I. By What Means is the Idea of God Originiated?
On this subject the three following opinions have been advanced: 1. That the idea is innate; 2. That it is the result of rational investigation; and, 3. That it depends alone upon Divine Revelation. Let us examine each of these briefly.
1. That the Idea is innate.—If the notion of a supreme First Cause were an innate idea, it would be as natural for man to believe that there is a God, as to believe in the existence of an external universe. Such an idea would have all the force of a self-evident proposition, and could be doubted by no one possessing rationality. But how does this theory correspond with matters of fact? Is it not evidently inconsistent with the existence of atheism? I am aware some suppose that no man can be an atheist, but this is assuming what cannot be proved. That there are those who profess atheism, and who manifest all possible zeal in its propagation, no one will deny; and, until we can claim the ability to discern the thoughts and purposes of the human heart, we have no right to call in question the truth of their profession or the sincerity of their zeal.
The theory in question is also at war with the true philosophy of mind. The doctrine of innate ideas is a mere hypothesis, which no man has ever been able to prove; but which is contradicted by all experience, and is, therefore, unworthy of our confidence. It is now generally admitted that we gain all our ideas by the use of our natural faculties, sensation and reflection; and if so, we have no reason to believe that our idea of God forms an exception to the general rule.
2. There seems to be a degree of plausibility in the opinion that men may acquire an idea of God by rational induction, or from the light of nature; but however plausible this theory may at first sight appear to be, we will find, on further examination, that it is wholly untenable. It is true, nature is a volume of theological instruction to those who are capable of reading it. But, as a book may be stored with wholesome and important matter, and yet be of no benefit to the man who understands not the language in which it is written; so the volume of nature may contain a thousand arguments in favor of the Divine existence, and yet men, for the want of a sufficient degree of moral instruction, may be unable in the slightest degree to feel their force or follow their tendency.
To the Jew it is evident that “the heavens declare the glory of God,” and that “the firmament showeth his handiwork.” To the Christian philosopher it is equally evident that “the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and godhead.” And to deists and heathen sages, who enjoy a light which they are either unable to trace to its proper source or unwilling to acknowledge, the voice of nature proclaims the existence of a supreme First Cause.
These facts, however, have no direct bearing upon the present subject. The question to be investigated is not, whether the light of nature sustains the proposition that there is a God, for of this there can hardly be a doubt; but it is simply this: Is the light of nature sufficient of itself to lead men to the knowledge of God? In other words, Can men who are entirely destitute of the idea of a God derive that idea from rational investigation? Of the question as understood in this sense we feel disposed to take the negative, and in support of our position we offer the following arguments.
(1.) The Opinion is not supported by a single matter of fact.—The history of ages does not afford a single instance in which any man, by a course of philosophic research, obtained the idea of God as an original discovery. On the other hand it is worthy of remark, that the wisest among heathen philosophers confessed themselves to be indebted to tradition for the ideas which they entertained upon this point; and no one, in any age or country, has ever pretended to have arrived at an original idea of God by rational investigation.
Had such a discovery ever been made by any man, there would most certainly have been preserved, in some way or other, a notice of so wonderful an event. This is true in regard to all the great discoveries of mankind in arts and science. Thus, the name of Copernicus is associated with the present system of astronomy. The name of Hervey is connected with the common theory of the circulation of the blood. Fulton stands at the head of steam power; and the memory of Morse runs with lightning speed along every telegraphic wire. So it is with almost every important discovery. But nothing of this kind marks the discovery of a great First Cause; and the only reason is, that such a discovery was never made by any human being. In every case, where a process of reasoning upon this subject has been instituted, it has been to corroborate the belief in the being of a God, and not to gain a knowledge of him as an original discovery. But, (2.) This Theory is incredible in itself because it is absurd and contradictory.
To suppose that a man can commence a rational investigation of this kind without an idea of God, and as the result of his researches to arrive at such an idea, is to suppose that he will put forth an effort without any object in view. Or, which is the same thing, to inquire after an object of which he has no conception—a subject of which he has not the least idea. It is, in a word, to have an idea of an object and no idea at the same time; and to suppose that of which he has no knowledge to be the subject of his thought and reasoning.
How, then, is a man to come by the first idea of God, with regard to whose existence he is to decide? Were we to suppose human beings to be without such an idea, is it probable that they would ever institute an inquiry respecting him? Or, if such an intention should somehow or other be formed by them, is it likely that they would be able to prosecute it? No one who understands the philosophy of the human mind will answer these questions in the affirmative. Every one knows that it requires more intellectual strength and effort to discover an unknown truth than to comprehend it when fairly stated, or to see the force of the evidence on which it rests. But, (3.) The opinion supposes a degree of mental culture that never has existed, and never can exist, where there is no idea of a God; and, therefore, the discovery is not probable.
Man, without some degree of education, is wholly a creature of appetite. The gratification of his animal nature occupies all his thoughts, and he is therefore unqualified for rational investigation. If we suppose that God is at all discoverable by the light of nature, we must look to those whose civilization and intellectual culture have fitted the mind for the investigation of abstract and philosophic truth. For, to a people who have never heard of God, his existence must be a question of mere philosophy.
But where is such a state of mental cultivation found? Is it among those from whose mind the idea of God is entirely obliterated? To suppose this is to suppose that men can be raised from a state of barbarism to one of civil and scientific cultivation without the influence of religion; for no religious motives can exist where the foundation of all religion is unknown. It is to suppose that civil and scientific cultivation can exist independent of moral control, without a sense of the principle of justice, without hope or fear in regard to another life.
This is what never was. No civilized nation ever existed under such circumstances. It is utterly impossible to raise any body of men, by mere civil improvement, to that degree of mental cultivation which will fit them for philosophic research without the aid of religion in some form. Accordingly, wherever there has been a sufficient amount of mental improvement to prepare men for the investigation of moral and spiritual truth, there the idea of a great First Cause has been previously known and acknowledged.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please only leave comment If you are interested in the topic discussed above. No spam will be tolerated so don't even try to spam my readers.