareth　or　Jerusalem。　It　is　the
  same　thing　in　the　Greek　Religion　where　the　god　present　in　devotion　changes　into　prosaic　statues
  and　marble；　or　in　painting；　where　this　externality　is　likewise　arrived　at；　when　the　god　becomes
  mere　canvas　or　wood。　The　Supper　is；　according　to　the　Lutheran　conception；　of　Faith　alone；　it　is　a
  divine　satisfaction；　and　is　not　adored　as　if　it　were　the　Host。　Thus　a　sacred　image　is　no　more　to　us
  than　is　a　stone　or　thing。　The　second　point　of　view　must　indeed　be　that　with　which　consciousness
  begins；　it　must　start　from　the　external　comprehension　of　this　form：　it　must　passively　accept　report
  and　take　it　up　into　memory。　But　if　it　remain　where　it　is；　that　is　the　unspiritual　point　of　view：　to
  remain　fixed　in　this　second　standpoint　in　this　dead　far…away　historic　distance；　is　to　reject　the　Spirit。
  The　sins　of　him　who　lies　against　the　Holy　Ghost　cannot　be　forgiven。　That　lie　is　the　refusal　to　be　a
  universal；　to　be　holy；　that　is　to　make　Christ　become　divided；　separated；　to　make　Him　only　another
  person　as　this　particular　person　in　Judea；　or　else　to　say　that　He　now　exists；　but　only　far　away　in
  Heaven；　or　in　some　other　place；　and　not　in　present　actual　form　amongst　His　people。　The　man　who
  speaks　of　the　merely　finite；　of　merely　human　reason；　and　of　the　limits　to　mere　reason；　lies　against
  the　Spirit；　for　the　Spirit　as　infinite　and　universal；　as　self…comprehension；　comprehends　itself　not　in　a
  〃merely〃　nor　in　limits；　nor　in　the　finite　as　such。　It　has　nothing　to　do　with　this；　for　it　comprehends
  itself　within　itself　alone；　in　its　infinitude。
  If　it　be　said　of　Philosophy；　that　it　makes　reality　the　subject　of　its　knowledge；　the　principal　point　is
  that　the　reality　should　not　be　one　outside　of　that　of　which　it　is　the　reality。　For　example；　if　from　the
  real　content　of　a　book；　I　abstract　the　binding；　paper；　ink；　language；　the　many　thousand　letters　that
  are　contained　in　it；　the　simple　universal　content　as　reality；　is　not　outside　of　the　book。　Similarly　law
  is　not　outside　of　the　individual；　but　it　constitutes　the　true　Being　of　the　individual。　The　reality　of　my
  Mind　is　thus　in　my　Mind　itself　and　not　outside　of　it；　it　is　my　real　Being；　my　own　substance；　without
  which　I　am　without　existence。　This　reality　is；　so　to　speak；　the　combustible　material　which　may　be
  kindled　and　lit　up　by　the　universal　reality　as　such　as　objective；　and　only　so　far　as　this　phosphorus　is
  in　men；　is　comprehension；　the　kindling　and　lighting　up；　possible。　Feeling；　anticipation；　knowledge
  of　God；　are　only　thus　in　men；　without　such；　the　divine　Mind　would　not　be　the　in　and　for　itself
  Universal。　Reality　is　itself　a　real　content　and　not　the　destitute　of　content　and　undetermined；　yet；　as
  the　book　has　other　content　besides；　there　is　in　the　individual　mind　also　a　great　amount　of　other
  matter　which　belongs　only　to　the　manifestation　of　this　reality；　and　the　individual　surrounded　with
  what　is　external；　must　be　separated　from　this　existence。　Since　reality　is　itself　Spirit　and　not　an
  abstraction；　〃God　is　not　a　God　for　the　dead　but　for　the　living；〃　and　indeed　for　living　spirits。
  The　great　Creator　was　alone
  And　experienced　desire；
  Therefore　He　created　Spirits；
  Holy　mirrors　of　His　holiness。
  The　noblest　Being　He　found　no　equal；
  From　out　the　bowl　of　all　the　spiritual　world；
  There　sparkled　up　to　Him　infinitude。
  Religion　is　also　the　point　of　view　from　which　this　existence　is　known。　But　as　regards　the　different
  forms　of　knowledge　existing　in　Religion　and　Philosophy；　Philosophy　appears　to　be　opposed　to　the
  conception　in　Religion　that　the　universal　mind　first　shows　itself　as　external；　in　the　objective　mode　of
  consciousness。　Worship；　commencing　with　the　external；　then　turns　against　and　abrogates　it　as　has
  just　been　said；　and　thus　Philosophy　is　justified　through　the　acts　and　forms　of　worship；　and　only
  does　what　they　do。　Philosophy　has　to　deal　with　two　different　objects；　first　as　in　the　Religion
  present　in　worship；　with　the　substantial　content；　the　spiritual　soul；　and　secondly　with　bringing　this
  before　consciousness　as　object；　but　in　the　form　of　thought。　Philosophy　thinks　and　conceives　of　that
  which　Religion　represents　as　the　object　of　consciousness；　whether　it　is　as　the　work　of　the
  imagination　or　as　existent　facts　in　history。　The　form　of　the　knowledge　of　the　object　is；　in　religious
  consciousness；　such　as　pertains　to　the　ordinary　idea；　and　is　thus　more　or　less　sensuous　in　nature。
  In　Philosophy　we　do　not　say　that　God　begot　a　Son；　which　is　a　relation　derived　from　natural　life。
