---
title: Improvement Era
description: Monthly periodical of the Mormon church, 1897 onward. This library holds the issues of November 1897 to December 1930.
authors:
  - Dummelow, J. R.
collections:
  - periodicals
tags:
  - magazine
  - improvement-era
periodical: Improvement Era
volume: 13
number: 4
published: 1910-02
publisher: Young Men’s Mutual Improvement Associations
publisher_place: Salt Lake City
language: en
type: magazine
reference: 'Dummelow, J. R., "Belief in God. II," *Improvement Era* 13, no. 4 (February 1910): 289–296.'
source:
  url: https://archive.org/details/improvementera1304unse
  transcription: Transcribed from the Internet Archive scan of each issue (the item for each issue is named in the issue's own source); unnumbered advertising leaves are omitted, printed page numbers are kept as page markers.
  identifier: improvementera1304unse
start_page: 289
end_page: 296
rights:
  status: public-domain
  basis: US publication 1930 or earlier (published 1910-02)
  source: https://archive.org/details/improvementera1304unse
  publication_year: 1910
  note: The Internet Archive item metadata carries a blanket "© Copyright by Intellectual Reserve, Inc." notice. The library owner judged it inapplicable because this issue was published in 1910, before 1931; a scan-level notice does not restore copyright.
---

# Belief in God. II


<!-- page:289 -->

IMPROVEMENT ERA.
Vol. XIII.                       FEBRUARY, 1910.                          No 4.

Belief in          God.*
BY REV. J. R. DUMMELOW, M. A.

II.

—
The Moral argument that drawn from the phenomena of
—
Conscience has been similarly assailed, but with no better suc-
cess.         Attempts have been made to discredit the authoritative
character         of conscience     by claiming for   it   a   non-moral origin.
Conscience,        it is   urged, is the result of a long and       complicated
process of evolution, and really represents, not the divine voice of
an inward monitor, but the outcome of ages and ages of racial
self-interest.         To reduce it to a principle of individual self-inter-
est     is    obviously    absurd   considering   how frequently conscience
and immediate self-interest are found to be ranged on opposite
sides.       But the interest of the community or the race is a different
thing.          Generation after generation has, as it were, mechanically
impressed upon         its    members the tendency to act in a         direction
salutary to the race, so that at last this unselfish or "altruistic"
principle has become a sort of instinct or second nature, varying
indeed in its range, intensity, and degree of enlightenment^ but a
constant characteristic of man as man.

* Copyright by the MacMillan        Co.,    New York, 1908.    1909.   Pub-
lished       by permission.

<!-- page:290 -->

290                    IMPROVEMENT ERA.

This line of argument is supported by the consideration that
there are traces of   apparently         conscientious    action     in    animals
customarily regarded as irrational, and that conscience in mankind
exhibits extremely various and inconsistent              results    in    different
circumstances and stages of civilization.
But to treat conscience and the moral argument on these
lines involves a misconception of the scope of Natural Science.

The scope of Natural Science, properly so called, does not include
the origin of things nor the purpose and end of their being.  It is

merely concerned with a description of their present state and the
discovery and analysis of the process by which they arrived there-
at.   Conscience is what    it    is,   quite independently of the process
by which it may have been evolved; just as man is man — an intelli-
gent, rational, moral, spiritual being, whatever may have been the
stages whereby the physical side of him climbed up from the hum-
blest places of the realms of organic life.         Undoubtedly the truer
view of things is the teleological      —that which sees       in    the humble
beginning the germ of a great future —and not the view which
refuses to    man and conscience their proper names because there
may have been a time when they were far removed from their
present stage of development.
As   for the startlingly inconsistent ways in which conscience
vents itself in   action, that     only    emphasizes the one underlying
principle, the principle   expressed in the words "I ought."                   The
subject matter    of conscience and its practical range of influence
may vary infinitely according to the surroundings,             circumstances,
and moral attainment of     its   particular possessor, and it is on this
side that    we speak of conscience as capable of education and en-
lightenment; but the form of conscience remains constant.    It may

be stronger or weaker according to the measure of its use, but it
remains in essence ever the same; a principle of moral constraint,
recognizing in extreme cases no human tribunal whatever —not even
the expressed will or the obvious immediate interest of society, in
general, and witnessing to an obligation that can only have reference
to a Universal Moral Ruler and Lawgiver,            whose     will is regarded

as at once morally perfect and absolutely without appeal.
Whatever, then, may be the history of the evolution of con-
science, the testimony of man's moral           nature would seem to be

