CORRESPONDENCE WEEK 10

CORRESPONDENCE WEEK 10

Human Intelligence itself a proof of God

(R) It seems to me that the very putting of the question is proof of the existence of that which is questioned.

(J) How do you make that out? It strikes me as a very extraordinary suggestion.

(R) Well, the question indicates considerable astuteness on the part of the questioner.
Here is a looking, thinking, prying creature called man, quick glancing east, west, north, south: noting this, noting that, putting this and that together: observing, reflecting, arguing, making experiments, studying, reasoning: constructing instruments, digging, boring, melting, dissolving: weighing, calculating, sailing on the sea, running over the land, exploring not only unknown parts of the earth which he inhabits, but even the vast regions of space are probed by man and even explored by man in a limited way physically and even more extensively mechanically. (This section has been revised due to the incursions of man’s endeavours into space. Ed.) If this audacious restless, prying creature had always been on the earth, we might have supposed him the root and source, in some inexplicable way, of the wonderful intellectual power he exhibits; but as we consider him, we note he had no existence a short way back, and that in each individual case, he shortly lies down and dies. The question, therefore, propounds itself in loud imperative tones, Where got man this wonderful faculty? Must it not have existed before him independently of him? Was there no wisdom before he was born?

(J) Is it possible that he is the highest intelligence in the universe?

(R) Is it conceivable that there was no contriving power anywhere till he himself wisely contrived to put in an appearance, seeing all things small and great in heaven and earth are wisely made? If man has a little wisdom where did he get his wisdom from? He is wisely constructed: must not the power that constructed him be wiser than he? “He that hath formed the eye, shall He not see? He that hath formed the ear, shall He not hear.” The propounding of the question, “Is there a God?” proves the existence of a power equal to the production of the intelligence that puts the question, and necessitates that that power shall be as much superior to that intelligence as all cause must be superior to all effects.

(J) Man’s intelligence is a mere effect: where is the cause?

(R) That is the question.

(J) Scientific men seem to find it in the molecular combination of atoms?

(R) But who or what combined the atoms? Granting the existence of atoms, they could not combine themselves. If there were nothing but atoms they must have remained as atoms, and filled the universe with eternal dust. Instead of that, it is a universe of order and glory and beauty; and it is all in one system under one control, as shown by the co-relation of the stars.

(J) Where is the seat of this control?

(R) Ah, who can tell? There must be such, must there not? If there were not, things would get into a whirl and a chaos. They do not. They are held together, and held apart, as with an iron rein.

(J) I should say that is the law of things.

(R) What do you mean by that?

(J) Well, the quality or tendency of things in general to keep in a certain relation. Fire burns; water finds its level; gravitation shapes the course of planets. It is the nature of things. I do not see that we require going outside of things themselves for an explanation of their behaviour.

(R) No doubt the law of their behaviour is in them (or rather, let us say, they in it): but that does not account for their being there to behave. How came they to be there at all, and to have that law? They must have had a cause equal to their production in the first instance.

(J) That is not to be denied.

(R) Must not that cause have combined power and wisdom? Without power, without wisdom, how could it have been equal to the production of works of power and wisdom?

(J) As a matter of terms, I cannot evade your argument. Yet I have a feeling as if it were not conclusive.

(R) A feeling is not a safe steersman in such a matter.

(J) Though I say feeling, of course I mean a reservation of reason.

(R) Can you define it?

(J) It is a little difficult.

(R) Try.

(J) Well, I have a difficulty in reconciling what I might call the mechanical relations of everything we see in the universe with the intelligent initiative and superintendence usually associated with the idea of God. Everything is interlocked in an endless chain of mechanical causes. The sun shines, the rain forms, the winds blow: vegetation springs: animals are born, and feed, and propagate, and die. The stars move in their courses by mutual influence and attraction; and there is nothing occurs anywhere, so far as we can see, but what springs naturally from some antecedent cause on mechanical principles.

(R) Therefore, what?

(J) Therefore, the intelligent causation of everything that you argue for is not so obvious to me.

(R) Perhaps you may not have apprehended my argument quite clearly?

(J) Perhaps.

(R) I am not contending for a moment to moment operation of Divine intelligence in detail. If I cut my finger, it does not require a Divine volition to make the blood flow. If a man gets no food, I do not say it requires a Divine volition to make him die. If a dry thicket catches fire on a hot summer’s day, I do not say it requires the action of Divine intelligence and power to cause the conflagration that follows. So in larger matters: the moon’s motion round the earth; the earths motion round the sun; the movements of the whole stellar universe are the result of the relations things sustain to one another.

(J) Then you seem to me to shut out God.

(R) By no means. Taking His existence as proved by “the things that are made” (to use Paul’s expression), and especially by the revelation of Himself He has made during the course of the world’s history, we have to realize that the universal fabric of things is put together in a way to give Him the least trouble of management as we might express it. His works are “in Him,” as the Scriptures declare, but He is separate from His works. That is, He holds them all in effluence of His eternal energy which the Bible denominates Spirit, but is Himself a distinct and separable entity, whose nucleus, as we might express it, is in eternal light, yet whose presence is as co-extensive with the Spirit as the sun is co-extensive with its light. Out of His omnipotent and eternal energy He has, by will and wisdom, concreted the tangible system of things which we call the universe. But He has so made this universe that, while in Him and subject to His power, it works by automatic action. This action which He started is what we call nature. His interference at any time when called for is what we call miracle.

(J) There are some strange things in your remarks. It is a new idea to me about God saving Himself the trouble. I always understood He was omnipotent and infinite, and did not require saving Himself trouble.

(R) You are thinking of the popular traditions on those subjects. We must take the Bible and Nature. They do not contradict each other. The modern demonstration of the conservation of energy proves that everything that is done involves the expenditure of energy, and that energy is measurable. It follows that when God works, He can spend much or little, as the case may require. When little does He does not spend much. He has spent much energy in the creation of heaven and earth; but the result of His work is a self working machine (self working as a motor car is self working when set a-going), which leaves Him little to do beyond the pleasure of superintendence in the evolution of His purpose.

(J) It is an extraordinary view, I must say.

(R) It is an inevitable view, when the various elements of truth in the case are combined. You cannot dispense with God as the explanation of things: but neither can you dispense with the automatic operation of Nature in its ordinary bearings. Therefore we must put two and two together with this grand result, that with the most exact study of Nature’s laws, we can combine the recognition and worship of God, and the exhilarating hope of that future glory which he has promised: the prospect of which supplies an interest and a principle to present mortal life otherwise entirely lacking.