  Thought；　or　the　substance　of　such　a　relation；　is　therefore　still　recognized　in　Philosophy。　Since
  Philosophy　thinks　its　object；　it　has　the　advantage　of　uniting　the　two　stages　of　religious
  consciousness　…　which　in　Religion　are　different　moments　…　into　one　unity　in　philosophic　thought。
  It　is　these　two　forms　which　are　different　from　one　another　and　which；　as　opposed；　may　therefore
  seem　to　be　mutually　conflicting；　and　it　is　natural　and　it　necessarily　seems　to　be　the　case；　that　on
  first　definitely　coming　to　view　they　are　so　to　speak　conscious　of　their　diversity；　and　hence　at　first
  appear　as　inimical　to　one　another。　The　first　stage　in　the　order　of　manifestation　is　definite　existence；
  or　a　determinate　Being…for…self　as　opposed　to　the　other。　The　later　form　is　that　Thought　embraces
  itself　in　the　concrete；　immerses　itself　in　itself；　and　Mind；　as　such；　comes　in　it　to　consciousness。　In
  the　earlier　stage；　Mind　is　abstract；　and　in　this　constraint　it　knows　itself　to　be　different；　and　in
  opposition　to　the　other。　When　it　embraces　itself　in　the　concrete；　it　is　no　more　simply　confined　in
  determinate　existence；　only　knowing　or　possessing　itself　in　that　diversity；　but　it　is　the　Universal
  which；　inasmuch　as　it　determines　itself；　contains　its　〃other〃　within　itself。　As　concrete　intelligence；
  Mind　thus　comprehends　the　substantial　in　the　form　which　seemed　to　differ　from　it；　of　which　it　had
  only　grasped　the　outward　manifestation　and　had　turned　away　from　it；　it　recognizes　itself　in　its
  inward　content；　and　so　it　for　the　first　time　grasps　its　object；　and　deals　justice　to　its　opposite。
  Generally　speaking；　the　course　of　this　antithesis　in　history　is　that　Thought　first　of　all　comes　forth
  within　Religion；　as　not　free　and　in　separate　manifestations。　Secondly；　it　strengthens　itself；　feels　itself
  to　be　resting　upon　itself；　holds　and　conducts　itself　inimically　towards　the　other　form；　and　does　not
  recognize　itself　therein。　In　the　third　place；　it　concludes　by　acknowledging　itself　as　in　this　other。　Or
  else　Philosophy　has　to　begin　with　carrying　on　its　work　entirely　on　its　own　account；　isolating
  Thought　from　all　popular　beliefs；　and　taking　for　itself　quite　a　different　field　of　operation；　a　field　for
  which　the　world　of　ordinary　ideas　lies　quite　apart；　so　that　the　two　exist　peacefully　side　by　side；　or；
  to　put　it　better；　so　that　no　reflection　on　their　opposition　is　arrived　at。　Just　as　little　did　the　thought　of
  reconciling　them　occur；　since　in　the　popular　beliefs　the　same　content　appeared　as　in　any　external
  form　other　than　the　notion　…　the　thought　that　is；　of　explaining　and　justifying　popular　belief；　in　order
  thus　to　be　able　again　to　express　the　conceptions　of　free　thought　in　the　form　of　popular　religion。
  Thus　we　see　Philosophy　first　restrained　and　confined　within　the　range　of　the　Greek　heathen　world；
  then　resting　upon　itself；　it　goes　forth　against　popular　religion　and　takes　up　an　unfriendly　attitude　to
  it；　until　it　grasps　that　religion　in　its　innermost　and　recognizes　itself　therein。　Thus　the　ancient　Greek
  philosophers　generally　respected　the　popular　religion；　or　at　least　they　did　not　oppose　it；　or　reflect
  upon　it。　Those　coming　later；　including　even　Xenophanes；　handled　popular　ideas　most　severely；　and
  thus　many　so…called　atheists　made　their　appearance。　But　as　the　spheres　of　popular　conception　and
  abstract　thought　stood　peacefully　side　by　side；　we　also　find　Greek　philosophers　of　even　a　later
  period　in　development；　in　whose　case　speculative　thought　and　the　act　of　worship；　as　also　the　pious
  invocation　upon　and　sacrifice　to　the　gods；　coexist　in　good　faith；　and　not　in　mere　hypocrisy。
  Socrates　was　accused　of　teaching　other　gods　than　those　belonging　to　the　popular　religion；　his
  daimonion　was　indeed　opposed　to　the　principles　of　Greek　morals　and　religion；　but　at　the　same
  time　he　followed　quite　honestly　the　usages　of　his　religion；　and　we　know　besides　that　his　last
  request　was　to　ask　his　friends　to　offer　a　cock　to　？esculapius　…　a　desire　quite　inconsistent　with　his
  conclusions　regarding　the　existence　of　God　and　above　all　regarding　morality。　Plato　declaimed
  against　the　poets　and　their　gods。　It　was　in　a　much　later　time　that　the　Neo…platonists　first　recognized
  in　the　popular　mythology　rejected　earlier　by　the　philosophers；　the　universal　content；　they
  transposed　and　translated　it　into　what　is　significant　for　thought；　and　thus　used　mythology　itself　as　a
  symbolical　imagery　for　giving　expression　to　their　formulas。
  Similarly　do　we　see　in　the　Christian　Religion；　thought　which　is　not　independent　first