Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
|
See also:THEISM (Gr. Beor, See also:god)
, literally, and in its widest sense, the belief in a See also:god or gods
.
The See also:term has had several changes of meaning
.
(1) It appears for the first See also:time in 18th-See also:century See also:English as an occasional synonym for " See also:deism " (q.v.), and therefore as applying to those who believed in God but not in See also:Christianity
.
Later See also:criticism, orthodox and heterodox, upon the English deists inclines to See also:charge them with the conception of a divine absentee, who See also:wound up the See also:machine of nature and See also:left it to run untended
.
That was the See also:general 18th-century way of thinking
.
God was See also:apt to be thought of as purely transcendent, not immanent in the See also:world
.
(2) In the lgth century See also:theism is generally used of See also:positive belief in God, either with or without belief in the claim of Christianity to be a See also:revelation, but unassociated with any peculiarities of 18th-century deists
.
If the word " deism " emphasizes a negative See also:element—rejection of See also: The See also:ambiguity cannot be cured . We use the word in this See also:article in the second sense.l I . From this point of view theism is a synonym for Natural See also:Theology, or almost so . But the expression Natural Theology Natural itself has a See also:history . (I) The " three theologies "—Theology. recognized by the See also:early See also:Roman See also:Stoics—probably on the See also:suggestion of a passage in See also:Aristotle's See also:Metaphysics, xi . 8—are named by St See also:Augustine (Latinizing the See also:Greek terms) Imm . See also:Kant's distinction of " deist " and theist " may be found in the Critique of Pure See also:Reason, Transcendental See also:Dialectic," See also:Book II. chaps. iii. and vii . It is curious, but, unless for the study of Kant, unimportant . 2 Cf . THEOLOGY . Natorp's article quoted there gives the reference to the passage in Aristotle, but does not recognize its connexion with the later Stoical distinction.mythical, natural, and See also:civil or See also:political (See also:City of God, iv . 27) .
There is probably a malicious See also:echo in a well-known passage of See also:Gibbon (Decline and Fall, See also:chap. ii.): " The various modes of See also:worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the See also:people as equally true, by the philosopher as equally false, and by the See also:magistrate as equally useful." Augustine rejects all three " theologies " as See also:pagan figments, and not a few church writers follow him in this—borrowing his learning without naming him (e.g. the See also:Protestant See also:Grotius in his notes on Rom. i
.
20)
.
Yet the natural or See also:physical theology of the philosophers—in contrast to See also:mere myths or mere statecraft—seems a straightforward effort to reach faith in God on grounds of scientific reason
.
It deserves the name, in the modern sense, of Natural Theology
.
(2) See also:Raymond of Sabunde's
See also:Liber naturae sive Creaturarum (1434–36) bears also the See also:title
Theologia Naturalis—but not from the author's own See also:hand,3
though his introduction to the book in question, the See also:Prologue, put upon the See also:Index at See also:Rome for its daring, describes the " book of nature " as " connatural to us," in contrast with the " super-natural" book, the See also:Bible, which belongs to the clerics
.
Laymen may read the book of nature, and See also:Man himself is the most important " See also:leaf " in it
.
Raymond attempts to demonstrate the whole of church theology upon principles of reason
.
That is a task quite beyond what is generally recognized as Natural Theology
.
(3) With See also:Francis See also: So too H . See also:Alsted, an early Protestant writer on Natural Theology (in his Methodus Theologiae, 1611, and in later See also:works), defines it as moderns do—some of the contents of his Natural Theology are fantastic enough—and his authorities, again so far as consulted, differ upon the See also:place to be assigned to Natural Theology within a See also:system of study, but do not employ the term.] In later times the expression is See also:common; it is used e.g. by See also:Locke, See also:Leibnitz and See also:Wolff . Wolff's See also:influence made the usage habitual,4 though See also:Schleiermacher and See also:Ritschl, like the Socinians earlier, deny the existence of a natural theology . Following the See also:text and See also:ordinary See also:interpretation 5 of Aristotle's Roman Metaphysics, it is believed that Aristotle already See also:catholic identified metaphysics with a theology: accordingly grouping. modern Roman Catholic learning, which owes a great See also:debt to Aristotle through the schoolmen, includes Natural Theology in See also:philosophy, not in theology properly so called . With Natorp's article W . See also:Wallace's See also:Gifford Lecture,6 chap. i., may also be consulted; but Wallace does not distinguish the unusual sense which the term bears as applied to Raymond's book . R . See also:Flint has remarked that Natural Theology ought not merely to prove the being of God, but to give a full systematic view of what (it is contended) can be learned of theological truth from the " See also:light of nature " (St Augustine, and See See also:art . " Raimundus Sabiende " by Schaarschmidt in See also:Herzog-Hauck, Realencyhlopadie (ed . 1905) . At this point we must also See also:call to mind the wide currency given to the term theology by See also:Abelard, and his editors or copyists . 4 A .
See also:Harnack and some others use the expression in a wider sense
.
Any supposed principles (even if not worked out into a system of inferences) used as ready-made clues for the study and interpretation of Christianity are described by this school as natural theology (cf
.
