THERE is but one true system of mathematics, one correct way to add, subtract, multiply, and divide, and that is known to be the true way by its practical, definite, satisfying results. Distances are thus determined, and the exact time calculated when a given point will be reached at a fixed rate of speed; weight and contents are ascertained, quality and values computed, estimates made, and contracts drawn and executed. The world's entire industrial and economic system, by which just and amicable dealings between men are made possible, stands as proof that the system of mathematics as practised throughout the world is scientific, is based on correct premises. If there were no recognized mathematical science the state of affairs throughout the world would be very different. There would be universal confusion, division, and strife, in every department where mathematical computation enters.
With this illustration before us, let us candidly ask ourselves why there are so many differing religions in the world. The existence of divisions is conceded by all, and that the disadvantage of these schisms is recognized, is shown by the many attempts to find a remedy, a basis upon which all can agree. In spite, however, of all that has been done to secure unity, there are multitudes who still hold that their own particular religion or sect is the best if not the only true religion, and who even persecute as unbelievers and deceivers the adherents of another faith. Much confusion, both as regards the teaching and the practice of religion, still reigns. It is safe to say that there is not a subject known to man in which there exists so many disagreements, irreconcilable traditions, opinions, forms, and dogmas as in religion. Even Christendom, while claiming for itself the only true expression of religion, is sadly divided.
Now what does all this signify? Does it not prove conclusively that the statement and practice of religion is unscientific, is more or less a matter of guesswork, influenced and controlled by human opinions, in short, experimental? But why should the practice of religion be less exact, less scientific than the practice of mathematics? There is not a subject in our modern world which has been thought of or studied so unscientifically as has religion. And why should this be the exception? why should we continue to regard it as a realm of mystery, governed by special providences, an unknowable, impenetrable region into which the light of understanding cannot penetrate? Does not religion deal with law and order, with facts and relations that are exact and eternal? Feeding upon abstract doctrines instead of relying upon demonstrable statements concerning the eternal verity, conformed to doctrinal molds of thinking, dwelling upon an awful providence whose ways are past finding out, Christians have naturally come to believe that religion is no proper sphere for science or exact knowledge. Many of them readily confess that their religion is unsatisfying, and no wonder, when the knowledge they have of God and their relation to Him and His government is so vague and uncertain, and falls so far short of absolute proof. Believing that the truth of revelation is something especially devised, "a mysterious plan," it has been argued that religious knowledge belongs to a category by itself and cannot be subjected to the ordinary methods of test. A religion so conceived rests upon faith more than understanding, upon ecclesiastical authority more than upon tangible proofs, upon intellectual assent to mysteries more than upon demonstration or intelligent application of known laws.
