repliedintheaffirmative。Thensaidhe，’Cometothefrontseat。’Theysangandprayedandtalkedwithme。Iexperiencednothingbutunaccountablewretchedness。TheydeclaredthatthereasonwhyIdidnot’obtainpeace’wasbecauseIwasnotwillingtogiveupalltoGod。Afterabouttwohourstheministersaidwewouldgohome。Asusual，onretiring，Iprayed。Ingreatdistress，Iatthistimesimplysaid，’Lord，IhavedoneallI
can，Ileavethewholematterwiththee。’Immediately，likeaflashoflight，therecametomeagreatpeace，andIaroseandwentintomyparents’bedroomandsaid，’Idofeelsowonderfullyhappy。’ThisIregardasthehourofconversion。ItwasthehourinwhichIbecameassuredofdivineacceptanceandfavor。
Sofarasmylifewasconcerned，itmadelittleimmediatechange。”
Themostcharacteristicofalltheelementsoftheconversioncrisis，andthelastoneofwhichIshallspeak，istheecstasyofhappinessproduced。Wehavealreadyheardseveralaccountsofit，butIwilladdacouplemore。PresidentFinney’sissovividthatIgiveitatlength：——
“Allmyfeelingsseemedtoriseandflowout；andtheutteranceofmyheartwas，’IwanttopourmywholesoulouttoGod。’TherisingofmysoulwassogreatthatIrushedintothebackroomofthefrontoffice，topray。Therewasnofireandnolightintheroom；neverthelessitappearedtomeasifitwereperfectlylight。AsIwentinandshutthedoorafterme，itseemedasifImettheLordJesusChristfacetoface。Itdidnotoccurtomethen，nordiditforsometimeafterwards，thatitwaswhollyamentalstate。Onthecontrary，itseemedtomethatIsawhimasIwouldseeanyotherman。Hesaidnothingbutlookedatmeinsuchamannerastobreakmerightdownathisfeet。Ihavealwayssinceregardedthisasamostremarkablestateofmind；
foritseemedtomearealitythathestoodbeforeme，andIfelldownathisfeetandpouredoutmysoultohim。Iweptaloudlikeachild，andmadesuchconfessionsasIcouldwithmychokedutterance。ItseemedtomethatIbathedhisfeetwithmytears；
andyetIhadnodistinctimpressionthatItouchedhim，thatI
recollect。Imusthavecontinuedinthisstateforagoodwhile，butmymindwastooabsorbedwiththeinterviewtorecollectanythingthatIsaid。ButIknow，assoonasmymindbecamecalmenoughtobreakofffromtheinterview，Ireturnedtothefrontoffice，andfoundthatthefirethatIhadmadeoflargewoodwasnearlyburnedout。ButasIturnedandwasabouttotakeaseatbythefire，IreceivedamightybaptismoftheHolyGhost。
Withoutanyexpectationofit，withouteverhavingthethoughtinmymindthattherewasanysuchthingforme，withoutanyrecollectionthatIhadeverheardthethingmentionedbyanypersonintheworld，theHolySpiritdescendeduponmeinamannerthatseemedtogothroughme，bodyandsoul。Icouldfeeltheimpression，likeawaveofelectricity，goingthroughandthroughme。Indeed，itseemedtocomeinwavesandwavesofliquidlove；forIcouldnotexpressitinanyotherway。ItseemedliketheverybreathofGod。Icanrecollectdistinctlythatitseemedtofanme，likeimmensewings。
“Nowordscanexpressthewonderfullovethatwasshedabroadinmyheart。Iweptaloudwithjoyandlove；andIdonotknowbutIshouldsayIliterallybellowedouttheunutterablegushingsofmyheart。Thesewavescameoverme，andoverme，andoverme，oneaftertheother，untilIrecollectIcriedout，’Ishalldieifthesewavescontinuetopassoverme。’Isaid，’Lord，I
cannotbearanymore；’yetIhadnofearofdeath。
“HowlongIcontinuedinthisstate，withthisbaptismcontinuingtorollovermeandgothroughme，Idonotknow。ButIknowitwaslateintheeveningwhenamemberofmychoir——forIwastheleaderofthechoir——cameintotheofficetoseeme。Hewasamemberofthechurch。Hefoundmeinthisstateofloudweeping，andsaidtome，’Mr。Finney，whatailsyou？’Icouldmakehimnoanswerforsometime。Hethensaid，’Areyouinpain？’I
gatheredmyselfupasbestIcould，andreplied，’No，butsohappythatIcannotlive。’“