THEOLOGY)
.
5 Challenged by Natorp; see THEOLOGY
.
e Published in Lectures and Essays
.
theologians generally after him)
.
The name " theism " makes that requirement less emphatic (see below)
.
Another kindred term is " Natural See also:Religion." We meet with this in the titles of two Latin works' by See also:German authors
Natural in reply to See also:Lord See also:Herbert of Cherbury
.
They use it Religion. with strong condemnation, from the standpoint of
rigorous Christian orthodoxy; but it comes into See also:England within very few years upon the Christian See also:side--religion against irreligion—in See also:Bishop See also: " Deist," or sometimes " theist " in sense (1), or Naturalist, is a term of reprobation with English 18th-century apologists, but not " Natural Religion." If there is any difference between " theism " or " Natural Theo-logy " on the one hand, and Natural Religion on the other, it is to be found in the more See also:practical See also:character attaching to natural " religion." While See also:Romans i . 19 and 20 (yet cf . Acts xiv . 17, xvii . 24, &c.) is the See also:main New Testament passage which seems to recognize a Natural Theology, Rom. ii . 14, 15 may be said to assert Natural Religion . When the expression Natural Theology comes to the front once more with See also:Archdeacon W . See also:Paley (1802), this is a sort of after-See also:birth or See also:anachronism.2 Natural See also:Law.—We do not pretend that Law of Nature—the jurist's term, not of course that of inductive See also:science—is Natural strictly a synonym for theism . But it is a cognate Law. conception, of great importance historically, bearing the marks of the Stoic See also:doctrine of " nature," and helping to turn men's minds towards a " natural " theology . A pantheist may believe in Law of Nature and go no further; a theist who accepts Law of Nature has a large See also:instalment of natural theology ready made to his hand; including an idealist, or else an intuitionalist, See also:scheme of See also:ethics . Both See also:jus naturale and lex naturalis are as early as See also:Cicero, and the jus gentium of the Roman lawyers is earlier still . See also:Ambrose of See also:Milan (Epistles ix .
71) quotes Romans ii
.
14, 15—the passage already referred to, under " Natural Religion "—as asserting " Natural Law "; St See also:Paul's words suggest that See also:form of thought and may conceivably have been suggested by it
.
J
.
G
.
See also:Ritchie's Natural Rights, from the point of view of a very hostile (evolutionary) See also:idealism, sketches the early history of the phrase Natural Law.3 The philosopher in Abelard's Dialogus inter Judaeum Philosophunz et Christianum expects to be saved ex sola lege naturali; here " law of nature " is fully See also:equivalent to Natural Religion, and the word sola sets it in contrast with Christianity
.
Not to speak of the canonists, Thomas Aquinas gives natural law an important place; while Melancthon, See also:drawing from Aquinas, gives it an entrance into Protestant thought
.
See also:Zwingli and See also:Calvin on the other hand prefer the positive view of law as instituted by God far back in history in the days of the Old See also:Covenant; but, when exegesis or controversy puts pressure upon them, they fall into See also:line and reiterate the See also:appeal to a Natural Law
.
See also:Richard See also:
2 See Wallace's Gifford Lecture
.
3 For the influence of that conception in theology, especially through the See also:medium of Isidore of See also:Seville, see successive chapters in A
.
J
.
See also:Carlyle's Inst. of Mediaeval Political Thought in the See also:West, vol i.a revival of belief in the (beau-ideal) " See also:state " of nature and a growing emphasis upon natural rights; ideas which, heralded by See also:
An investigator, pledging himself to no beliefs—even perhaps one who definitely disbelieves and rejects theism—may yet interest himself in tracking out the See also:psychology of religion
.
Or a philosopher like See also:Hegel, armed with a metaphysical theory, may descend upon the facts of religion and interpret them in its light, till they almost lose their See also:original significance, which we might provisionally define as consisting in this, that the believer in any religion finds himself helped or (as he claims) saved by it
.
Again, we must not be misled by verbal idiosyncrasies
.
What See also: The historian observes and records, in different lands and ages, the rise or explicit utterance of belief in one God . Some uncertainty may be See also:felt whether See also:pantheism should See also:rank as a theism . Is unity the main point ? Or is not See also:personality rather of See also:prime importance, though doubtless pre-supposing unity ? (Usage does not allow us to rank polytheism as a form of theism.) E . Troeltsch, Kultur der Gegenwart, Tell I . See also:Abt . 4, p . 470, finds that the See also:wisdom of the priests, in one See also:land after another, rises to the thought of divine unity . That suggests pantheism, the usual form of such See also:esoteric wisdom . See also:Professor T . W . Rhys Davids (See also:American Lectures, p . 37) sums up that, when the name of an earlier deity is 4 See (with writers already mentioned) Sir H . See also:Maine's See also:Ancient Law . 5 See his Introduction . attached to the See also:object of supreme worship, monotheism proper is approached; while, when a new thought-construction is put in the supreme place, there is a tendency rather towards See also:pan-theism . So far as this is true, theism (proper) would seem to be an See also:accident of language . There is a further problem; whether monotheism is of very early occurrence . Belief in a primitive See also:historical revelation, once universal among Christians, has almost disappeared; but belief in a very early and highly moral theism is stoutly defended, chiefly on Australian See also:evidence, by See also:Andrew See also:Lang (The Making of Religion and later works) . If Lang is right, " primitive " peoples See also:drew typical theistic inferences, and argued to God from nature and from See also:conscience, though without displacing other types of religious belief and practice . In many regions--See also:Egypt, Babylonia, &c.—individual investigators of the great religions have thought they found traces of an early—one hesitates to write, of a " primitive "—monotheism . Perhaps J . See also:Legge, who finds true theism at the See also:dawn of See also:Chinese history, is the most authoritative representative of such views .
