COD REVEALED IN THE WORLD-PROCESS. '^'] 



3/ O 



I 



Hence the method also of our proof of God's exist- 

 ence stands in the sharpest contrast with that of 

 Pantheism. It is not based on a supposed necessity 

 of hypostasizing the abstract formula of a logical 

 unity of the universe, a unity indifferent to every 

 content and intrinsically empty. It does not yield a 

 God who is equally implied in every sort of world, 

 without reference to its nature and its character, a 

 God indifferent to the course of things, and without 

 influence upon it, a God unknowable and unprov- 

 able. On the contrary, it proves His existence in 

 the only way in which it has been evident, since 

 Kant, that it could be proved (ch. ii. § iq)^ viz., not 

 a priori, from the consideration of a world, as such, 

 or of an abstract totality of reality, hwl.a posteriori 

 from the particular nature of this particular world of 

 ours. And beinof an inference from real data it will 

 permit the proof of something beyond mere exist- 

 ence {cp. ch. ii. § 3). The character and nature of 

 God and of His purpose may be obscured in the 

 gloom of our ignorance and degradation, but- they 

 are not intrinsically unknowable. And the divine 

 education of the human race lies just in this, that in 

 studying the nature and history of our world, we are 

 .spelling out the elements of God's revelation to men. 

 § 30. It will be necessary to touch upon one more 

 objection to the principles laid down in the preced- 

 ing sections, not because it is very important in 

 itself, but because it contains a certain amount of 

 truth. The question may be asked, how does- this 

 view assure us that God is one and not many .'* In 

 answer it would certainly have to be admitted that 

 the unity of the divine person was not a matter of 

 philosophic principle. If there are other reasons 

 for holding that God is three, our theory offers no 



