Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 23.djvu/263

Rh THEISM 245 who most fully developed some of the distinctive principles of Descartes, it was identical with all science, for to him God was the only substance, and all things else were only His attributes or modes. Besides the pantheism of Spinoza, the occasionalism of Guelinx, Malebranche s vision of things in God, Leibnitz s pre-established harmony and optimism, and Wolf s rationalism were natural, if not necessary, outgrowths from the same root, Cartesian theism. Perhaps, of all the many services to the cause of theism with which Cartesianism must be credited the greatest was that it constantly gave prominence to the absolute perfection of God. 1 Baconian or empirical philo sophy was content if, by the ways of causality and design, it could rise to an apprehension of a First Cause and Su preme Intelligence. It tended of itself to a phenomenal ism, sensationism, associationism, unfavourable to theism. It was, however, counteracted, restrained, and modified by Cartesianism and Platonism, and it naturally allied itself with positive science. The massive defence of theism erected by the Cambridge school of philosophy against atheism, fatalism, and the denial of moral distinctions was avowedly built on a Platonic foundation. The popularity during the 18th century of the design argument, and what was called physico-theology, was largely due to the impres sion made on the general mind by the brilliant discoveries of the founders of modern astronomy, chemistry, and other physical sciences. Bishop Berkeley showed how an em pirical philosophy might be logically evolved into a theistic im materialism, Hume how it might be logically dissolved into an agnostic nihilism. Mysti- In the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries mysticism had cism. many representatives, several of whom, as, e.g., Weigel, Ottingen, Swedenborg, and especially Jacob Boehme, are entitled to a considerable place in any detailed history of theism. To the eyes of Boehme God revealed Himself from without and within in the most real and intimate manner. In the powers, antagonisms, and conjunctions of creation he saw the energies, struggles, and victories of the creative Spirit itself ; in the constitution and opera tions of physical and human nature, the essential constitu tion and necessary processes of the Divine nature. His thoughts of God were in striking contrast to those of the deists and natural theologians of the 17th and 18th cen turies, and strikingly anticipated those of a Schelling, Hegel, and Baader in the 19th century. Could Sweden- borg s doctrine of correspondences be verified, our means of insight into the character of God would be largely extended. Nine- The 19th century is sufficiently far advanced to allow teenth us to see that a new epoch even in the history of theism ntury. b e g an near j^ commencement. The revolution in philo sophy initiated by Kant has profoundly affected theistic thought. It has introduced that type of agnosticism which is what is most original and distinctive in the antitheism of the present age, and at the same time stimu lated reason to undertake bolder inquiries as to the Divine than those which Kant prohibited. The enlarged and deepened views of the universe attained through the dis coveries of recent physical science have rendered incredible the idea of a God remote from the world, irresistible the 1 Saisset, in the first part of his Modern Pantheism has some what elaborate studies on (1) the theism of Descartes, (2) God in the system of Malebranche, (3) the pantheism of Spinoza, and (4) the theism of Leibnitz. Huber (1854) and Elvenich (1865) have written special treatises on the Cartesian proofs of the Divine existence. Among the most thorough studies of Spinoza are those of Camerar, Pollock, and Martineau. Herder, Voigtlander, and others have maintained that he was a theist, not a pantheist. On the Theodicee of Leibnitz there are three excellent papers by Prof. Torrey in the Andover Rev. for October, November, and December 1885. The best general history of philosophy is Kuno Fischer s ; the best history of Cartesianism F. Bouillier s. conviction that the eternal source of things must be immanent in their constitution, changes, and laws. The rapid growth of biology and the spread of the doctrine of evolution have not only tended in the same direction, but given a new and nobler conception of the teleology of the universe, and, consequently, of God as the supreme in telligence. History which the natural theologians of the 18th century so strangely ignored, which the solitary Italian thinker Vico alone recognized with clearness and comprehensiveness of vision to be necessarily the chief scene of the self-revelation of God began with Lessing and Herder to be generally seen in its true religious light. The comparative or historical method of study has created two disciplines or sciences, comparative theology and Biblical theology, which are both largely occupied with tracing the development of the idea of God. The ethical spirit of the age has so told on its religious teaching that to no generation save that to which the gospel was originally given has the Divine fatherhood been so distinctly set forth as to the present. Dogmatic theology, especially in Germany, has been earnestly active ; and its chief repre sentatives have laboured so to amend and advance the doctrine concerning God that it may satisfy the new requirements which have arisen. It is now necessary briefly to indicate the present state of thought Present on the chief points and problems of theism. state of As to the origin, then, of our actual idea of God, that, it is seen, thought, can only be the whole religious history of man which precedes it, Origin of and the whole religious nature of man which underlies that history, idea of It is absurd to refer exclusively to any faculty, intuition, or feeling, God. any revelation or instruction, any person or event, what can be traced in growth and formation through thousands of years, and can be shown by facts and documents to have&quot; been influenced by all the chief causes which have made history what it is. The history of the idea of God is the centre of all history, both explained by and explaining it ; and our nineteenth-century idea of God is the result of the entire historico-psychological process which has produced the culture and religion of the 19th century. The idea of God is what it now is because God s whole guidance of man and man s whole search for God, the whole economy and evolution of things and the whole constitution and development of thought and feeling, have been what they have been from the beginning of history to the present time. Anthropology, comparative psycho logy, the science of language, comparative theology, Biblical theo logy, the history of philosophy, and the history of Christian doctrine, have all been engaged in attempting to discover the factors and stages of the vast and complex process which has resulted in the accepted idea of God ; and, by their separate and conjunct endeavours, they have succeeded in casting great light on all parts of the process. As to the absolute historical origin of theism as to where, when, and how the theistic conception of the Divine first obtained recog nition among men a definitive answer has not yet been reached. But the labonr expended on the problem has not been wasted. It has made clearer the nature of the inquiry, rendered apparent the unsatisfactoriness of previous solutions, opened up glimpses of divers ways by which men have been led to belief in the unity of God, and accumulated means and materials for future and probably more successful work. The question as to the psychological origin of theism cannot be wholly separated from that as to its historical origin. Unless theism can be shown to be the primitive form of religion, it cannot be held to have had an entirely peculiar and distinct psychological origin, but must be viewed as simply a phase or development of religion. It cannot be said that there is as yet agreement as to the psychological origin, or as to the psychological constitution even, of religion. The hypothesis of a simple impartation of the knowledge of God and spiritual things through primitive revelation, or through instruction and tradition which go back to the first appearance of man on earth, still retains a hold on certain conser vative minds, but has received no confirmation from modern science and discovery, and is plainly of its very nature inadequate. A revelation relative to God in words or signs could have no meaning to a mind devoid of thoughts of God ; spiritual instruction is only possible where there are spiritual powers to understand and profit by it ; tradition will carry nothing far to which intelligence is in different. There have been many attempts made dnring the present century to refer the origin of belief in God to some emotional source, some element or state of sensitivity. Thus Strauss has re affirmed the hypothesis of Epicurus, Lucretius, and Hume, that fear made the gods ; Feuerbach has resolved religion into desire,