Passing to later times, we can See also:watch a theory of monotheism rising, and dying down again, during what our scholars distin-See also:Brahman guish as the Brahmanical See also:period of See also:Indian religion. theism
.
The supreme god, Isvara, has the See also:personal name Prajapati, Visvakarman or some other
.
But this theism is lifeless—a " See also:pale and shallow deism, which See also:India has often confessed with the lips, but which has never won the See also:homage of her See also:heart.''' The thought of India is upon the side of pan-theism
.
Again, the heretical See also:Egyptian See also: So that here again theism, if theism it was, did not continue in strength . If we understand by theism not See also:simple belief in a divine unity, but such faith in one divine See also:person as will constitute the basis for a popular religion, then—unless we allow a doubtful exception in Zoroastrianism—we must agree with those historians of religion who affirm that the world has known only a single living monotheism, viz. that of the Old Testament, along with what are historically the daughter faiths, Christianity and See also:Islam . The theist believes that he can further trace many incomplete workings of the monothesitic See also:instinct in the history of religion . /ncom- Not only is it true, as A . Menzies observes, that plete " Reason knows only God, not Gods "; if we take theistic religion as saving help, no worshipper possesses re-impulses. ligion in full See also:security until he has gone straight to the fountain-head, and gained the friendship of the God of Gods . Indian Vedic henotheism (otherwise called kathenotheism);3 Semitic monolatry, so important as the probable starting-point of religious development in See also:Israel; the Greek use of " See also:Zeus " almost as we say " God "—even the See also:attempt to arrange deities in a monarchical See also:pantheon, all show the tendency, though it so seldom attains a real victory . r A . See also:Barth, Religions of India, Eng. trans., pp . 29, 30, 69 . We may probably extend this hostile See also:judgment to the theism of the modern Samaj-es . 2 The centralizing of worship at Babylon by its last king, Nabonidos, hardly seems to have amounted to monotheism . t The two terms are explicitly identified by F .
Max See also: But that would only mislead us; See also:free will and immortality are really predicates ascribed—on whatever grounds—to the soul; and it is natural that in theism the soul of man should be a topic second in importance only to God Himself . Every theistic system, or almost every one, makes See also:provision in some way for Kant's three postulates . Accordingly, even in a hurried survey of the history of theism, we must try to question the systems we are reviewing upon their attitude towards human freedom and immortality, as well as upon their doctrine of God . Sometimes it will be found that free will is asserted as an assured fact, as a datum, Free and so as a ground of inference to God . But some- will . times free will is rather a probandum . In Christian theology, much labour has been spent upon vindicating man's freedom against God's intrusion, or upon blotting out human power in order to leave room for the divine . Theism si'ggests at the very outset that we should rather expect to find a. correlation between the two . If there is a God at all, he must be thought of as the See also:guarantee of freedom in man and as the See also:pledge of his immortality . The mention of Christian theology may remind us that, for the See also:majority of theists in See also:medieval and modern times, theism proper has ranked only as a secondary wisdom . It simpiinis possible for Christians to work out natural theology cation of in See also:separate detail; but we cannot wonder if they theism. rarely attempt the task, believing as they do that they have a fuller revelation of religious truth elsewhere . In point of fact, as we look to history, we find that theism has been much simplified and cut down . First of all, attention has been concentrated upon God . One does not suggest that this concentration was an See also:error., On the contrary, even Christian theology makes at least theeffort to show that the thought of God regulates the whole system of belief . Yet while an adequate doctrine of God may See also:settle everything in principle, we ought to remember that there are applications of the principle, apart from which we do not see our way clearly . As a second step in concentration, attention is almost confined to the question " Does God exist ? " and to theistic proofs as answering " Yes." The 'further question " What is God?" is slurred, as if there could be no two opinions regarding that; whereas in truth there are two See also:hundred opinions . A . B . See also:Bruce feels this so strongly that the natural theology See also:section of his Apologetics entirely omits the question " Does God exist?" in favour of the question " What is God?" Perhaps that is equally one-sided . When we do find theism dealing with the question " What is God?" it tends to See also:borrow from scholastic 'dorms of Christian theology the scheme of Being and Attributes (see e.g . Wolff) . But such a scheme gives at best an See also:external preliminary description of the object to which it is applied.' So our See also:wealth of material narrows down in the ordinary handling to a single question . God, the world, the soul, free will, immortality, optimism; What then is God ? All these questions, and perhaps others, tend t |