Guidance of Nature by John Norton Loughborough

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Nov 5, 1861

Guidance of Nature.

By John Norton Loughborough

BY J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.

While laboring to enforce upon the minds of the people the importance of giving heed to the precepts of the Bible, we are often met with the statement that "nature is a sufficient guide, and in fact the only revelation that God has made to his creatures." But we conclude this is not so; for if God reveals himself only through nature; and if those who profess to be guided by reason and nature are following such revelation, then we must certainly conclude from their various and contradictory views and course that the revelation of nature is a contradictory revelation.

If we are to judge of the revelation of nature by the acts and belief of those who profess to be guided by nature (and this must be a just way of judging), we shall find that the religion of nature has a variety of gods, and its forms of worship are as various as the fancies of its worshipers. We find one class worshiping the sun and moon and hosts of heaven. Another have the river Ganges as their god. Others bow in reverence to a crocodile or other inferior reptiles. Even the more enlightened among the heathen nations, and those also who profess to be skilled in the principles of the philosophy of nature come to discordant conclusions in their reasoning from nature, for the simple reason that nature furnishes them no standard by which to try their reasonings. Sometimes their philosophical deductions lead them to the conclusion that there is a future state; again they give it all up and admit that they can tell nothing about it. So it was with ancient heathen, and so with modern free-thinkers.

Seneca says the Stoics equaled themselves to the gods; for the gods, they affirmed, "are what they are by nature; the wise man is what he is by his own industry. Again they say: 'The gods excel not a wise man in happiness, though they excel him in the duration of happiness.'"

Socrates, who at one time told his friends that when they buried his body he should "go to be among the gods," seemed afterward to lose this confidence, and his principles of reason led him to other conclusions. Just as he was about to die he said, "I hope I am now going to good men, though this I would not take upon me peremptorily to assert; but, that I shall go to the gods, lords that are absolutely good, this if I can affirm anything of this kind, I would certainly affirm. And for this reason I do not take it all that I am to die, as otherwise I should do; but I am in good hope that there is something remaining for those who are dead, and that it will then be much better for good than for bad men." Again he said, that though he should be mistaken, he did at least gain this much, that the expectation of it made him less uneasy while he lived, and his error would die with him, and he concluded thus:

"I am going out of the world, and you are to continue in it; but which of us has the better part, is a secret to every one but God."

Here we see an illustration of the uncertainty of the religion of nature. As its principles were mainly drawn from the reasonings of the people, it left them in a blank uncertainty as to the future, and they have to admit that how it will be, "God only knows." This is frankly admitting that the revelation of futurity from nature and reason are but blank uncertainties.

We cannot refrain from contrasting with the above, Job's hope: "O that my words were now written! O that they were printed in a book! That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock forever! For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth; and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God; whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another." Job xix, 23-27. What a contrast in these cases. Socrates' hope is like a drowning man catching at straws, but Job's is fixed in a foundation so sure that it is knowledge. He says, "I know."

Again, on the unsatisfying nature of a hope based on reason alone, we will instance the last moments of Voltaire and Edward Gibbon (author of decline and fall of the Roman empire). Says Voltaire: "Who can without horror consider the whole world as the empire of destruction? It abounds with wonders, it abounds also with victims. It is a vast field of carnage and contagion. Every species is without pity pursued and torn to pieces, through the air, and earth, and water. In man there is more wretchedness than in all other animals put together. He loves life, and yet he knows he must die. If he enjoys a transient good, he suffers various evils, and is at last devoured by worms. This knowledge is his fatal prerogative. Other animals have it not. He spends the transient moments of his existence in diffusing the miseries which he suffers; in cutting the throats of his fellow-creatures for pay; in cheating and being cheated; robbing, and being robbed; in serving that he might command; and in repenting of all he does. The bulk of mankind are nothing more than a crowd of wretches, equally criminal and unfortunate; and the globe contains rather carcasses than men. I tremble at the review of this dreadful picture, and find it contains a complaint against providence itself. I wish I never had been born."

