Pantheism's destruction of boundaries - pagina 17

Methodist Review.

ophy

call

and

rest,

])liilosoi)Lic

no

tliat

of pantheistic philos-

failure

tlie

lonn^er he concealed,

in the evolution

still

is

it

Jiheory that the harmful impulse of pantheism works in the

most seductive manner, since

it

spends

all its

power

to maintain

the nonexistence of separating houndaries in every dej)artment

Valentinus, the most sensible of (inostics,

of our knowledge.

hut was so

dfcji),

hack of the creation to the [ivOoq (the of the danger for the erasure

evolution

relegated

of boundaries

much aware

which concealed

the Iloros, or Ilorkos, that

nance of the fixed order of ever strange

its

form,

is

that exists.

God

stands or

tenance or removal of boundaries. lie himself

is

to appear in the

God

the chief boundary for

effacement of boundaries tion of the idea of

God.

form of

This thought, how-

nevertheless entirely correct as a poetic

Faith in the living

image.

God

the boundary for the mainte-

is,

all

in this that out of the

itself

AvTOTTaTup he makes suddenly a

is

falls

with the main-

created the boundaries.

all his

creatures,

and the

virtually identical with the oblitera-

If,

then,

it

be never so true that mod-

ern philosophy "began with doubt and ended with despair" this

whole pantheistic stream has left a j)oisonous slime upon it is in Darwin's evolution theory that this slime

the shore, and reveals It

its

may

power. truly be said that with all differences of opinion this

evolution theory

is

the "formula of unity," which

unites

of

modern

all priests

at'

present

science in their secularized temple.

A few dreatners may utter com])laints against this, but they are aged manikins, who, as described by Ilartman, " feel themselves incapable of a second education, but whose numbers liave so long been diminishing that they are powerless to stop tho victor's march of the new truth." This evolution theory has become the fashion-system, not merely with the Darwins and Ilacckels, the Spencers and the jSTagelis, but equally so with our theologians, with our psychologists and moralists. Even an

adherent of Lotze,

my

learned colleague Dr.

of the city university, wrote

only recently:

De

la Saussaye,

"Xowhere

is

a

between the domains of nature and of spirit clearly demonstrable, nor may an unmixed expression be predidefinite frontier

cated of either sphere." Ihit critical

we

are most concerned about the favor with which this

theory gains

among our jurists

(tho divinely appointed

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen