Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-01-07
rs THERE A GOD?
BY q. A. LAFAYETTE.

BY q. A. LAFAYRTTR
The existence or non-existence of God
is subject of grave Importance to every
member of the human family, and one
that each must decide for himself. Let US
consider it then in the light of reason and
common sense.
1t is the duty of every lover of God, or
true liberty, to express his honest senti-
ments concerning it, and as one who feels
the full weight of such a duty, we have I'M
dertaken the task. 1t ought to be the OBJ
ject of every one who says anything about
this matter to say it in way that is cal
culated, to the best of his ability, to rid the
human mind of cloud that overhangs it
as a result of the teachings of a class
of men, prominent in every community
to-day. We wish to be understood in the
matter. We do not intend warning with
mon or their opinion. Every man has
right to his opinion as we'll as we have to
ours, therefore the object is not to
prove that other men are wrong,but to ask
which, in your Judgment, is right; we, or
those who argue against us. We are
aware that in so far as arriving at any sat
isfactory conclusions is concerned men are
as far from solving this problem to-day as
they were 5000 years ago, and yet, to our
mind, and as we think, to the minds of all
fair minded men, the thing is self-evident.
Notwithstanding many learned professors
would have US believe to the contrary, viz,
that there is no God and that all things
are the workings of nature. We admit
that nature is great creator. Her works
are grand and beautiful to behold, yet it
is as far from being reason, in our judg-
ment, to think of child without mother
as to think of a world like this without a
Creator. Can we conceive of a living
creature or a particle in the vast
works of the universe that
came into existence without a
cause? Can there be such thing as an
effect without cause? and we ask, is not
this world an effect and could it have been
produced without cause? Spencer, Hux-
ley, Tyndal, Voltaire, Paine, Ingersoll and
others would lead mankind through the
valley of science until they reached the
very brink then ask the question "canyou
see or find anything beyond this that
proves God" We'would recommend that
these, or any other men, who are inclined
to thus address the people would examine
themselves more closely and ask the ques-
ton "Can you tell what that something of
which you, and all men, are possessed and
is component part of your existence, that
inconceivable something that manifests
itself in your every action and very large
ly, if not fully, to the entire unconscious
ness of yourself?" What is it that governs
mans acts? Some will say his will, his
motives, his mind, or his surroundings.
We care not what mans motives, mind,
will or surroundings may be, he will in his
true make up, in his true dispositions man
ifest himself in action if not in words. In
other words, no amount of training can
make gentleman or gentlewoman IN
less the germ be within, and truer idea
of the inability of man to understand him
self was never expressed clearer than in
the language of Robert Burns, so, wa
some power the giftie gle US to see oursels
as others see u.s." Every species of cattle,
every blade of grass, every snow flake,
every flower, in short, everything is living
| testimonial of the existence of God, and
why? Notice all the various particles that
make up the component parts of the uni
verse, and you cannot find two that are
| precisely alike. Examine the leaves that
grow on the vast forests, and you will find
| difference on close observation. Among
lo11 +ba Aolya Of
ters there are scarcely two alike.
abound upon our vast prairies the same
fact exists. Among all the faces in the
human family the same is true. More
than this. You can not find two men who
think alike on all subjects. AS Cicero
says: "There are as many opinions as there
are men," Admitting that there are many
who look very nearly alike as well as think
very nearly alike, yet on general outline
the above mentioned facts hold true the
world over. And in other matters this is
equally true. Two mechanics may do the same
piece of work in manner that it will ap-
pear alike, yet GO about it in an entirely
different way. In short, We may observe
all things pertaining to these matters, and
we find the same law predominant. And
does not tn1s prove tnat everything Is
complete design in itself. And the fact
that there is a design proves there
was a designer. But upon making
the above assertion we find ourselves
confronted by some of the opposers of
our position with the argument, if there
can be no design without designer, there
can be no designer without designer of
designer. This we regard as an unjust and
illogical position. AS well say there can be
no designer of a designer without de-
signer of designer of a designer and SO
forth. We have heard of such a thing as
learned ignorance and We are inclined to
say that if such thing there be this is an
| exhibition of it. There is distinction be-
tween design and designer but there is
none between designer and designer.
A man may conceive an idea concerning
picture and convey such idea or picture
to canvas. He may further be
taught through the process of tuition or
example to do the same thing and to make
it appear in manner that will become at
tractive to all who look upon
it, but in this case it is
not truly a design. A design
must be an originally conceived idea exc
cuted. For instance, painter conceives an