IjustnowquotedBillyBray；Icannotdobetterthangivehisownbriefaccountofhispost-conversionfeelings：——
“Ican’thelppraisingtheLord。AsIgoalongthestreet，I
liftuponefoot，anditseemstosay’Glory’；andIliftuptheother，anditseemstosay’Amen’；andsotheykeepuplikethatallthetimeIamwalking。”[141]
[141]Iaddinanoteafewmorerecords：——
“Onemorning，beingindeepdistress，fearingeverymomentI
shoulddropintohell，Iwasconstrainedtocryinearnestformercy，andtheLordcametomyrelief，anddeliveredmysoulfromtheburdenandguiltofsin。Mywholeframewasinatremorfromheadtofoot，andmysoulenjoyedsweetpeace。ThepleasureI
thenfeltwasindescribable。Thehappinesslastedaboutthreedays，duringwhichtimeIneverspoketoanypersonaboutmyfeelings。”AutobiographyofDanYoung，editedbyW。P。
Strickland，NewYork，1860。
“InaninstantthereroseupinmesuchasenseofGod’stakingcareofthosewhoputtheirtrustinhimthatforanhouralltheworldwascrystalline，theheavenswerelucid，andIsprangtomyfeetandbegantocryandlaugh。”H。W。Beecher，quotedbyLeuba。
“Mytearsofsorrowchangedtojoy，andIlaytherepraisingGodinsuchecstasyofjoyasonlythesoulwhoexperiencesitcanrealize。”——“IcannotexpresshowIfelt。ItwasasifIhadbeeninadarkdungeonandliftedintothelightofthesun。I
shoutedandIsangpraiseuntohimwholovedmeandwashedmefrommysins。Iwasforcedtoretireintoasecretplace，forthetearsdidflow，andIdidnotwishmyshopmatestoseeme，andyetIcouldnotkeepitasecret。”——“Iexperiencedjoyalmosttoweeping。”——“IfeltmyfacemusthaveshonelikethatofMoses。
Ihadageneralfeelingofbuoyancy。Itwasthegreatestjoyitwasevermylottoexperience。”——“Iweptandlaughedalternately。
Iwasaslightasifwalkingonair。IfeltasifIhadgainedgreaterpeaceandhappinessthanIhadeverexpectedtoexperience。”Starbuck’scorrespondents。
Oneword，beforeIclosethislecture，onthequestionofthetransiencyorpermanenceoftheseabruptconversions。Someofyou，Ifeelsure，knowingthatnumerousbackslidingsandrelapsestakeplace，makeofthesetheirapperceivingmassforinterpretingthewholesubject，anddismissitwithapityingsmileatsomuch“hysterics。”Psychologically，aswellasreligiously，however，thisisshallow。Itmissesthepointofseriousinterest，whichisnotsomuchthedurationasthenatureandqualityoftheseshiftingsofcharactertohigherlevels。
Menlapsefromeverylevel——weneednostatisticstotellusthat。Loveis，forinstance，wellknownnottobeirrevocable，yet，constantorinconstant，itrevealsnewflightsandreachesofidealitywhileitlasts。Theserevelationsformitssignificancetomenandwomen，whateverbeitsduration。Sowiththeconversionexperience：thatitshouldforevenashorttimeshowahumanbeingwhatthehigh-watermarkofhisspiritualcapacityis，thisiswhatconstitutesitsimportance——animportancewhichbackslidingcannotdiminish，althoughpersistencemightincreaseit。Asamatteroffact，allthemorestrikinginstancesofconversion，allthose，forinstance，whichIhavequoted，HAVEbeenpermanent。Thecaseofwhichtheremightbemostdoubt，onaccountofitssuggestingsostronglyanepileptoidseizure，wasthecaseofM。Ratisbonne。
YetIaminformedthatRatisbonne’swholefuturewasshapedbythosefewminutes。Hegaveuphisprojectofmarriage，becameapriest，foundedatJerusalem，wherehewenttodwell，amissionofnunsfortheconversionoftheJews，showednotendencytouseforegotisticpurposesthenotorietygivenhimbythepeculiarcircumstancesofhisconversion——which，fortherest，hecouldseldomrefertowithouttears——andinshortremainedanexemplarysonoftheChurchuntilhedied，lateinthe80’s，ifIrememberrightly。
