32 The Fundamentals substantially of four arguments, to wit: (A) The ontological argument; to the effect that the being of God is involved in the idea of God. This is good as far as it goes, but it falls vastly short of demonstration; and in any case it reaches no conclusion as to the character of God. (B) The cosmological argument, which reasons from effect to cause and expresses itself in the epigram ex nihilo nihil fit; “out of nothing nothing comes”. This is equally inconclusive, since the necessary Somewhat to which it leads is but the merest shade of the shadow of a god. (C) The teleological argu ment, which proceeds from design to a designer; carrying with it a strong presumption as to infinite wisdom but taking little or no cognizance of the moral nature of God. (D) And the anthropological argument , which infers the moral nature of God from the moral nature of man. This goes further than the others; nevertheless it is so far from being final proof in the mathematical sense that one may reason ably question whether any truth-seeker was ever really con vinced by it. These are the arguments which have been used by philoso phers from time immemorial; and little has been added in the process of the passing years. The result, as a whole, is melancholy failure. The world by its wisdom, that is by the exercise of its unaided reason, has simply reached Agnos ticism; it has not “found out God”. Not to those who deem them themselves wise, but rather to the simple whose hearts are open Godward, comes the great revelation. I t is one thing to know about God and quite another to know Him. John Hay knew all about President Lincoln from his boyhood up; little “Tad” had no such information, but he knew his father, knew him through and through. The eyes of Faith see further than those of reason. Wherefore Jesus said, “Except ye become as a little child ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of God”. The third of the alluring pathways is that of the Five
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker