Dedication

TO THE

MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,

THOMAS,

LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, AND PRIMATE OF ALL ENGLAND;

SIR HENRY ASHURST, BARONET;
SIR JOHN ROTHERAM, KNIGHT, SERGEANT AT LAW;
JOHN EVELIN, ESQ.

TRUSTEES APPOINTED BY THE HONOURABLE ROBERT BOYLE, ESQ.

THIS DISCOURSE

IS HUMBLY DEDICATED.

THE PREFACE.

THERE being already published many and good books to prove the Being and Attributes of God, I have chosen to contract what was requisite for me to say upon this subject, into as narrow a compass, and to express what I had to offer, in as few words as I could with perspicuity. For which reason I have also confined myself to one only method or continued thread of arguing, which I have endeavoured should be as near to mathematical as the nature of such a discourse would allow; omitting some other arguments which I could not discern to be so evidently conclusive; because it seems not to be at any time for the real advantage of truth to use arguments in its behalf founded only on such hypotheses as the adversaries apprehend they cannot be compelled to grant: Yet I have not made it my business to oppose any of those arguments, because I think it is not the best way for any one to recommend his own performance by endeavouring to discover the imperfections of others who are engaged in the same design with himself, of promoting the interest of true religion and virtue. But every man ought to use such arguments only as appear to him to be clear and strong, and the readers must judge whether they truly prove the conclusion.

Introduction

ALL those who either are or pretend to be atheists; The introduction. who either disbelieve the being of God, or would be thought to do so; or, (which is all one,) who deny the principal attributes of the divine nature, and suppose God to be an unintelligent being, which acts merely by necessity; that is, which, in any tolerable propriety of speech, acts not at all, but is only acted upon: all men that are atheists, I say, in this sense, must be so upon one or other of these three accounts.

Either, first, Because being extremely ignorant Atheism arises from stupid ignorance. and stupid, they have never duly considered any thing at all; nor made any just use of their natural reason, to discover even the plainest and most obvious truths; but have spent their time in a manner of life very little superior to that of beasts.

Or from gross corruption of manners: Or, secondly, Because being totally debauched and corrupted in their practice, they have, by a vicious and degenerate life, corrupted the principles of their nature, and defaced the reason of their own minds; and, instead of fairly and impartially inquiring into the rules and obligations of nature, and the reason and fitness of things, have accustomed themselves only to mock and scoff at religion; and, being under the power of evil habits, and the slavery of unreasonable and indulged lusts, are resolved not to hearken to any reasoning which would oblige them to forsake their beloved vices.

Or from false philosophy. Or, thirdly, Because in the way of speculative reasoning, and upon the principles of philosophy, they pretend that the arguments used against the being or attributes of God, seem to them, after the strictest and fullest inquiry, to be more strong and conclusive than those by which we endeavour to prove these great truths.

These seem the only causes that can be imagined, of any man’s disbelieving the being or attributes of God; and no man can be supposed to be an atheist but upon one or other of these three accounts. Now, to the two former of these three sorts of men; namely, to such as are wholly ignorant and stupid, or to such as through habitual debauchery have brought themselves to a custom of mocking and scoffing at all religion, and will not hearken to any fair reasoning; it is not my present business to apply myself. The one of these wants to be instructed in the first principles of reason as well as of religion. The other disbelieves only for a present false interest, and because he is desirous that the thing should not be true. The one has not yet arrived to the use of his natural faculties: the other has renounced them; and declares he will not be argued with, as a rational creature. It is therefore the third sort of atheists only (namely those who in the way of speculative reasoning, and upon the principles of philosophy, pretend that the arguments brought against the being or attributes of God, do, upon the strictest and fullest examination, appear to them to be more strong and conclusive, than those by which these great truths are attempted to be proved;) these, I say, are the only atheistical persons to whom my present discourse can be supposed to be directed, or indeed who are capable of being reasoned with at all.

Now, before I enter upon the main argument, I shall premise several concessions, which these men, upon their own principles, are unavoidably obliged to make.

And first, They must of necessity own, that, supposing The being of God very desirable. it cannot be proved to be true, yet at least it is a thing very desirable, and which any wise man would wish to be true, for the great benefit and happiness of men; that there was a God, an intelligent and wise, a just and good Being, to govern the world. Whatever hypothesis these men can possibly frame; whatever argument they can invent, by which they would exclude God and providence out of the world; that very argument or hypothesis will of necessity lead them to this concession. If they argue, that our notion of God arises not from nature and reason, but from the art and contrivance of politicians; that argument itself forces them to confess, that it is manifestly for the interest of human society that it should be believed there is a God. If they suppose that the world was made by chance, and is every moment subject to be destroyed by chance again; no man can be so absurd as to contend that it is as comfortable and desirable to live in such an uncertain state of things, and so continually liable to ruin,

Maria ac terras cœlumque—
Una dies dabit exitio, multosque per annos
Sustentata ruet moles, et machina mundi.
—Dictis dabit ipsa fidem res
Forsitan, et graviter terrarum motibus orbis
Omnia conquassari in parvo tempore cernes.

Lucret. lib. 5.

Proposition I.

I. Proposition I. First then, it is absolutely and undeniably certain, that Something must have existed from eternity. something has existed from all eternity.—This is so evident and undeniable a proposition, that no atheist in any age has ever presumed to assert the contrary; and therefore there is little need of being particular in the proof of it. For since something now is, it is evident that something always was; otherwise the things that now are must have been produced out of nothing, absolutely and without cause, which is a plain contradiction in terms. For to say a thing is produced, and yet that there is no cause at all of that production, is to say that something is effected, when it is effected by nothing; that is, at the same time when it is not effected at all.—Whatever exists, has a cause, a reason, a ground of its existence; (a foundation, on which its existence relies; a ground or reason why it doth exist rather than not exist;) either in the necessity of its own nature, and then it must have been of itself eternal; or in the will of some other being, and then that other being must, at least in the order of nature and causality, have existed before it.

Of the difficulty of conceiving eternity. That something therefore has really existed from eternity, is one of the certainest and most evident truths in the world; acknowledged by all men, and disputed by none. Yet as to the manner how it can be; there is nothing in nature more difficult for the mind of man to conceive, than this very first plain and self-evident truth. For, how any thing can have existed eternally; that is, how an eternal duration can be now actually past, is a thing utterly as impossible for our narrow understandings to comprehend, as any thing that is not an express contradiction can be imagined to be: and yet to deny the truth of the proposition, that an eternal duration is now actually past, would be to assert something still far more unintelligible, even a real and express contradiction.