I look on the above as a strong plea for men to understand God's will by a written revelation, although penned by Voltaire for altogether a different purpose. Were nature our only guide, and the deductions of reason our only hope, we might perhaps join in the doleful strain of Voltaire. But when we consider that this lamentable picture is for the most part of those who reject the Bible, and among those who are professedly guided by nature and reason, we conclude that nature's guidance comes quite too short of the mark. With the Christian, who puts his trust in God and his word, what a different feeling we find. He has the "love of Christ which passeth knowledge" as the Lord grants him his blessing

in copious showers, until he is "filled with all the fullness of God." Eph. iii, 19.

With Voltaire we might contrast the experience of Paul. "We glory in tribulations also." "I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed in us." And again he says, "For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal." Rom. v, 3; viii, 18; 2 Cor. iv, 17, 18.

Gibbon in his declining moments said: "The present is a fleeting moment; the past is no more; and our prospect of futurity is dark and doubtful. This day may possibly be my last; but the laws of probability, so true in general, so fallacious in particular, still allow about fifteen years. . . . I will not suppose any premature decay of the mind and body; but I must reluctantly observe that two causes, the abbreviation of time, and the failure of hope, will always tinge with a browner shade the evening of life."

We may be allowed to avail ourself of a contrast with the above, used by Mr. Wm. Plummer, in his "Bible True," in the case of Paul. "I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge shall give at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." 2 Tim. iv, 6-8. The unbeliever in trouble is a reed shaken with the wind—he is tossed with the tempest and not comforted. But he whose trust is in the living oracles of Jehovah, even when sorrow betides him, stands

"As some tall cliff, that lifts its awful form, Swells from the vale and midway leaves the storm; Though round its breast the rolling clouds are spread, Eternal sunshine settles on its head."

This professed revelation from nature as we have already intimated is to a great extent imaginary, and for this reason has led men to believe in no God, or to the belief that everything is God; that dead men are gods, or others, that all the gods there are are dead men. One professes to learn from nature that God is all power, another that he has no power at all over man. One of these blasphemous reasoners a few months since said: "If there is a God, I have rights. I have a right to life, liberty, and happiness, &c., whether he is pleased to grant it or not;" and to conclude his harangue of darkness, declared that he could "look God in the face and assert it."

About as good a take-off of their mode of reasoning as I have seen, is in a verse that was found written on the tomb-stone of Hume:

"Beneath this circular idea, Vulgarly called a tomb, Impressions and ideas rest, Which constituted Hume."

The natural tendency of following this professed revelation of nature is to sin. This we see

fully illustrated in the lives of its advocates.

"Aristippus maintained that it was lawful for a wise man to steal, commit adultery, and sacrilege, when opportunity offered; for that none of these actions were naturally evil, setting aside the vulgar opinion, which was introduced by silly and illiterate people; and that a wise man might publicly gratify his libidinous propensities." Also read the following from Horne's Introduction to the Bible, Vol. i, p. 25.

"Lord Herbert declared, that men are not hastily, or on small grounds, to be condemned, who are led to sin by bodily constitution; that the indulgence of lust and of anger is no more to be blamed than the thirst occasioned by the dropsy, or the drowsiness produced by lethargy.

"Mr. Hobbes asserted that the civil or municipal law is the only foundation of right and wrong; that where there is no civil law, every man's judgment is the only standard of right and wrong; that the sovereign is not bound by any obligation of truth or justice, and can do no wrong to his subjects; that every man has a right to all things, and may lawfully get them if he can!

"Lord Bolingbroke resolved all morality into self-love as its principle, and taught that ambition, the lust of power, sensuality, and avarice may be lawfully gratified, if they can be safely gratified; that the sole foundation of modesty is vanity, or a wish to show ourselves superior to mere animals; that man lives only in the present world, and is only a superior animal; that the chief end of man is to gratify the appetites and inclinations of the flesh; that modesty is inspired by mere prejudice; and that polygamy is a part of the law or religion of nature. He also intimates that adultery is no violation of the law of nature; and that there is no wrong, except in the highest lewdness.

"Mr. Hume (the immorality of whose principles is displayed in his Private Correspondence recently published) maintained, that self-denial, self-mortification, and humility are not virtues, but are useless and mischievous; that they stupefy the understanding, sour the temper, and harden the heart; that pride, self-valuation, ingenuity, eloquence, quickness of thought, easiness of expression, delicacy of taste, strength of body, and cleanliness, are virtues; and, consequently, that to want honesty, to want understanding, and to want strength of body, are equally the subjects of moral disapprobation; that adultery must be practised, if men would obtain all the advantages of life; that, if generally practised, it would in time cease to be scandalous; and that if practiced secretly and frequently, it would by degrees come to be thought no crime at all!!!