<!-- page:291 -->

BELIEF IN GOD.                                  291

direct and unmistakable.                        It points     to an Eternal Cause of the
Universe          and of mankind characterized not merely by creative
power and wisdom, but also by moral holinesss.
Is it corroborated by the testimony of history? for if the

actual ordering of the world of mankind clearly contradicts the
testimony of conscience, we                         may still   be tempted to treat that
testimony as illusory.
Bishop Butler has shown convincingly that though the gov-
ernment of the world represents a scheme imperfectly compre-
hensible          to    us, yet           there exist quite undeniable marks of moral
rule   — tokens that the Power which guides the world is, in more
modern phrase, something —not itself which makes for right-     —
eousness.  The rise and fall and the succession of empires; he                             t

advance and decadence of races, tribes, families; the fortunes of
individual men           — all these, while they present many puzzling and
inexplicable features, about which we shall have more to say later
on —bear witness on the whole to the righteousness of him who
sits   on the world's throne.
On the physical side of human                        nature, where    we should     ex-
pect things to work themselves out most mechanically, the moral
law    is   perhaps most clearly vindicated.                         Immoral conduct pro-
duces       its    own punishment in so large a number of cases that sin
and suffering have sometimes been regarded as simply and in every
case, cause and effect.                     Experienze teaches us, however -and the
Bible teaches             it   too,        in the   Book of Job— that not all which we
commonly regard                  as       evil —all pain,    suffering or material loss - is
the direct consequence of moral wrong-doing in the individual who
suffers.     And Christ himself expressly discountenances this attribution
of suffering to sin, as its necessary cause (Luke 13: 2, 3, 4).                        Indeed,
suffering         is   not always an             evil,   as things    are now, though          we
rightly look upon               it   as belonging to an imperfect state of exist-
ence.        Sometimes               it    seems to be the consequence of virtue and
intended to stimulate the aspiring soul to still higher ideals.
In history,             the most striking picture of moral government is
to be found in the fortunes of Israel.                       Here we are leaving Natural
Religion and bordering upon Revelation.                             But if the Bible picture
of Hebrew              history be taken as substantially true,              it will   be found
to supply a'key^to historyin general, and to justify the believer's

<!-- page:292 -->

292                      IMPROVEMENT ERA.

conviction that Old Testament history differs from secular history
not so much in its subject matter as its treatment                     — that    it is     unique
not mainly because the Chosen People                were uniquely nurtured,
guided and disciplined, but because here alone the veil                               is     lifted
and the true issues of personal and national conduct are made
plain as they appear to him whose hand has guided the history of
mankind from its beginning until now.   For this reason, in spite
of our enormous advance in historical method, and of the advan-
tage that comes from an indefinitely wider horizon, it may be
boldly said that the historians of today can never hope to surpass
or even to equal the fundamental grasp of truth achieved in the early
and unscientific efforts of the inspired historians of Israel.
Revelation.   "Natural Religion,"           as    it       is    called        i.   e.,   the
witness of human nature to God       — needs Revealed Religion to com-
plete it. Man's mind, dwelling on external nature,                        is   led up to the
thought of an immensely wise, mighty and beneficent Creator and
Ruler.    But there are many considerations which tend to depreci-
ate the design-argument and rob it of its force.                         Man needs some
direct assurance from outside the circle of his ordinary thought, to
combat the problems raised by the presence of anomaly, failure, and
waste, to say nothing of pain.
Again,   man's nature bears on         it   the impress of moral law,
and would lead him up to belief in an all-holy Universal Lawgiver.
Yet there is much in the facts of human society that would draw
him in a quite opposite direction.     No one can read the Psalms
or the Book of Job, no one can face honestly the facts of human
society around him today, without feeling something of the almost
overwhelming difficulty that is involved in the spectacle of human
wickedness, unpunished oppression, and unmerited suffering.
We need some more direct assurance than conscience itself
can give us if we are to exclaim with real conviction:

God's in his heaven;
All's right with the world.

And it is natural to ask:     If   there     be        a    God such as human
nature seems to suggest       or demand, could he not                     — would he not
find   some means      of   making        himself       known            to     his        rational
creatures?