Difficulties arising merely from the nature of eternity, not to be regarded, because equal in all suppositions. The use I would make of this observation, is this: That since in all questions concerning the nature and perfections of God, or concerning any thing to which the idea of eternity or infinity is joined; though we can indeed demonstrate certain propositions to be true, yet it is impossible for us to comprehend or frame any adequate or complete ideas of the manner how the things so demonstrated can be: therefore, when once any proposition is clearly demonstrated to be true, it ought not to disturb us that there be perhaps perplexing difficulties on the other side, which merely for want of adequate ideas of the manner of the existence of the things demonstrated, are not easy to be cleared. Indeed, were it possible there should be any proposition which could equally be demonstrated on both sides of the question, or which could on both sides be reduced to imply a contradiction; (as some have very inconsiderately asserted;) this, it must be confessed, would alter the case. Upon this absurd supposition, all difference of true and false, all thinking and reasoning, and the use of all our faculties, would be entirely at an end. But when to demonstration on the one side, there are opposed on the other, only difficulties raised from our want of having adequate ideas of the things themselves; this ought not to be esteemed an objection of any real weight. It is directly and clearly demonstrable, (and acknowledged to be so, even by all atheists that ever lived,) that something has been from eternity: All the objections therefore raised against the eternity of any thing, grounded merely on our want of having an adequate idea of eternity, ought to be looked upon as of no real solidity. Thus in other the like instances: It is demonstrable, for example, that something must be actually infinite: All the metaphysical difficulties, therefore, which arise usually from applying the measures and relations of things finite, to what is infinite; and from supposing finites to be [aliquot] parts of infinite, when indeed they are not properly so, but only as mathematical points to quantity, which have no proportion at all: (and from imagining all infinites to be equal, when in things disparate they manifestly are not so; an infinite line, being not only not equal to, but infinitely less than an infinite surface, and an infinite surface than space infinite in all dimensions:) All metaphysical difficulties, I say, arising from false suppositions of this kind, ought to be esteemed vain and of no force. Again: it is in like manner demonstrable, that quantity is infinitely divisible: All the objections therefore raised, by supposing the sums total of all infinities to be equal, when in disparate parts they manifestly are not so; and by comparing the imaginary equality or inequality of the number of the parts of unequal quantities, whose parts have really no number at all, they all having parts without number; ought to be looked upon as weak and altogether inconclusive: To ask whether the parts of unequal quantities be equal in number or not, when they have no number at all, being the same thing as to ask whether two lines drawn from differently distant points, and each of them continued infinitely, be equal in length or not, that is, whether they end together, when neither of them have any end at all.

Proposition II. There must have existed from eternity one independent being.

II. Proposition II: There must have existed from eternity one independent being. There has existed from eternity,

The meaning of this proposition, (and all that the argument here requires,) is, that there must needs have always been some independent being, some one at least. To show that there can be no more than one, is not the design of this proposition, but of the seventh.

Proposition III. The one independent Being must be necessarily existing.

Proposition III: The one independent Being must be necessarily existing. III. That unchangeable and independent Being, which has existed from eternity, without any external cause of its existence, must be self-existent, that is, necessarily existing. For whatever exists, must either have come into being out of nothing, absolutely without cause; or it must have been produced by some external cause; or it must be self-existent. Now, to arise out of nothing, absolutely without any cause, has been already shown to be a plain contradiction. To have been produced by some external cause, cannot possibly be true of every thing; but something must have existed eternally and independently, as has likewise been shown already. It remains, therefore, that that being which has existed independently from eternity must of necessity be self-existent. Now, to be self-existent is not to be produced by itself; for that is an express contradiction. But it is, (which is the only idea we can frame of self-existence; and without which, the word seems to have no signification at all;) it is, I say, to exist by an absolute necessity originally in the nature of the thing itself: And this necessity must be antecedent; not, indeed, in time, to the existence of the being itself, because that is eternal; but it must be antecedent in the natural order of our ideas, to our supposition of its being; that is, this necessity must not barely be consequent upon our supposition of the existence of such a being; (for then it would not be a necessity absolutely such in itself, nor be the ground or foundation of the existence of any thing, being on the contrary only a consequent of it;) but it must antecedently force itself upon us, whether we will or no, even when we are endeavouring to suppose that no such being exists. For example: when we are endeavouring to suppose, that there is no being in the universe that exists necessarily, we always find in our minds, Page 10, &c. (besides the foregoing demonstration of something being self-existent, from the impossibility of every thing’s being dependent;) we always find in our minds, I say, some ideas, as of infinity and eternity; which to remove, that is, to suppose that there is no being, no substance in the universe, to which these attributes or modes of existence are necessarily inherent, is a contradiction in the very terms. For modes and attributes exist only by the existence of the substance to which they belong. Now, he that can suppose eternity and immensity (and consequently the substance by whose existence these modes or attributes exist,) removed out of the universe, may, if he please, as easily remove the relation of equality between twice two and four.

That to suppose immensity removed out of the universe, or not necessarily eternal, is an express contradiction; is intuitively evident to every one who attends to his own ideas, and considers the essential nature of things. To suppose

Moveantur partes spatii de locis suis, et movebuntur (ut ita dicam) de seipsis.—Newton. Princip. lib. I. Schol. ad Definit. 8.

From this third proposition it follows,

1st, That the only true idea of a self-existent or The true notion of self existence. Pages 10 and 14. necessarily-existing being, is the idea of a being, the supposition of whose not-existing is an express contradiction. For since it is absolutely impossible but there must be somewhat self-existent; that is, which exists by the necessity of its own nature; it is plain that that necessity cannot be a necessity consequent upon any foregoing supposition, (because nothing can be antecedent to that which is self-existent, no not its own will, so as to be the cause or ground of its own existence,) but it must be a necessity absolutely such in its own nature. Now, a necessity, not relatively or consequentially, but absolutely such in its own nature, is nothing else but its being a plain impossibility or implying a contradiction to suppose the contrary. For instance; the relation of equality between twice two and four is an absolute necessity only because it is an immediate contradiction in terms to suppose them unequal. This is the only idea we can frame of an absolute necessity; and to use the word in any other sense seems to be using it without any signification at all.

If any one now asks, what sort of idea the idea of that being is, the supposition of whose not-existing is thus an express contradiction; I answer, it is the first and simplest idea we can possibly frame; an idea necessarily and essentially included or presupposed, as a sine qua non, in every other idea whatsoever; an idea, which (unless we forbear thinking at all) we cannot possibly extirpate or remove out of our minds; of a most simple being, absolutely eternal and infinite, original and independent. For, that he who supposes there is no original independent being in the universe, supposes a contradiction, has been shown already. And that he who supposes there may possibly be no eternal and infinite being in the universe supposes likewise a contradiction, is evident from hence; (besides that these two attributes do necessarily follow from self-originate independent existence, as shall be shown hereafter;) that when he has done his utmost, in endeavouring to imagine that no such being exists, he cannot avoid imagining an eternal and infinite

See the Answer to a Seventh Letter, at the end of this Book.