TheonlystatisticsIknowof，onthesubjectofthedurationofconversions，arethosecollectedforProfessorStarbuckbyMissJohnston。Theyembraceonlyahundredpersons，evangelicalchurch-members，morethanhalfbeingMethodists。Accordingtothestatementofthesubjectsthemselves，therehadbeenbackslidingofsomesortinnearlyallthecases，93percent。ofthewomen，77percent。ofthemen。Discussingthereturnsmoreminutely，Starbuckfindsthatonly6percent。arerelapsesfromthereligiousfaithwhichtheconversionconfirmed，andthatthebackslidingcomplainedofisinmostonlyafluctuationintheardorofsentiment。Onlysixofthehundredcasesreportachangeoffaith。Starbuck’sconclusionisthattheeffectofconversionistobringwithit“achangedattitudetowardslife，whichisfairlyconstantandpermanent，althoughthefeelingsfluctuate……Inotherwords，thepersonswhohavepassedthroughconversion，havingoncetakenastandforthereligiouslife，tendtofeelthemselvesidentifiedwithit，nomatterhowmuchtheirreligiousenthusiasmdeclines。”[142]
PsychologyofReligion，pp。
ThesubjectofSaintlinessleftusfacetofacewiththequestion，Isthesenseofdivinepresenceasenseofanythingobjectivelytrue？Weturnedfirsttomysticismforananswer，andfoundthatalthoughmysticismisentirelywillingtocorroboratereligion，itistooprivate(andalsotoovarious)initsutterancestobeabletoclaimauniversalauthority。Butphilosophypublishesresultswhichclaimtobeuniversallyvalidiftheyarevalidatall，sowenowturnwithourquestiontophilosophy。Canphilosophystampawarrantofveracityuponthereligiousman’ssenseofthedivine？
IimaginethatmanyofyouatthispointbegintoindulgeinguessesatthegoaltowhichIamtending。Ihaveunderminedtheauthorityofmysticism，yousay，andthenextthingIshallprobablydoistoseektodiscreditthatofphilosophy。
Religion，youexpecttohearmeconclude，isnothingbutanaffairoffaith，basedeitheronvaguesentiment，oronthatvividsenseoftherealityofthingsunseenofwhichinmysecondlectureandinthelectureonMysticismIgavesomanyexamples。
Itisessentiallyprivateandindividualistic；italwaysexceedsourpowersofformulation；andalthoughattemptstopouritscontentsintoaphilosophicmouldwillprobablyalwaysgoon，menbeingwhattheyare，yettheseattemptsarealwayssecondaryprocesseswhichinnowayaddtotheauthority，orwarranttheveracity，ofthesentimentsfromwhichtheyderivetheirownstimulusandborrowwhateverglowofconvictiontheymaythemselvespossess。
Inshort，yoususpectthatIamplanningtodefendfeelingattheexpenseofreason，torehabilitatetheprimitiveandunreflective，andtodissuadeyoufromthehopeofanyTheologyworthyofthename。
ToacertainextentIhavetoadmitthatyouguessrightly。Idobelievethatfeelingisthedeepersourceofreligion，andthatphilosophicandtheologicalformulasaresecondaryproducts，liketranslationsofatextintoanothertongue。Butallsuchstatementsaremisleadingfromtheirbrevity，anditwilltakethewholehourformetoexplaintoyouexactlywhatImean。
WhenIcalltheologicalformulassecondaryproducts，Imeanthatinaworldinwhichnoreligiousfeelinghadeverexisted，I
doubtwhetheranyphilosophictheologycouldeverhavebeenframed。Idoubtifdispassionateintellectualcontemplationoftheuniverse，apartfrominnerunhappinessandneedofdeliveranceontheonehandandmysticalemotionontheother，wouldeverhaveresultedinreligiousphilosophiessuchaswenowpossess。Menwouldhavebegunwithanimisticexplanationsofnaturalfact，andcriticisedtheseawayintoscientificones，astheyactuallyhavedone。Inthesciencetheywouldhaveleftacertainamountof“psychicalresearch。”evenastheynowwillprobablyhavetore-admitacertainamount。Buthigh-flyingspeculationslikethoseofeitherdogmaticoridealistictheology，thesetheywouldhavehadnomotivetoventureon，feelingnoneedofcommercewithsuchdeities。Thesespeculationsmust，itseemstome，beclassedasover-beliefs，buildings-outperformedbytheintellectintodirectionsofwhichfeelingoriginallysuppliedthehint。
