(2.) The teleological argument may fairly be made to include the study of nature and the study of man as a physical, intellectual, and moral being. It is simple in form, readily apprehended, and has been enforced among thinking men in all ages. Socrates and Cicero are well known among the ancients for their arguments on this subject. The Bible appeals to nature for illus- trations of the power and goodness of God. His exist- ence is taken for granted in the first verse of Genesis, on the ground that there is in nature proof of the existence of such a being. In the New Testament we have the testimony of Paul to the fulness and value of this proof (Kom. i, 19-20), and among the fathers there have been able writers on this subject. Since the time of Paley, whose name is best known of all those who have entered this field, writers in large numbers have appeared, who have written treatises professedly on this subject, or have treated it indirectly in connection with scientific discussions. Some of the ablest arguments have been made in this way; and of late years great additions have been made, directly and indirectly, to such writings (see Literature below).
It has been objected to the argument from design that, at best, it only proves the existence of a worker, or world-builder; that it is only in man that we have proof of the existence of a personal Creator. It may be added that the creator of man is not necessarily the self-existent God. But the existence of man's creator proves that there must be a self-existent, personal God. After we reach the proof that our Creator is a per- sonal being, loving justice and truth, we must wait for him to declare whether he is the Almighty or not— whether he shall swear by himself or one greater. Thus we join natural theology to revelation. Natural theol- ogy declares a Creator of man, of the heavens and the earth. He declares himself to be the Almighty, which we know from the laws of our belief must exist. Wa seek for a cause of what we see, and cannot stop till we find one adequate and necessarily eternal.
4. Counter Tendencies of the Present Day. — As already intimated, the positire philosophy, of which Comte is the father, would render the science of natural theology impossible. This science assumes the existence of ef- ficient causes, and rests for its proof upon final causes. Both efficient and final causes positive philosophy for- bids us to name as having any relation to science. If they exist, they are to be to us as though they were not. The doctrine of ero/M^ion, which, in some of its forms, is now accepted by many scientific men, is supposed by some to weaken or destroy the proof for the existence of a Creator. This result "is claimed by some who hold the doctrine, and denied by others of the same school. For one who accepts the doctrine of causality, belief in the existence and wisdom of a designer will not be affected at all by the time required or the secondary agencies employed in producing results. The only question that co'uld arise would be in reference to power. When a certain effect is reached, as the production of a tree or animal, with all their complex relations, such an effect demands belief in a cause adequate to produce such a result; and if there is evidence of wisdom and skill in it, the evidence is there irrespective of the time or secondary agencies concerned in its production. The
NATURALISM
864
NATURE, LAWS OF
belief that a being of low rank can be raised to a higher rank by any process of development or natural selection, Avithout the same agency in kind as would be required to produce the being of high rank directly, can arise only by ignoring the plainest principles of causality. Whatever raay be the final conclusions of science in regard to the origin of species, they cannot affect the argument for design in the creation of species, nor ma- terially change the teachings of natural theology. If any difficulty arises, it will be found in harmonizing the teachings of science with the Bible account of crea- tion as to the mode in which the creative power was manifested.
5. Literature. — Xenoph. Memorabilia ; Plato, Laws, x; Cicero, Be Xaiura JJeoritm; Des Cartes, Princip. Philos. ; Leibnitz, Theodice ; Augustine, Confess. ; Der- ham, Phys. Theology ; Nieuwentyt, Relig. I'hilos. ; Ur. Samuel Clarke, Boyle Led. and /Sermons, vol. ii; Paley, Natural Theolof/y ; the Bridf/ewater Treatises; Chal- mers, jV«/. Theology; TuUoch, Theism; McCosh and Dickie, Typical Forms, etc.; Hitchcock, Pel. of Geol. ; Cooke, Pel. of Chem. ; Agassiz, Contrib. to Nat. Hist. U. S. vol. i; Chadbourne, Xat. Tkeol. (N. Y. 1867, 8vo) ; Jackson, Philos. of Nat. Theol. (Lond. 1874); Cocker, Theistic Conception, etc. (N. Y. 1875) ; Gothvin, Christ and JIumanity (N. Y. 1875) ; Gillett, Nat. Theol. (N. Y. 1874, 12mo) ; ^\'iseman, Con. between Science and Pe- reided Peliy. ; Bushnell, Nat. and Supernatural ; Pres- ident Hopkins, in the Am. Qua?: Obs. vol. i ; Child, Bene- dicite ; Jlolloy, Geol. and Rev. ; Foster (.1.), On Nat. Re- ligion and Social Virtue; Grose (John), Pdlinutd I'.lhics ; Jevon, System. Morality on the Groiiinl.'^ <f Xni. Pel. ; Priestley, Institutes of Nat. Pel.; Wilkins. J',iiicij>/(s of Nat. Pel. ; Thompson, Christian Theism ; Zcicklcr, Theol. naturulis; Amer. Presb. Rev. July, 1806, art. i; Amer. Ch. Qu. Rec. April, 1869, art. ii ; Mercershnrg Per. 1860 ; North Am. Rev. i&x\. l.sd.'i: Ort. isi;:,; .luly. I,sti7: Neic- £nf/lander,.Jim.lH6H; Od. 1n71; .Ian. 1.^7.".; JUhlintheca Sacra, A\^xi\, 1868; On. ISCS; \V, slnun.'^h r I!, >: .Ian. 18.54; Jan. 1867; Presb. Qu. and I'rincet. Rev. April, 187.5, art. viii; Meth. Qu. Rev. Jidy, 1865, p. 519 sq. See TiiKOLOGV. (P. A. C.)