This The error of the Cartesians. argument the Cartesians, who supposed the idea of immensity to be the idea of matter, have been greatly perplexed with. For, (however in words they have contradicted themselves, yet in reality) they have more easily been driven to that most intolerable absurdity of asserting matter

Puto implicare contradictionem, ut mundus sit finitus: i. e. I think it implies a contradiction for the world to be finite.—Cartes. Epist. 69. primæ partis.

And his follower Mr. Regis, Mais peutê tre (saith he) que je raisonne mal, &c. i. e. But perhaps I argue ill, when I conclude that the property my idea hath to represent extension, [that is, in the sense of the Cartesians, matter,] comes from extension itself as its cause. For, what hinders me from believing that if this property comes not from myself, yet at least it may come from some spirit [or being] superior to me, which produces in me the idea of extension, though extension does not actually exist? Yet when I consider the thing attentively, I find that my conclusion is good; and that no spirit [or being] how excellent soever, can cause the idea which I have of extension to represent to me extension rather than any thing else, if extension does not actually exist; because if he should do so, the idea which I should then have of extension would not be a representation of extension, but a representation of nothing; which is impossible.

But it may be I still deceive myself, when I say that the idea I have of extension supposes an object actually existing. For it seems that I have ideas, which do not suppose any object: I have, for example, the idea of an enchanted castle; though no such thing really exists. Yet when I consider the difficulty still more attentively, I find there is this difference between the idea of extension, and that of an enchanted castle, that the first, being natural, that is, independent on my will, supposes an object which is necessarily such as it represents, whereas the other, being artificial, supposes indeed an object, but it is not necessary that that object be absolutely such as the idea represents, because my will can add to that object, or diminish from it, as it pleases, as I have before said, and as shall be proved hereafter, when I come to treat of the origin of ideas.—Regis Metaphys. lib. I. par. 1. cap. 3.

Proposition IV: The essence of the self-existent Being [is] incomprehensible.

IV. Proposition IV. The essence of the self-existent Being incomprehensible. What the substance or essence of that being, which is self-existent, or necessarily-existing, is, we have no idea; neither is it at all possible for us to comprehend it. That there is such a being actually existing without us, we are sure (as I have already shown) by strict and undeniable demonstration. Also what it is not, that is, that the material world is not it, as modern atheists would have it, has been already demonstrated. But what it is, I mean as to its substance and essence, this we are infinitely unable to comprehend. Yet this does not in the least diminish the certainty of the demonstration of its existence. For it is one thing to know certainly that a being exists; and another, to know what the essence of that being is. And the one may be capable of the strictest demonstration, when the other is absolutely beyond the reach of all our faculties to understand. A blind or deaf man has infinitely more reason to deny the being, or the possibility of the being, of light or sounds, than any atheist can have to deny, or doubt of the existence of God: For the one can, at the utmost, have no other proof but credible testimony, of the existence of certain things, whereof it is absolutely impossible that he himself should frame any manner of idea, not only of their essence, but even of their effects or properties; but the other may, with the least use of his reason, be assured of the existence of a Supreme Being, by undeniable demonstration; and may also certainly know abundance of its attributes, (as shall be made appear in the following propositions,) though its substance or essence be entirely incomprehensible. Wherefore nothing can be more unreasonable and weak, than for an atheist upon this account to deny the being of God, merely because his weak and finite understanding cannot frame to itself any adequate notion of the substance or essence of that first and supreme cause. We are utterly ignorant of the substance or essence of all other things; even of those things which we converse most familiarly with, and think we understand best. There is not so mean and contemptible a plant or animal, that does not confound the most enlarged understanding upon earth; nay, even the simplest and plainest of all inanimate beings have their essence or substance hidden from us in the deepest and most impenetrable obscurity. How weak then and foolish is it, to raise objections against the being of God from the incomprehensibleness of his essence! And to represent it as a strange and incredible thing, that there should exist any incorporeal substance, the essence of which we are not able to comprehend! As if it were not far more strange, that there should exist numberless objects of our senses, things subject to our daily inquiry, search, and examination, and yet we not be able, no not in any measure, to find out the real essence of any one even of the least of these things.

Nevertheless, it is very necessary to observe here, by the way, that it does not at all from hence follow, that there can possibly be, in the unknown substance or essence of God, any thing contradictory to our clear ideas. For, as a blind man, though he has no idea of light and colours, yet knows certainly and infallibly that there cannot possibly be any kind of light which is not light, or any sort of colour which is not a colour; so, though we have no idea of the substance of God, nor indeed of the substance of any other being; yet we are as infallibly certain that there cannot possibly be, either in the one or the other, any contradictory modes or properties as if we had the clearest and most distinct idea of them.

From what has been said upon this head, we may observe,

1st. Of infinite space. The weakness of such as have presumed to imagine infinite space to be a just representation or adequate idea of the essence of the supreme cause. This is a weak imagination, arising from hence, that men, using themselves to judge of all things by their senses only, fancy spiritual or immaterial substances, because they are not objects of their corporeal senses, to be, as it were, mere nothings; just as children imagine air, because they cannot see it, to be mere emptiness and nothing. But the fallacy is too gross to deserve being insisted upon. There are perhaps numberless substances in the world, whose essences are as entirely unknown and impossible to be represented to our imaginations, as colours are to a man that was born blind, or sounds to one that has been always deaf. Nay, there is no substance in the world, of which we know any thing further than only a certain number of its properties or attributes; of which we know fewer in some things, and in others more. Infinite space is nothing else but abstract immensity or infinity, even as infinite duration is abstract eternity. And it would be just as proper, to say that eternity is the essence of the supreme cause, as to say, that immensity is so. Indeed, they seem both to be but modes of an essence or substance incomprehensible to us; and when we endeavour to represent the real substance of any being whatsoever in our weak imaginations, we shall find ourselves in like manner deceived.

2dly. From hence appears the vanity of the schoolmen, The vanity of the schoolmen. who, as in other matters, so in their disputes about the self-existent being, when they come at what they are by no means able to comprehend or explain, lest they should seem ignorant of any thing, they give us terms of art, and words of amusement, mere empty sounds, which, under pretence of explaining the matter before them, have really no manner of idea or signification at all. Thus, when they tell us concerning the essence of God, that he is purus actus, mera forma, and the like, either the words have no meaning, and signify nothing; or else they express only the perfection of his power and other attributes; which is not what these men intend to express by them.

Proposition V. That the self-existent being must be eternal.

V. Proposition V. That the self-existent being must be eternal. Though the substance or essence of the self-existent being is in itself absolutely incomprehensible to us; yet many of the essential attributes of his nature are strictly demonstrable, as well as his existence. Thus, in the first place, the self-existent being must of necessity be eternal. The ideas of eternity and self-existence are so closely connected, that, because something must of necessity be eternal independently and without any outward cause of its being, therefore it must necessarily be self-existent; and, because it is impossible but something must be self-existent, therefore it is necessary that it must likewise be eternal. To be self-existent, is (as has been already shown,) to exist by an absolute necessity in the nature of the thing itself. Now this necessity being absolute, and not depending upon any thing external, must be always unalterably the same; nothing being alterable but what is capable of being affected by somewhat without itself. That being, therefore, which has no other cause of its existence but the absolute necessity of its own nature, must of necessity have existed from everlasting, without beginning; and must of necessity exist to everlasting without end.

As Of the manner of our conceiving the eternity of God. to the manner of this eternal existence: it is manifest, it herein infinitely transcends the manner of the existence of all created beings, even of such as shall exist for ever; that whereas it is not possible for their finite minds to comprehend all that is past, or to understand perfectly all things that are at present, much less to know all that is future, or to have entirely in their power any thing that is to come; but their thoughts, and knowledge, and power must of necessity have degrees and periods, and be successive and transient as the things themselves. The eternal supreme cause, on the contrary, (supposing him to be an intelligent being, which will hereafter be proved in the sequel of this discourse,) must of necessity have such a perfect, independent, and unchangeable comprehension of all things, that there can be no one point or instant of his eternal duration, wherein all things that are past, present, or to come, will not be as entirely known and represented to him in one single thought or view; and all things present and future be equally entirely in his power and direction as if there was really no succession at all, but all things were actually present at once. Thus far we can speak intelligibly concerning the eternal duration of the self-existent being; and no atheist can say this is an impossible, absurd, or insufficient account. It is, in the most proper and intelligible sense of the words, to all the purposes of excellency and perfection, interminabilis vitæ tota simul et perfecta possessio; the entire and perfect possession of an endless life.

Others With respect to succession. have supposed that the difference between the manner of the eternal existence of the supreme cause, and that of the existence of created beings, is this: that, whereas the latter is a continual transient succession of duration, the former is one point or instant comprehending eternity, and wherein all things are really co-existent. But this distinction I shall not now insist upon, as being of no use in the present dispute, because it is impossible to prove and explain it in such a manner as ever to convince an atheist that there is any thing in it; and besides, as, on the one hand, the schoolmen have indeed generally chosen to defend it, so, on the other hand,

Crucem ingenio figere, ut rem capiat fugientem captum.—Tam fieri non potest, ut instans [temporis] coexistant rei successivæ, quam impossibile est punctum coexistere [coexistendi] lineæ.—Lusus merus non intellectorum verberum.—Gassend. Physic. lib. 1.

I shall not trouble you with the inconsistent and unintelligible notions of the schoolmen; that it [the eternity of God] is duratio tota simul, in which we are not to conceive any succession, but to imagine it an instant. We may as well conceive the immensity of God to be a point, as his eternity to be an instant.—And how that can be together, which must necessarily be imagined to be co-existent to successions, let them that can, conceive.—Archbishop Tillotson, vol. 7. serm. 13.

Others say, God sees and knows future things, by the presentiality and co-existence of all things in eternity; for they say, that future things are actually present and existing to God, though not in mensura propria, yet in mensura aliena. The schoolmen have much more of this jargon and canting language. I envy no man the understanding these phrases; but to me they seem to signify nothing, but to have been words invented by idle and conceited men, which a great many ever since, lest they should seem to be ignorant, would seem to understand. But I wonder most, that men, when they have amused and puzzled themselves and others with hard words, should call this explaining things.—Archbishop Tillotson, vol. 6. serm. 6.

Proposition VI. That the self-existent being must be infinite and omnipresent.

VI. Proposition VI. That the self-existent being must be infinite and omnipresent. The self-existent Being must of necessity be infinite and omnipresent. The idea of infinity or immensity, as well as of eternity, is so closely connected with that of self-existence, that, because it is impossible but something must be infinite independently and of itself, (for else it would be impossible there should be any infinite at all, unless an effect could be perfecter than its cause,) therefore it must of necessity be self-existent: and because something must of necessity be self-existent, therefore it is necessary that it must likewise be infinite. To be self-existent (as has been already shown,) is to exist by an absolute necessity in the nature of the thing itself. Now, this necessity being absolute in itself, and not depending on any outward cause, it is evident it must be everywhere as well as always, unalterbly the same. For a necessity, which is not everywhere the same, is plainly a consequential necessity only, depending upon some external cause, and not an absolute one in its own nature; for a necessity absolutely such in itself, has no relation to time or place, or any thing else. Whatever therefore exists by an absolute necessity in its own nature, must needs be infinite as well as eternal. To suppose a finite being to be self-existent, is to say that it is a contradiction for that being not to exist, the absence of which may yet be conceived without a contradiction; which is the greatest absurdity in the world. For if a being can, without a contradiction, be absent from one place, it may, without a contradiction, be absent likewise from another place, and from all places: and whatever necessity it may have of existing, must arise from some external cause, and not absolutely from itself; and, consequently, the being cannot be self-existent.

From hence it follows,

1st. That the infinity of the self-existent being must be an infinity of fulness as well as of immensity; that is, it must not only be without limits, but also without diversity, defect, or interruption: For instance; could matter be supposed boundless, it would not therefore follow that it was in this complete sense infinite; because, though it had no limits, yet it might have within itself many assignable vacuities. But whatever is self-existent, must of necessity exist absolutely in every place alike, and be equally present everywhere; and consequently must have a true and absolute infinity, both of immensity and fulness.

2dly. From hence it follows, that the self-existent being must be a most simple, unchangeable, incorruptible being; without parts, figure, motion, divisibility, or any other such properties as we find in matter. For all these things do plainly and necessarily imply finiteness in their very notion, and are utterly inconsistent with complete infinity. Divisibility is a separation of parts, real or mental: meaning, by mental separation, not barely a partial apprehending, (for space, for instance, which is absolutely indivisible and inseparable, either really or mentally, may yet be partially apprehended;

Ordo partium spatii est immutabilis; moveantur hæ de locis suis, et movebuntur (ut ita dicam) de seipsis. Newton. Princip. Schol. ad definit. 8.

Proposition VII. That the self-existent being can be but one.

VII. Proposition VII. That the self-existent being can be but one. The self-existent being must of necessity be but one. This evidently follows from his being necessarily-existent: for necessity absolute, in itself, is simple and uniform and universal, without any possible difference, difformity, or variety whatsoever: and all variety or difference of existence must needs arise from some external cause, and be dependent upon it, and proportionable to the efficiency of that cause, whatsoever it be. Absolute necessity, in which there can be no variation in any kind or degree, cannot be the ground of existence of a number of beings, however similar and agreeing: because, without any other difference, even number is itself a manifest difformity or inequality (if I may so speak) of efficiency or causality.

Again: To suppose two (or more) distinct beings existing of themselves, necessarily, and independent from each other, implies this plain contradiction; that each of them being independent from the other, they may either of them be supposed to exist alone, so that it will be no contradiction to imagine the other not to exist; and consequently neither of them

See this farther explained, in the Answer to the First Letter at the end of this book.

