OCR Text |
Show x I 1 I I Agnosticism and I Deism Explained j Hollowncss of the Agnostic's Answer to Faith, "I do Not i Know"--Herbert Spencer Rejected His Own Theories j j of the Origin of the Universe. ! (Written for the Tntermountain Catholic.) Modern unbelief, which developed npnostoeism in the last century, has 7 1-roduced a two-fold effect. In the minds of the young it means liberty from all religious restraint or skepticism. skepti-cism. In the minds of those who have passed the heyday of life, whose i thoughts are matured and who begin i to weigh the stern realities of life, it has left a barren soil that is impervious to reason. To them faith, with its con-J con-J stations, may recall pleasant rernin- jpcenses of the pat. yet the cold indif ference of agnostics "1 do not know" stands as a barrier between his wishes ; snd convictions. "I have often wished mid prayed for the faith of my boyhood boy-hood days." said an avowed agnostic once to the writer, "but I cannot believe." be-lieve." There was no reason for questioning ques-tioning the sincerity of the man's open confession. He was a man of more than ordinary intelligence, and when pressed for some reason lor the loss f of faith he could give none. To his i mind there war no distinction between the Ininian and divine elements of the j church., or between her dogmatic anil disciplinary teaching. He revered that j faith of which his soul was dispos- I sussed. f Unlike the man of years and mature judgment, the college youth displays a I real second only to that of St. Paul in denouncing religion which he terms a Fham or a superstition which must be eradicated from the soul. St. Paul's sincerity in propagating the Christian ; faith .which, be mice persecuted, but which he ultimately sealed with his : h'-ood, cannot be questioned; nor should the sincerity of those who have learned fmm old masters that God is unknow-': unknow-': ff;e, immortality a dream and religion I a myth, be questioned. The agnostic's profession of respect for the moral in- fi fluence of religion may be sincere, too, J but the tendency of his "I do not I know" is to destroy that faith, which is sacred to man, in the minds of the I youth, who are by nature prone to re bel, ready to retrace their steps, sacri- fire the cherished hopes of immortality, j and take as a substitute the world and 1 its enjoyments. This is the real issue of the contro- versy today. Unbelief is no longer hid- den or ashamed to avow itself. It is the universal topic of conversation. From the street arab up through the various phases of humanity to the college col-lege president, philosopher and man of science, it is discussed: and this un-j un-j I f lief boldly arraigns that faith which j i.- coeval with the history of man. This i open and avowed unbelief of the young f pgitator, whilst always to be deplored, 4 is preferable to the cold and silent in- difference of the agnostic; the former I BCitates religious truths by calling them into question, whilst the latter's I profession, namely, "I do not know nor do I care," allows those truths to slum- j bf-r and die by not applying to them j tli light of reason. I , Only the few condescend to give rea- r"n lur wieir unoener. i ney oecome , the acknowledged leaders. The Meat "'i Majority seldom reflect, are satisfied f when certain restraints are removed and no divine law to observe. The few l'-aders make no pretense to refute the ' arguments in favor of the vxistenre of h Supreme Being, nor assign any rea- 1. h''n w'nv the faith of the human race f f-houid be dispossessed. They fmply -!;ince theories which may conflict " i'h that belief, but theories which ihv themselves are unable to explain. H -rbf-rt Spencer's theories of tie f ricln of the universe were rejected by I himself. From his great mind he ! could evolve only three possible suppositions suppo-sitions for its existence. According to his philosophy, "it must be uher (1) self-existent: (2) self-created, or (3) created by an external agency. ' The first supposition was so manifestly Lb-surd Lb-surd that he rejected it at once. The second, which contradicted the well-known well-known principle "from nothing, i t th.ng is made," he did not entertain at all. The third, which favored the tv1 of the human race and which r.:id prescriptive pre-scriptive rights, he also rejected, giMng as a substitute the agnostic's profession. profes-sion. "I do not know." His denial of creation logically leads to tue d-?nijl of God, and this in turn leads tj a di nial cf all knowledge, and instead of enlightenment en-lightenment he leaves his a lnnrers groping in the dark. Rejecting his own three possible and only three p'ss.:ble suppositions for the origin of the universe, uni-verse, he removes the very foundation of all knowledge and begins in doubt. Acknowledged inability to account for the origin of the universe, denying at the same time the account given in the first chapter of Genesis, is the first lesson les-son in the unknowable creed of agnostics. agnos-tics. Their second lesson is that they do not deny the existence of a Supreme Being, but simply nuintnin that, if at all. he' is unknowable and mu-;: be an Infinite Power or Force that is inseparable insep-arable from nature. But this Infinite Power or Force is not the God proclaimed pro-claimed by the patriarch, taught in synagogue and still worshipped oxd adored by all true Christi ms, as the Prea tnr rf the nnlvprso th.-- K'atVer nf the human family, the Author cf lire and death, a. Being infinite i.i duration, omnipotent in power and omn:pv-.-sent. This is' Christia theism which the agnostic ag-nostic denies. Therefore, in the. Christian Chris-tian sense, he is an atheist., . But how deny this idea of the one, true and only God? That faith as to the essence and existence of God is coeval with the history of the human race. It has been carried down from generation to generation by the unbroken un-broken chain of tradition. Its history traced through the ages as far back as we have any historical record confirms this oldest of religious creeds. Some of the reasons assigned are because of the many religious frauds which have existed ex-isted at all times. But in defending the ancient faith, there is. no pretense of defending gross corruptions of that belief be-lief or superstitions which, like noxious weeds, have crept in and tried to stifle the mustard seed of God's word. Truth cannot be held responsible for what is done in the name of or with the sanction sanc-tion of a false system. The Gentiles, after their separation from the synagogue, syna-gogue, the source and center of truth, became more and more depraved in each succeeding generation. Following the bent of their inclinations, the farther far-ther they were removed from the guiding guid-ing light of the ancient prophets the more corrupt they became, and the more grotesque their religion. Without With-out a divine guide to direct they were led blindly on till they reached the lowest low-est forms of African fetichlsm. The synagogue could not be held responsible responsi-ble for this deterioration any more than the Catholic church, which is the continuation con-tinuation of the synagogue, could be held responsible for witchcraft or the physical intervention of the : devil in human affairs: or spiritism, which is a belief in the physical intervention of the souls of the dead in human affairs; af-fairs; to all of which the agnostic appeals ap-peals as a reason for rejecting Christianity Chris-tianity and adopting as his principle the uncertain, doubtful and indifferent theory, "I do not know." (Concluded.) |