<!-- page:293 -->

BELIEF IN GOD.                                             293

The presupposition of the Bible                 is   that he        has    found such
means, and supplemented and completed Natural Religion by direct
Revelation.           This revelation is focussed in the divine-human                           fig-

ure of Jesus Christ, foretold and expected in the Old Testament,
present to teach and work in the New, and ever abiding by his
Spirit in the       Church.
The fact of divine revelation is, of course, denied by Atheism:
but apart from revelation altogether, Atheism                         is   self -condemned

by its presumption.                To prove a negative is confessedly a difficult
task in any field, and the Atheist claims to have proved it in the
widest      field    of   all   — the Universe — and        in face   of the many-sided
testimony of Nature and                   Human Nature.          To be          justified    in   a
flat   and categorical denial of the existence of a deity I must be
furnished with a full               knowledge of the universe both as a whole
and    in   its details,        so as to be competent to declare                that nowhere
in all the realm of things existing is there                  any trace of evidence
which might even probably                 tell in   favor of Theism.              None but a
mind practically infinite, omnipresent, and all-knowing could com-
pass this.           And so it might be suggested that the Atheist really
claims for himself the divine qualities and attributes of which he
denies the existence in a God.
Another line of thought antagonistic to revelation goes by the
name of Agnosticism.                 It   dwells on the obvious limitations of our
mental powers, which               find   themselves baffled in every department
when they attempt to pass beyond a certain point; and says that
the circumscribed human mind, excellent as it is in its own sphere,
can never hope to comprehend the Infinite, the Absolute.      "The
Power," it says, "which the universe manifests to us, is inscrut-
able."       It     dwells also on the difficulties and anomalies in nature;
on the darker side of evolution              —   its aspect   of failure, struggle and
decay; on the darker side of human nature -the presence of evil,
especially of moral evil, in the world; and says these so far bal-
ance the tokens of goodness observable, that we cannot be sure,
if   there be a government of the world, whether                           it    is    one   that
really   "makes for righteousness."
There is considerable justification for the emphasis                              laid   by
Agnosticism on th^ss two factors in human                        life;     but it is just in
regard to them th                Revelation is our greatest help.                     The prob-

<!-- page:294 -->

294                               nWltOVEMENT ERA.

lem of        evil   scarcely falls to be             discussed here: but           it   may be
remarked that, while a very real and pressing problem, it can be
seen, in the light of Revelation, to be no insuperable obstacle to
faith.        With regard to the other point, the inadequacy of our fac-
ulties, it may be said at           once that Natural Religion does                   fall short

of    certainty and completeness, and that this is fully admitted in
the Bible.           There   is   a sense in which the           God    of the           Bible   is

"incomprehensible," "inscrutable."                        He is as high above man in
his     ways and thoughts            as heaven is above earth (Isaiah 55: 9).
His essential          inaccessibility      is    expressed as a        '
dwelling in the
thick darkness" (1 K. 8: 12), or in "light inapproachable" (I Tim.
6: 16).   "No man hath seen God at any time'               (John        .     .      .

1: 18).  "No man kioweth who  the Father is save the Son'' (Luke
10: 22).  Again, man as we know him is, of himself, utterly
incapable of any true knowledge of God: the natural man is incap-
able of discerning the things of the                    Spirit (I Cor. 2: 14).

At the same time no duty  more persistently impressed on
is

their hearers by the prophets than "to know the Lord."     To its
neglect are ascribed the woe and failures of the Chosen People
(Isaiah 1: 3; 5: 13; Hos. 4:               6),    and its presence is a guarantee of
righteous conduct.                In the   New Testament the knowledge of the
Father and the Son is identified with "everlasting life"                      (,   John 17: 3).
What     is   the meaning of this apparent contradiction?                          Fallen man,
though        sin has blurred in him the              image of   his    Creator,          retains
still   the potentiality of that communion for which he was created;
and though he cannot of his own initiative    "by searching find out
God" (Job 11: 7), he can still, by penitent co-operation with Divine
grace, attain to a true knowledge of One who has been seeking
him ever since the first days of alienation in Paradise (Gen. 3:9),
and has revealed himself to receptive hearts                       in   times past           "by
divers portions and in divers                manners" (Heb. 1:1).                    In himself
essentially inscrutable,            God wills to be known with the knowledge
of personal communion.                He has given man the capacity for such
communion, and though man has rejected him, God has devised
means that his banished be not outcast from him (cp. 2 S 14: 14).
The greatest prophet of the Old Testament porbrays in wonderful
words this paradox of divine condescension (Isa. 57: 15). The
New Testament presents it to us in concrete form in the Messiah