Proposition VIII. That the self-existent being must be intelligent.

VIII. Proposition VIII. That the self-existent being must be intelligent. The self-existent and original cause of all things must be an intelligent being. In this proposition lies the main question between us and the atheists. For, that something must be self-existent, and that that which is self-existent must necessarily be eternal and infinite, and the original cause of all things, will not bear much dispute.—But all atheists, whether they hold the world to be of itself eternal both as to the matter and form, or whether they hold the matter only to be necessary and the form contingent, or whatever hypothesis they frame, have always asserted, and must maintain, either directly or indirectly, that the self-existent being is not an intelligent being, but either pure unactive matter, or (which in other words is the very same thing) a mere necessary agent. For a mere necessary agent must of necessity either be plainly and directly in the grossest sense unintelligent; which was the ancient atheist’s notion of the self-existent being: or else its intelligence (which is the assertion of Spinoza and some moderns,) must be wholly separate from any power of will and choice; which, in respect of any excellency and perfection, or indeed to any common sense, is the very same thing as no intelligence at all.

Now, that the self-existent being is not such a blind and unintelligent necessity, but in the most proper sense an understanding and really active being, does not indeed so obviously and directly appear to us by considerations a priori; because (through the imperfection of our faculties) we know not wherein intelligence consists, nor can see the immediate and necessary connexion of it with self-existence, as we can that of eternity, infinity, unity, &c. But, a posteriori, almost every thing in the world demonstrates to us this great truth, and affords undeniable arguments to prove that the world, and all things therein, are the effects of an intelligent and knowing cause.

And 1st. Proved from the degrees of perfection in things, and the order of causes and effects. Since in general there are manifestly in things various kinds of powers, and very different excellencies and degrees of perfection, it must needs be, that, in the order of causes and effects, the cause must always be more excellent than the effect: and consequently the self-existent being, whatever that be supposed to be, must of necessity (being the original of all things) contain in itself the sum and highest degree of all the perfections of all things: not because that which is self-existent must therefore have all possible perfections; (for this, though most certainly true in itself, yet cannot be so easily demonstrated a priori;) but because it is impossible that any effect should have any perfection, which was not in the cause. For, if it had, then that perfection would be caused by nothing; which is a plain contradiction. Now an unintelligent being, it is evident, cannot be indued with all the perfections of all things in the world; because intelligence is one of those perfections. All things, therefore, cannot arise from an unintelligent original; and consequently the self-existent being, must, of necessity, be intelligent.

There is no possibility for an atheist to avoid the force of this argument any other way than by asserting one of these two things: either that there is no intelligent being at all in the universe; or that intelligence is no distinct perfection, but merely a composition of figure and motion, as colour and sounds are vulgarly supposed to be. Of the former of these assertions, every man’s own consciousness is an abundant confutation. For they who contend that beasts are mere machines, have yet never presumed to conjecture that men are so too. And that the latter assertion (in which the main strength of atheism lies,) is most absurd and impossible, shall be shown presently; though if that assertion could be supposed to be true, yet even still it would unavoidably follow, that the self-existent being must needs be intelligent; as shall be proved in my fourth argument upon this present head. In the meantime, that the assertion itself, viz. that intelligence is not any distinct perfection, properly speaking, but merely a composition of unintelligent figure and motion; that this assertion, I say, is most absurd and impossible, will appear from what shall be said in the ensuing argument.

2dly. From the intelligence that is in created beings. Since in men in particular there is undeniably that power, which we call thought, intelligence, consciousness, perception or knowledge; there must of necessity either have been from eternity, without any original cause at all, an infinite succession of men, whereof no one has had a necessary, but every one a dependent and communicated being; or else these beings, indued with perception and consciousness, must at some time or other have arisen purely out of that which had no such quality as sense, perception, or consciousness; or else they must have been produced by some intelligent superior being. There never was nor can be any atheist whatsoever, that can deny but one of these three suppositions must be the truth. If, therefore, the two former can be proved to be false and impossible, the latter must be owned to be demonstrably true. Now, that the first is impossible, is evident from what has been already said in proof of the second general head of this discourse; and that the second is likewise impossible, may be thus demonstrated: If perception, or intelligence, be a distinct quality or perfection, and not a mere effect or composition of unintelligent figure and motion, then beings indued with perception or consciousness can never have arisen purely out of that which had no such quality as perception or consciousness; because nothing can ever give to another any perfection, which it hath not either actually in itself, or at least in a higher degree. But perception or intelligence is a distinct quality or perfection, and not a mere effect or composition of unintelligent figure and motion.

First: If perception or intelligence be any real distinct quality, or perfection, and not a mere effect or composition of unintelligent figure and motion, then beings indued with perception or consciousness can never possibly have arisen purely out of that which itself had no such quality as perception or consciousness; because nothing can ever give to another any perfection which it hath not either actually in itself, or at least in a higher degree. This is very evident; because, if any thing could give to another any perfection which it has not itself, that perfection would be caused absolutely by nothing; which is a plain contradiction. If any one here replies, (as Mr Gildon has done

Oracles of Reason, p. 186. See also my Letter to Mr Dodwell, with several answers and replies concerning the natural immortality of the soul.

Proposition IX. That the self-existent being must be a free agent.

IX. Proposition IX. That the self-existent being must be a free agent. The self-existent and original cause of all things, is not a necessary agent but a being indued with liberty and choice. The contrary to this proposition is the foundation and the sum of what Spinoza and his followers have asserted concerning the nature of God. What reasons or arguments they have offered for their opinion I shall have occasion to consider briefly in my proof of the proposition itself. The truth of which appears—

1st. This a necessary consequent of the foregoing proposition. In that it is a necessary consequence of the foregoing proposition. For intelligence without liberty (as I there hinted) is really (in respect of any power, excellence, or perfection,) no intelligence at all: It is indeed a consciousness, but it is merely a passive one; a consciousness, not of acting, but purely of being acted upon. Without liberty, nothing can, in any tolerable propriety of speech, be said to be an agent, or cause of any thing. For to act necessarily, is really and properly not to act at all, but only to be acted upon. What therefore Spinoza and his followers assert, concerning the production of all things

Ex necessitate divinæ naturæ, infinita infinitis modis sequi debent—Ethic. par. I. prop. 16.

Proposition X. That the self-existent being must be all-powerful.