Butevenifreligiousphilosophyhadtohaveitsfirsthintsuppliedbyfeeling，mayitnothavedealtinasuperiorwaywiththematterwhichfeelingsuggested？Feelingisprivateanddumb，andunabletogiveanaccountofitself。Itallowsthatitsresultsaremysteriesandenigmas，declinestojustifythemrationally，andonoccasioniswillingthattheyshouldevenpassforparadoxicalandabsurd。Philosophytakesjusttheoppositeattitude。Heraspirationistoreclaimfrommysteryandparadoxwhateverterritoryshetouches。Tofindanescapefromobscureandwaywardpersonalpersuasiontotruthobjectivelyvalidforallthinkingmenhaseverbeentheintellect’smostcherishedideal。Toredeemreligionfromunwholesomeprivacy，andtogivepublicstatusanduniversalrightofwaytoitsdeliverances，hasbeenreason’stask。
Ibelievethatphilosophywillalwayshaveopportunitytolaboratthistask。[288]Wearethinkingbeings，andwecannotexcludetheintellectfromparticipatinginanyofourfunctions。Eveninsoliloquizingwithourselves，weconstrueourfeelingsintellectually。Bothourpersonalidealsandourreligiousandmysticalexperiencesmustbeinterpretedcongruouslywiththekindofscenerywhichourthinkingmindinhabits。Thephilosophicclimateofourtimeinevitablyforcesitsownclothingonus。Moreover，wemustexchangeourfeelingswithoneanother，andindoingsowehavetospeak，andtousegeneralandabstractverbalformulas。Conceptionsandconstructionsarethusanecessarypartofourreligion；andasmoderatoramidtheclashofhypotheses，andmediatoramongthecriticismsofoneman’sconstructionsbyanother，philosophywillalwayshavemuchtodo。
ItwouldbestrangeifIdisputedthis，whentheseverylectureswhichIamgivingare(asyouwillseemoreclearlyfromnowonwards)alaboriousattempttoextractfromtheprivaciesofreligiousexperiencesomegeneralfactswhichcanbedefinedinformulasuponwhicheverybodymayagree。
[288]CompareProfessorW。Wallace’sGiffordLectures，inLecturesandEssays，###第26章
Religiousexperience，inotherwords，spontaneouslyandinevitablyengendersmyths，superstitions，dogmas，creeds，andmetaphysicaltheologies，andcriticismsofonesetofthesebytheadherentsofanother。Oflate，impartialclassificationsandcomparisonshavebecomepossible，alongsideofthedenunciationsandanathemasbywhichthecommercebetweencreedsusedexclusivelytobecarriedon。Wehavethebeginningsofa“ScienceofReligions。”so-called；andiftheselecturescouldeverbeaccountedacrumb-likecontributiontosuchascience，I
shouldbemadeveryhappy。
Butalltheseintellectualoperations，whethertheybeconstructiveorcomparativeandcritical，presupposeimmediateexperiencesastheirsubject-matter。Theyareinterpretativeandinductiveoperations，operationsafterthefact，consequentuponreligiousfeeling，notcoordinatewithit，notindependentofwhatitascertains。
TheintellectualisminreligionwhichIwishtodiscreditpretendstobesomethingaltogetherdifferentfromthis。Itassumestoconstructreligiousobjectsoutoftheresourcesoflogicalreasonalone，oroflogicalreasondrawingrigorousinferencefromnon-subjectivefacts。Itcallsitsconclusionsdogmatictheology，orphilosophyoftheabsolute，asthecasemaybe；itdoesnotcallthemscienceofreligions。Itreachestheminanaprioriway，andwarrantstheirveracity。
Warrantedsystemshaveeverbeentheidolsofaspiringsouls。
All-inclusive，yetsimple；noble，clean，luminous，stable，rigorous，true；——whatmoreidealrefugecouldtherebethansuchasystemwouldoffertospiritsvexedbythemuddinessandaccidentalityoftheworldofsensiblethings？Accordingly，wefindinculcatedinthetheologicalschoolsofto-day，almostasmuchasinthoseofthefore-time，adisdainformerelypossibleorprobabletruth，andofresultsthatonlyprivateassurancecangrasp。Scholasticsandidealistsbothexpressthisdisdain。