<!-- page:295 -->

BELIEF IN GOD.                                       29f>

on whom the wistful gaze of prophet and Psalmist had for centu-
ries    been        lixed.        Then was given once and for all a revelation
of God and of man together in a single life.
The revelation of God                        in   Jesus Christ has stood the test of
many generations                  as corresponding to the highest aspirations and
most urgent demands of human nature.                                       Consideration of     its

characteristics shows it is just the revelation that man needs.                                 On
the one hand, it is a revelation of the character of Almighty God,
as     in    the         highest and           supremest       sense      "our Father."         On
the other hand, it is a revelation of Ideal Manhood: the bewildered
question of ages about the meaning, purpose,                                 and destiny of the
human life is cleared up                   in       the   New Testament.           What he tells
us,    in    the Sermon on the                  Mount and elsewhere, about our duty
and our hopes                in    this life and beyond the            grave— what he shows
us in his own person of communion with the Heavenly Father, and
successful              resistance       of temptation in the strength of that com-
munion       — what he shows us of absolute self-surrender, even to the
point of death,              of triumph through suffering, and of new life and
glory after the grave                —   all   these are essential parts of his Revela-
tion.            But the Revelation is no bare presentation of truth and of
an ideal utterly inaccessible to                          weak and     fallen man.      Grace as
well as Truth came by Jesus Christ (J )hn 1: 17).                                And what differ-
entiates this            from      all   other so-called Revelation is that, while the
ideal       it    holds up before man is uniquely lofty                     — nothing less than
perfection (Mat.                  5: 48)   —   it    supplies at the same time the motive
force necessary for arriving at the ideal.
The Revelation of Truth by itself might well generate despair.
Its   most characteristic effect has always been the production of a
sense of sin: resulting from the felt contrast between the absolute
holiness of Almighty God,                       required by him in man, and exhibited
actually in the              Man Christ Jesus, and               the      tale that   conscience
tells us of our own impurity and pollution.                               This terrible contrast
—viewed            in   the light of God's revealed Love                  — would by itself pro-
duce an unspeakably bitter remorse; but that remorse                                    is   trans-
formed into penitence by the further revelation of Grace i. e., of
the means which Divine Love has devised for man's restoration.
And so the sense                  of sin       leads to     "Conversion."           In the   Bible
teaching about Atonement                        — culminating        in    the   self-offering of

<!-- page:296 -->

296                            IMPROVEMENT ERA.

Christ    — we see the true Representative of Mankind removing the
barrier set up by sin, opening once               more the avenue of access to
God, and so rendering possible to man a sacramental sharing of
the divine        life   and strength.    Here     find   their   satisfaction    that
instinct and yearning that led to the primitive institution of sacri-
fice,    as old apparently and as universal as the human race.                   In the
teaching about the Incarnation— "theWord made flesh" the Son             —
of God taking upon him not an isolated individual human person-
ality,    but our nature in a universal way, so as to become true rep-
resentative man; we find the fulfilment of the true idea underlying
those strange dreams, clothed often in unworthy guise, which find
expression in the "Incarnation Myth" of Hindoo and other religions.
While      in    the outcome of the        Incarnation    — the incorporation of
human personalities one by one as members into the body of Christ,
that incorporation which renders the atoning sacrifice effectual in
each one        — we see realized the ideal of the social instinct:        all   other
social"membership" being but a poor metaphor beside the living
membership in the Church, "which is His Body."
Finally, the Revelation in both its sides receives a magnificent
corroboration, when we see the life of Christ reproduced really, if
not completely, in           the thousands of his followers who, conscious
of their own shortcomings, have yet been able to say with lips and
life    at once, "I live, yet not I but Christ liveth in me" (Gal. 2: 20).
"I can do all things through Christ which strengthened me."

[the end.]

Facts.

The man who fell was climbing.

Good habits are not made on birthdays, nor Christian character at
the New Year.   The workshop of character is every-day life.    The un-
eventful and commonplace hour is where the battle is lost or won.

An expert commission appointed by the government has                 reported
that strong drink is responsible for ninety per cent of our crime and for
most of our poverty, and that alcohol, instead of being necessary to               life

and comfort, is inimical to both.         Farm. Journal.