X. Proposition X. That the self-existent being must be all-powerful. The self-existent being, the supreme cause of all things, must of necessity have infinite power.—This proposition is evident, and undeniable. For since nothing (as has been already proved,) can possibly be self-existent, besides himself; and consequently all things in the universe were made by him, and are entirely dependent upon him; and all the powers of all things are derived from him, and must therefore be perfectly subject and subordinate to him; it is manifest that nothing can make any difficulty or resistance to the execution of his will, but he must of necessity have absolute power to do every thing he pleases, with the perfectest ease, and in the perfectest manner, at once, and in a moment, whenever he wills it. The descriptions the scripture gives of this power, are so lively and emphatical, that I cannot forbear mentioning one or two passages. Thus, Job ix. 4:—“He is wise in heart, and mighty in strength;—which removeth the mountains, and they know it not; which overturneth them in his anger. Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble. Which commandeth the sun, and it riseth not; and sealeth up the stars. Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waters of the sea. Which doth great things past finding out, yea and wonders without number.” Again: “Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering. He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing. He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds, and the cloud is not rent under them. The pillars of Heaven tremble, and are astonished at his reproof. He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smiteth through the proud. Lo, these are part of his ways, but how little a portion is heard of him? But the thunder of his power, who can understand?” Job xxvi. 6. So likewise, Isaiah xl. 12:—“Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out Heaven with the span; and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure; and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance. Behold, the nations are as a drop of the bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance; behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing. All nations before him are as nothing, and they are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity. To whom then will ye liken God, or what likeness will ye compare unto him?” But I do not urge authority to the persons I am at present speaking to. It is sufficiently evident, from reason, that the supreme cause must of necessity be infinitely powerful. The only question is, what the true meaning of what we call infinite power is; and to what things it must be understood to extend, or not to extend.

Now, in determining this question, there are some propositions about which there is no dispute; which therefore, I shall but just mention. As,

1st, Of working contradictions. That infinite power reaches to all possible things, but cannot be said to extend to the working any thing which implies a contradiction: As, that a thing should be and not be at the same time; that the same thing should be made and not be made, or have been and not have been; that twice two should not make four, or that that which is necessarily false should be true: The reason whereof is plain; because the power of making a thing to be, at the same time that it is not, is only a power of doing that which is nothing, that is, no power at all.

2dly. Or natural and moral evils. Infinite power cannot be said to extend to those things which imply natural imperfection in the being to whom such power is ascribed; as, that it should destroy its own being, weaken itself, or the like. These things imply natural imperfection, and are by all men confessed to be such as cannot possibly belong to the necessary self-existent being. There are also other things which imply imperfection in another kind, viz. moral imperfection; concerning which, atheism takes away the subject of the question, by denying wholly the difference of moral good and evil; and therefore I shall omit the consideration of them until I come to deduce the moral attributes of God.

But some other instances there are, in the question about the extent of infinite power, wherein the principal difference between us and the atheists, (next to the question, whether the supreme cause be an intelligent being, or not,) does in great measure consist. As,

1st. Of the power of creating matter. That infinite power includes a power of creating matter. This has been constantly denied by all atheists, both ancient and modern, and as constantly affirmed by all who believe the being, and have just notions of the attributes of God. The only reason which the atheists have, or can pretend to allege, for their opinion, is, that the thing is in its own nature absolutely impossible. But how does it appear to be impossible? Why, only because they are not able to comprehend how it can be: For, to reduce it to a contradiction, (which is the alone real impossibility,) this they are by no means able to do. For, to say that something which once was not, may since have begun to exist, is neither directly, nor by any consequence whatsoever, to assert that that which is not, can be, while it is not; or that that which is, can not be, while it is. It is true, we who have been used to converse only with generations and corruptions, and never saw any thing made or created, but only formed or framed, are apt to endeavour to conform our idea of creation to that of formation, and to imagine, that as in all formations there is some pre-existing matter, out of which a thing is formed, so in creation there must be considered a pre-existing nothing, out of which, as out of a real material cause, a thing is created; which looks, indeed, very like a contradiction. But this is only a confusion of ideas, just like children’s imagining that darkness is some real thing, which in the morning is driven away by the light, or transformed into it; whereas the true notion of creation is not a forming something out of nothing, as out of a material cause, but only a bringing something into being that before had no being at all, or a causing something to exist now that did not exist before, or which, without this cause, would not have existed; which no man can ever reduce to a contradiction, any more than the formation of any thing into a shape which it had not before, can be reduced to a contradiction.

But further: The creation of matter is a thing not only not impossible in itself, but what, moreover, even by bare reason, is demonstrated to be true. For it is a contradiction (as I have shown above) to suppose matter necessarily existing.

2dly. Of the power of creating immaterial cogitative substances. It is possible to infinite power to create any immaterial cogitative substance, indued with a power of beginning motion, and with a liberty of will or choice. This also has been always denied by all atheists; and, because it is a proposition of the greatest consequence to religion and morality, therefore I shall be particular in endeavouring the proof of the several parts of it.

First, It is possible to infinite power to create any immaterial cogitative substance. That there can be such a thing as a cogitative substance, that is, a substance indued with consciousness and thought, is granted by all, because every man’s own experience convinces him that he himself is such a substance. Further: That if there be, or can be, any such thing as immaterial substances, then it is most reasonable to believe that such substances as are indued with consciousness and thought [properties the farthest distant from the known properties of matter, and the most unlike them that can possibly be imagined,] are those immaterial substances; this also will, I think, be granted by all men. The only point, therefore, that remains to be proved, is, that immaterial substances are not impossible, or, that a substance immaterial is not a contradictory notion. Now, whoever asserts that it is contradictory, must affirm, that whatever is not matter is nothing, and that to say any thing exists which is not matter, is saying that there exists something which is nothing; which, in other words, is plainly this: That whatever we have not an idea of, is nothing, and impossible to be; for there is no other way to reduce immaterial substance to a contradiction, but by supposing immaterial to signify the same as having no existence; and there is no possible way to prove that, but by saying we have no idea of it; and, therefore, it neither has nor can have any existence. By which same argument, material substance will in like manner be a contradiction; for of that also, (viz. of the substance to which solidity belongs,) we have no idea. But supposing it were true (as it is indeed most false,) that we had a clearer idea of the substance of matter, than we have of immaterial substance, still by the same argument, wherewith an atheist will prove immaterial substance to be impossible, a man born blind may demonstrate irrefragably that light or colour is an impossible and contradictory notion, because it is not a sound or a smell; for the power of seeing light or colour is, to a man born blind, altogether as incomprehensible and absolutely beyond the reach of all his ideas, as either the operations and perceptions, or even the simple essence of a pure immaterial substance of spirit, can be to any of us. If, therefore, the blind man’s want of ideas be not a sufficient proof of the impossibility of light or colour, how comes our bare want of ideas to be a demonstration of the impossibility of the being of immaterial substances? A blind man, they will say, has testimony of the existence of light: Very true; so also have we of the existence of immaterial substances. But there is this further advantage on our side in the comparison, that a blind man, excepting the testimony of others, finds not, by any reasoning within himself, the least likelihood or probability, no not in the lowest possible degree, that there can be any such thing as light or colour; but we, besides testimony, have great and strong arguments, both from experience and reason, that there are such things as immaterial substances, though we have no knowledge of their simple essence; as indeed of the substance even of matter itself (its simple substance, considered as abstract from, and as the foundation of that essential property of solidity,) we have no idea, (for to say that extension is the substance of matter, is the same way of thinking, as to say that existence, or that duration, is the substance of matter.) We have, I say, great and strong arguments both from experience and reason, that there are such things as immaterial substances, though we have no idea of their simple essence; even the very first and most universal principle of gravitation itself, in all matter, since it is ever proportional, not at all to the surfaces of bodies, or of their particles in any possible supposition, but exactly to the solid content of bodies, it is evident it cannot be caused by matter acting upon the surfaces of matter, which is all it can do, but must (either immediately or mediately) be caused by something which continually penetrates its solid substance. But in animals, which have a power of self-motion, and in the perfecter sorts of them, which have still higher faculties, the thing is yet more evident; for we see and feel, and observe daily in ourselves and others, such powers and operations and perceptions, as undeniably evince themselves either to be the properties of immaterial substances; or else it will follow, that matter is something, of whose essential powers (as well as of its substance itself,) we have altogether as little idea as we have of immaterial beings; and then how are immaterial substances more impossible than material? But of this, more hereafter.