PrincipalJohnCaird，forexample，writesasfollowsinhisIntroductiontothePhilosophyofReligion：——
“Religionmustindeedbeathingoftheheart，butinordertoelevateitfromtheregionofsubjectivecapriceandwaywardness，andtodistinguishbetweenthatwhichistrueandfalseinreligion，wemustappealtoanobjectivestandard。ThatwhichenterstheheartmustfirstbediscernedbytheintelligencetobeTRUE。ItmustbeseenashavinginitsownnatureaRIGHTtodominatefeeling，andasconstitutingtheprinciplebywhichfeelingmustbejudged。[289]Inestimatingthereligiouscharacterofindividuals，nations，orraces，thefirstquestionis，nothowtheyfeel，butwhattheythinkandbelieve——notwhethertheirreligionisonewhichmanifestsitselfinemotions，moreorlessvehementandenthusiastic，butwhataretheCONCEPTIONSofGodanddivinethingsbywhichtheseemotionsarecalledforth。Feelingisnecessaryinreligion，butitisbytheCONTENTorintelligentbasisofareligion，andnotbyfeeling，thatitscharacterandwortharetobedetermined。”[290]
[289]Op。cit。，p。174，abridged。
[290]Ibid。，p。186，abridgedanditalicized。
CardinalNewman，inhiswork，TheIdeaofaUniversity，givesmoreemphaticexpressionstilltothisdisdainforsentiment。[291]Theology，hesays，isascienceinthestrictestsenseoftheword。Iwilltellyou，hesays，whatitisnot——
not“physicalevidences“forGod，not“naturalreligion。”forthesearebutvaguesubjectiveinterpretations：——
[291]DiscourseII。Section7。
“If。”hecontinues，“theSupremeBeingispowerfulorskillful，justsofarasthetelescopeshowspower，orthemicroscopeshowsskill，ifhismorallawistobeascertainedsimplybythephysicalprocessesoftheanimalframe，orhiswillgatheredfromtheimmediateissuesofhumanaffairs，ifhisEssenceisjustashighanddeepandbroadastheuniverseandnomoreifthisbethefact，thenwillIconfessthatthereisnospecificscienceaboutGod，thattheologyisbutaname，andaprotestinitsbehalfanhypocrisy。Then，piousasitistothinkofHimwhilethepageantofexperimentorabstractreasoningpassesby，stillsuchpietyisnothingmorethanapoetryofthought，oranornamentoflanguage，acertainviewtakenofNaturewhichonemanhasandanotherhasnot，whichgiftedmindsstrikeout，whichothersseetobeadmirableandingenious，andwhichallwouldbethebetterforadopting。ItisbutthetheologyofNature，justaswetalkofthePHILOSOPHYortheROMANCEofhistory，orthePOETRYofchildhood，orthepicturesqueorthesentimentalorthehumorous，oranyotherabstractqualitywhichthegeniusorthecapriceoftheindividual，orthefashionoftheday，ortheconsentoftheworld，recognizesinanysetofobjectswhicharesubjectedtoitscontemplation。IdonotseemuchdifferencebetweenavowingthatthereisnoGod，andimplyingthatnothingdefinitecanbeknownforcertainaboutHim。”
WhatImeanbyTheology，continuesNewman，isnoneofthesethings：“IsimplymeantheSCIENCEOFGOD，orthetruthsweknowaboutGod，putintoasystem，justaswehaveascienceofthestarsandcallitastronomy，orofthecrustoftheearthandcallitgeology。”
Inboththeseextractswehavetheissueclearlysetbeforeus：
Feelingvalidonlyfortheindividualispittedagainstreasonvaliduniversally。Thetestisaperfectlyplainoneoffact。
Theologybasedonpurereasonmustinpointoffactconvincemenuniversally。Ifitdidnot，whereinwoulditssuperiorityconsist？Ifitonlyformedsectsandschools，evenassentimentandmysticismformthem，howwoulditfulfillitsprogrammeoffreeingusfrompersonalcapriceandwaywardness？Thisperfectlydefinitepracticaltestofthepretensionsofphilosophytofoundreligiononuniversalreasonsimplifiesmyprocedureto-day。I
neednotdiscreditphilosophybylaboriouscriticismofitsarguments。ItwillsufficeifIshowthatasamatterofhistoryitfailstoproveitspretensiontobe“objectively“convincing。