"Mr. Gibbon, one of the most decent of modern infidels, has given a biographical account of himself, and what is the result of the moral portrait there exhibited? Amid all the polish and splendor of literary culture, not a single line of moral beauty is perceptible. There is 'no fear of God, no reverence for sacred things, no regard for the welfare of the human race; but the most heartless and sordid selfishness, vain glory, a desire of admiration, adulation of the great and wealthy, contempt for the poor, and supreme devotedness to his own gratification.'

"Both Voltaire and Helvetius advocated the unlimited gratification of the sensual appetites, and the latter held that it is not agreeable to policy to regard gallantry (that is, unlawful intercourse with married women), as a vice in a moral sense; and that, if men will call it a vice, it must be acknowledged that there are vices which are useful in certain ages and countries! In other words, that in those countries such vices are virtues. Rousseau, a thief, a liar, and a debauched profligate, according to his own printed 'Confessions,' also had recourse to feelings as his standard of morality. 'I have only to consult myself,' said he, 'concerning what I do. All that I feel to be right, is right. Whatever I feel to be wrong, is wrong. All the morality of our actions lies in the judgment we ourselves form of them.'

If some of those professed infidels have had regard for morality it has been owing more to their early religious training than anything they have learned from nature alone. And this is well expressed in the following letter from Ben Franklin:

"FRANKLIN'S LETTER TO PAINE.

"Thomas Paine sailed from this country in 1787 to visit France the second time. Soon after he arrived there, which was three years before the death of Franklin, he wrote the first part of his 'Age of Reason.' He submitted the manuscript to Franklin for his inspection and opinion, and received the following answer, which was printed in Niles' Register, Vol. xxx, p. 397.

"Dear Sir: I have read your manuscript with some attention. By the argument it contains against a particular Providence, though you allow a general Providence, you strike at the foundation of all religion. For without the belief of a Providence, that takes cognizance of, guards and guides, and favors particular persons, there is no motive to worship a Deity, to fear his displeasure, or to pray for his protection.

"I will not enter into any discussion of your principles, though you seem to desire it. At present, I shall only give you my opinion, that though your reasonings are subtle, and may prevail with some readers, you will not succeed so as to change the general sentiments of mankind on that subject; and the consequence of printing this piece will be a great deal of odium upon yourself, mischief to you, and no good to others. He that spits against the wind spits in his own face. But were you to succeed, do you imagine any good will be done by it?

"You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous life without the assistance afforded by religion. You have a clear perception of the advantages of virtue, and the disadvantages of vice, and possess strength of resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common temptations.

"But think how great a portion of mankind consists of ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth, of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the point for its security.

"And, perhaps, you are indebted to it, originally, that is, to your religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. You might easily display your excellent talents of reasoning upon a less hazardous subject, and thereby obtain rank with our most distinguished authors. For among us it is not necessary, as among the Hottentots, that a youth, to be raised into the company of men, should prove his manhood by beating his mother. I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person, whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification from the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance.

"If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be without it? I intend this letter itself as a proof of my friendship, and therefore add no profession, but simply subscribe,

"Yours, B. Franklin."

The question is asked by many why do those who follow nature as a guide run into such gross errors, and wickedness? The simple answer, I conceive, is this: that those who profess to follow nature, in reality follow self. Instead of having any real fixed principles to follow, in the end they claim, as one writer above, that "whatever they feel to be right is right," &c. They war against the Bible, simply because it wars against self. Its injunction is, "Deny thyself!" This they cannot submit to, and so war against the word. Perhaps you and I think we are safe from such a snare. "Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall." Our only safety is to deny ourselves and take up every cross, or in the end we may be as hardened as any against the word of God. "Because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved, God will send them strong delusion." Deception is in the world, and that for God's saints, unless they are faithful. Remember our only safety is to deny self, and take up every cross. God help us to prove faithful.

Battle Creek, Mich., Oct. 29, 1861.