From Of the immateriality of human souls. what has been said on this head, it will be easy to answer all the objections, that have been brought by any atheists against the notion of human souls being immaterial substances, and distinct from body. See my letter to Mr Dodwell, with the four defences of it. For since it is possible there may be such things as immaterial substances; and since, if any such substance can be, there is all the reason in the world to believe that conscious and thinking substance is such, these properties being the most remote from the known properties of matter, that are possible to be conceived; the foundation of all the objections against the immateriality of the soul is entirely taken away. I shall not here tarry to consider the objections in particular, which have been often and fully answered by learned pens, but shall only mention one, on which all the rest depend, and to which they may all be reduced; and it is this:

—Si immortalis natura animæ est, Et sentire potest secreta a corpore nostro; Quinque (ut opinor) eam faciendum est sensibus auctam: Nec ratione alia nosmet proponere nobis, Possumus infernas animas Acheronte vagare. Pictores itaque; et scriptorum secla priora. Sic animas introduxerunt sensibus auctas. At neque seorsum oculi, &c.— Nec sensus ipsi seorsum consistere possunt Naribus atque manu, atque oculis, atque auribus, atque Lingua; nec per se possunt sentire, nec esse.

Lucret. lib. 3.

Ὄσων γάρ ἐστιν ἀρχῶν ἐνέργεια ἡ σωματικὴ δῆλον ὅτι τᾶυτας ἄνευ σώματος ἀδύνατον ὑσάρχειν οἷον βαδίζειν ἄνευ ποδῶν.—Aristot.

Proposition XI. That the supreme cause and author of all things must of necessity be infinitely wise.

XI. Proposition XI. That the supreme cause and author of all things must of necessity be infinitely wise. The supreme cause and author of all things must of necessity be infinitely wise. This proposition is evidently consequent upon those that have already been proved; and those being established, this, as admitting no further dispute, needs not to be largely insisted upon. For nothing is more evident than that an infinite, omnipresent, intelligent being, must know perfectly all things that are; and that he who alone is self-existent and eternal, the sole cause and author of all things, from whom alone all the powers of all things are derived, and on whom they continually depend, must also know perfectly all the consequences of those powers, that is, all possibilities of things to come, and what in every respect is best and wisest to be done: And that, having infinite power, he can never be controlled or prevented from doing what he so knows to be fittest. From all which, it manifestly follows, that every effect of the supreme cause must be the product of infinite wisdom: More particularly; the supreme being, because he is infinite, must be everywhere present; and because he is an infinite mind or intelligence, therefore wherever he is, his knowledge is, which is inseparable from his being, and must therefore be infinite likewise; and wherever his infinite knowledge is, it must necessarily have a full and perfect prospect of all things, and nothing can be concealed from its inspection: he includes and surrounds every thing with his boundless presence, and penetrates every part of their substance with his all-seeing eye: so that the inmost nature and essence of all things are perfectly naked and open to his view, and even the deepest thoughts of intelligent beings themselves manifest in his sight. Further, all things being not only present to him, but also entirely depending upon him, and having received both their being itself and all their powers and faculties from him; it is manifest that, as he knows all things that are, so he must likewise know all possibilities of things, that is, all effects that can be. For, being himself alone self-existent, and having alone given to all things all the powers and faculties they are indued with; it is evident he must of necessity know perfectly what all and each of those powers and faculties, which are derived wholly from himself, can possibly produce: and seeing, at one boundless view, all the possible compositions and divisions, variations and changes, circumstances and dependences of things; all their possible relations one to another, and their dispositions or fitnesses to certain and respective ends,—he must, without possibility of error, know exactly what is best and properest in every one of the infinite possible cases or methods of disposing things; and understand perfectly how to order and direct the respective means, to bring about what he so knows to be, in its kind, or in the whole, the best and fittest in the end. This is what we mean by infinite wisdom. And having before shown, (which indeed is also evident of itself,) that the supreme cause is moreover all-powerful; so that he can no more be prevented by force or opposition, than he can be hindered by error or mistake, from effecting always what is absolutely fittest and wisest to be done: it follows undeniably, that he is actually and effectually, in the highest and most complete sense, infinitely wise; and that the world, and all things therein, must be and are effects of infinite wisdom. This is demonstration à priori. The proof à posteriori, of the infinite wisdom of God, from the consideration of the exquisite perfection and consummate excellency of his works, is no less strong and undeniable. But I shall not enlarge upon this argument; because it has often already been accurately and strongly urged, to the everlasting shame and confusion of the atheists, by the ablest and learnedest writers both of ancient and modern times. See Galen de Usu Partium; Tully de Natura Deorum; Boyle, of Final Causes; MrRay, of the Wisdom of God in the Creation; Mr Derham’s Physico-Theology. &c. I shall here observe only this one thing; that the older the world grows, and the deeper men inquire into things, and the more accurate observations they make, and the more and greater discoveries they find out, the stronger this argument continually grows; which is a certain evidence of its being founded in truth.

Opinionum commenta delet dies, naturæ judicia confirmat.—Cic.

Proposition XII. The supreme author of all things must be infinitely good, just, and true.