Infact，philosophydoessofail。Itdoesnotbanishdifferences；itfoundsschoolsandsectsjustasfeelingdoes。I
believe，infact，thatthelogicalreasonofmanoperatesinthisfieldofdivinityexactlyasithasalwaysoperatedinlove，orinpatriotism，orinpolitics，orinanyotherofthewideraffairsoflife，inwhichourpassionsorourmysticalintuitionsfixourbeliefsbeforehand。Itfindsargumentsforourconviction，forindeeditHAStofindthem。Itamplifiesanddefinesourfaith，anddignifiesitandlendsitwordsandplausibility。Ithardlyeverengendersit；itcannotnowsecureit。[292]
[292]Asregardsthesecondarycharacterofintellectualconstructions，andtheprimacyoffeelingandinstinctinfoundingreligiousbeliefsseethestrikingworkofH。Fielding，TheHeartsofMen，London，1902，whichcameintomyhandsaftermytextwaswritten。“Creeds。”saystheauthor，“arethegrammarofreligion，theyaretoreligionwhatgrammaristospeech。
Wordsaretheexpressionofourwantsgrammaristhetheoryformedafterwards。Speechneverproceededfromgrammar，butthereverse。Asspeechprogressesandchangesfromunknowncauses，grammarmustfollow“(p。313)。Thewholebook，whichkeepsunusuallyclosetoconcretefacts，islittlemorethananamplificationofthistext。
LendmeyourattentionwhileIrunthroughsomeofthepointsoftheoldersystematictheology。YoufindtheminbothProtestantandCatholicmanuals，bestofallintheinnumerabletext-bookspublishedsincePopeLeo’sEncyclicalrecommendingthestudyofSaintThomas。IglancefirstattheargumentsbywhichdogmatictheologyestablishesGod’sexistence，afterthatatthosebywhichitestablisheshisnature。[293]
[293]Forconvenience’sake，IfollowtheorderofA。Stockl’sLehrbuchderPhilosophie，5teAutlage，Mainz，1881，Bandii。B。
Boedder’sNaturalTheology，London，1891，isahandyEnglishCatholicManual；butanalmostidenticaldoctrineisgivenbysuchProtestanttheologiansasC。Hodge：SystematicTheology，NewYork，1873，orA。H。Strong：SystematicTheology，5thedition，NewYork，1896。
TheargumentsforGod’sexistencehavestoodforhundredsofyearswiththewavesofunbelievingcriticismbreakingagainstthem，nevertotallydiscreditingthemintheearsofthefaithful，butonthewholeslowlyandsurelywashingoutthemortarfrombetweentheirjoints。IfyouhaveaGodalreadywhomyoubelievein，theseargumentsconfirmyou。Ifyouareatheistic，theyfailtosetyouright。Theproofsarevarious。
The“cosmological“one，so-called，reasonsfromthecontingenceoftheworldtoaFirstCausewhichmustcontainwhateverperfectionstheworlditselfcontains。The“argumentfromdesign“reasons，fromthefactthatNature’slawsaremathematical，andherpartsbenevolentlyadaptedtoeachother，thatthiscauseisbothintellectualandbenevolent。The“moralargument“isthatthemorallawpresupposesalawgiver。The“argumentexconsensugentium“isthatthebeliefinGodissowidespreadastobegroundedintherationalnatureofman，andshouldthereforecarryauthoritywithit。
AsIjustsaid，Iwillnotdiscusstheseargumentstechnically。
ThebarefactthatallidealistssinceKanthavefeltentitledeithertoscoutortoneglectthemshowsthattheyarenotsolidenoughtoserveasreligion’sall-sufficientfoundation。
Absolutelyimpersonalreasonswouldbeindutyboundtoshowmoregeneralconvincingness。Causationisindeedtooobscureaprincipletobeartheweightofthewholestructureoftheology。
Asfortheargumentfromdesign，seehowDarwinianideashaverevolutionizedit。Conceivedaswenowconceivethem，assomanyfortunateescapesfromalmostlimitlessprocessesofdestruction，thebenevolentadaptationswhichwefindinNaturesuggestadeityverydifferentfromtheonewhofiguredintheearlierversionsoftheargument。[294]Thefactisthattheseargumentsdobutfollowthecombinedsuggestionsofthefactsandofourfeeling。Theyprovenothingrigorously。Theyonlycorroborateourpreexistentpartialities。
[294]ItmustnotbeforgottenthatanyformofDISorderintheworldmight，bythedesignargument，suggestaGodforjustthatkindofdisorder。Thetruthisthatanystateofthingswhateverthatcanbenamedislogicallysusceptibleofteleologicalinterpretation。TheruinsoftheearthquakeatLisbon，forexample：thewholeofpasthistoryhadtobeplannedexactlyasitwastobringaboutinthefullnessoftimejustthatparticulararrangementofdebrisofmasonry，furniture，andoncelivingbodies。Noothertrainofcauseswouldhavebeensufficient。Andsoofanyotherarrangement，badorgood，whichmightasamatteroffactbefoundresultinganywherefrompreviousconditions。Toavoidsuchpessimisticconsequencesandsaveitsbeneficentdesigner，thedesignargumentaccordinglyinvokestwootherprinciples，restrictiveintheiroperation。
Thefirstisphysical：Nature’sforcestendoftheirownaccordonlytodisorderanddestruction，toheapsofruins，nottoarchitecture。
Thisprinciple，thoughplausibleatfirstsight，seems，inthelightofrecentbiology，tobemoreandmoreimprobable。Thesecondprincipleisoneofanthropomorphicinterpretation。Noarrangementthatforusis“disorderly“canpossiblyhavebeenanobjectofdesignatall。ThisprincipleisofcourseamereassumptionintheinterestsofanthropomorphicTheism。
Whenoneviewstheworldwithnodefinitetheologicalbiasonewayortheother，oneseesthatorderanddisorder，aswenowrecognizethem，arepurelyhumaninventions。Weareinterestedincertaintypesofarrangement，useful，aesthetic，ormoral——sointerestedthatwheneverwefindthemrealized，thefactemphaticallyrivetsourattention。Theresultisthatweworkoverthecontentsoftheworldselectively。Itisoverflowingwithdisorderlyarrangementsfromourpointofview，butorderistheonlythingwecareforandlookat，andbychoosing，onecanalwaysfindsomesortoforderlyarrangementinthemidstofanychaos。IfIshouldthrowdownathousandbeansatrandomuponatable，Icoulddoubtless，byeliminatingasufficientnumberofthem，leavetherestinalmostanygeometricalpatternyoumightproposetome，andyoumightthensaythatthatpatternwasthethingprefiguredbeforehand，andthattheotherbeansweremereirrelevanceandpackingmaterial。OurdealingswithNaturearejustlikethis。Sheisavastplenuminwhichourattentiondrawscapriciouslinesininnumerabledirections。Wecountandnamewhateverliesuponthespeciallineswetrace，whilsttheotherthingsandtheuntracedlinesareneithernamednorcounted。Thereareinrealityinfinitelymorethings“unadapted“
toeachotherinthisworldthantherearethings“adapted“；
infinitelymorethingswithirregularrelationsthanwithregularrelationsbetweenthem。Butwelookfortheregularkindofthingexclusively，andingeniouslydiscoverandpreserveitinourmemory。Itaccumulateswithotherregularkinds，untilthecollectionofthemfillsourencyclopaedias。Yetallthewhilebetweenandaroundthemliesaninfiniteanonymouschaosofobjectsthatnooneeverthoughtoftogether，ofrelationsthatneveryetattractedourattention。
Thefactsoforderfromwhichthephysico-theologicalargumentstartsarethuseasilysusceptibleofinterpretationasarbitraryhumanproducts。Solongasthisisthecase，althoughofcoursenoargumentagainstGodfollows，itfollowsthattheargumentforhimwillfailtoconstituteaknockdownproofofhisexistence。
Itwillbeconvincingonlytothosewhoonothergroundsbelieveinhimalready。
IfphilosophycandosolittletoestablishGod’sexistence，howstandsitwithhereffortstodefinehisattributes？Itisworthwhiletolookattheattemptsofsystematictheologyinthisdirection。
SinceGodisFirstCause，thisscienceofsciencessays，hediffersfromallhiscreaturesinpossessingexistencease。