XII. Proposition XII. The supreme author of all things must be infinitely good, just, and true. Lastly; the supreme cause and author of all things must of necessity be a being of infinite goodness, justice, and truth, and all other moral perfections, such as become the supreme governor and judge of the world. That there are different relations of things one towards another, is as certain as that there are different things in the world. That from these different relations of different things there necessarily arises an agreement or disagreement of some things to others, or a fitness or unfitness of the application of different things or different relations, one to another, is likewise as certain as that there is any difference in the nature of things, or that different things do exist. Further, that there is a fitness or suitableness of certain circumstances to certain persons, and an unsuitableness of others, founded in the nature of things and in the qualifications of persons, antecedent to will and to all arbitrary or positive appointment whatsoever, must unavoidably be acknowledged by every one who will not affirm that it is equally fit and suitable, in the nature and reason of things, that an innocent being should be extremely and eternally miserable as that it should be free from such misery. There is, therefore, such a thing as fitness and unfitness, eternally, necessarily, and unchangeably in the nature and reason of things. Now, what these relations of things, absolutely and necessarily are in themselves; that also they appear to be, to the understanding of all intelligent beings except those only who understand things to be what they are not, that is, whose understandings are either very imperfect or very much depraved; and by this understanding or knowledge of the natural and necessary relations of things, the actions likewise of all intelligent beings are constantly directed, (which, by the way, is the true ground and foundation of all morality,) unless their will be corrupted by particular interest or affection, or swayed by some unreasonable and prevailing lust. The supreme cause, therefore, and author of all things, since (as has already been proved,) he must of necessity have infinite knowledge, and the perfection of wisdom, so that it is absolutely impossible he should err, or be in any respect ignorant of the true relations and fitness or unfitness of things, or be by any means deceived or imposed upon herein; and since he is likewise self-existent, absolutely independent and all-powerful; so that, having no want of any thing, it is impossible his will should be influenced by any wrong affection, and having no dependence, it is impossible his power should be limited by any superior strength,—it is evident he must of necessity, (meaning, not a necessity of fate, but such a moral necessity as I before said was consistent with the most perfect liberty,) do always what he knows to be fittest to be done; that is, he must act always according to the strictest rules of infinite goodness, justice, and truth, and all other moral perfections. In particular, the supreme cause must, in the first place, be infinitely good; that is, he must have an unalterable disposition to do and to communicate good or happiness; because, being himself necessarily happy in the eternal enjoyment of his own infinite perfections, he cannot possibly have any other motives to make any creatures at all, but only that he may communicate to them his own perfections, according to their different capacities, arising from that variety of natures which it was fit for infinite wisdom to produce; and according to their different improvements, arising from that liberty which is essentially necessary to the constitution of intelligent and active beings. That he must be infinitely good, appears likewise further from hence; that, being necessarily all-sufficient, he must consequently be infinitely removed from all malice and envy, and from all other possible causes or temptations of doing evil, which, it is evident, can only be effects of want and weakness, of imperfection or depravation. Again, the supreme cause and author of all things, must in like manner be infinitely just; because, the rule of equity being nothing else but the very nature of things, and their necessary relations one to another; and the execution of justice being nothing else but a suiting the circumstances of things to the qualifications of persons, according to the original fitness and agreeableness which I have before shown to be necessarily in nature, antecedent to will and to all positive appointment, it is manifest that he who knows perfectly this rule of equity, and necessarily judges of things as they are; who has complete power to execute justice according to that knowledge, and no possible temptation to deviate in the least therefrom; who can neither be imposed upon by any deceit, nor swayed by any bias, nor awed by any power,—must, of necessity, do always that which is right, without iniquity, and without partiality; without prejudice, and without respect of persons. Lastly, that the supreme cause and author of all things must be true and faithful, in all his declarations and all his promises, is most evident. For the only possible reason of falsifying, is either rashness or forgetfulness, inconstancy or impotency, fear of evil, or hope of gain; from all which

Ὀυκ ἔστιν οὖ ἓνεκα ἂν θεὸς ψέυδοιτο.—Κομιδῆ ἅρα ὁ θεὸς ἁπλοῦν καὶ ἀληθὲς ἔν τε ἔργῳ καὶ ἐν λύγῳ. Καὶ οὔτε ἄλλους ἐξαπατᾶ, οὔτε κατὰ φαντασίας, οὔτε κατὰ λόγους, οὔτε κατὰ σημείων πομπὰς, οὔθ ὓπαρ οὔδ᾽ ὄναρ.—Plato de Repub. lib. 2, sub finem.

TO THE

MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,

THOMAS,

LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, AND PRIMATE OF ALL ENGLAND;

SIR HENRY ASHURST, BARONET;
SIR JOHN ROTHERAM, KNIGHT, SERGEANT AT LAW;
JOHN EVELIN, ESQ.

TRUSTEES APPOINTED BY THE HONOURABLE ROBERT BOYLE, ESQ.

THIS DISCOURSE

IS HUMBLY DEDICATED.

THE PREFACE.

I SHOULD not have presumed to publish these papers in vindication of natural and revealed religion, after so many excellent discourses already written upon that subject, had I not thought myself obliged to it, in order to pursue more fully the design of the honourable founder of this lecture, and to answer the expectation of the most reverend and the honourable trustees appointed by him. The honourable Robert Boyle, Esq. was a person no less zealously solicitous for the propagation of true religion, and the practice of piety and virtue, than diligent and successful in improving experimental philosophy, and enlarging our knowledge of nature; and it was his settled opinion, that the advancement and increase of natural knowledge would always be of service to the cause and interest of true religion, in opposition to atheists and unbelievers of all sorts. Accordingly he, in his life-time, made excellent use of his own observations to this purpose in all his writings, and made provision after his death for carrying on the same design perpetually. In pursuance of which end I endeavoured, in my former discourse, to strengthen and confirm the arguments which prove to us the being and attributes of God, partly by metaphysical reasoning, and partly from the discoveries (principally those that have been lately made,) in natural philosophy. And in the present treatise I have attempted, in a plainer and easier method, to establish the unalterable obligations of natural religion, and the truth and certainty of the Christian revelation. If what I have said, may, in any measure, promote the interest of true religion in this sceptical and profane age, and answer the design for which this lecture was founded, I have my end.

It may perhaps be expected, that I should take some notice of certain remarks which have been published upon my former sermons. Had the author of those remarks entered into the merits of the cause, or offered any considerable reasons in opposition to what I had laid down, I should have thought myself obliged to give him a particular answer; but since his book is made up chiefly of railing and gross misconstructions, and all that he pretends to say, by way of argument, depends entirely upon supposition of the truth of the Cartesian hypothesis, which the best mathematicians in the world have demonstrated to be false, I presume it may be sufficient to show here the insincerity of that author, and the weakness of his reasoning, by a few brief observations.

The only argument he alleges against me, in his whole book, is this: that if we know not distinctly what the essence of God,

Note—That in this whole question, the word essence is not to be taken in the proper metaphysical sense of the word, as signifying that by which a thing is what it is; for in that sense the attributes of God do constitute his essence; and solidity, or impenetrability, is the essence of matter. But essence is all along to be understood as signifying here the same with substance.

To which I answer: It is plain we know not the essences of things by intuition, but can only reason about them from what we know of their different properties or attributes. Now, from the demonstrable attributes of God, and from the known properties of matter, we have as unanswerable reasons to convince and satisfy us that their essences are entirely different, though we know not distinctly what those essences are, as our faculties can afford us, in judging of any the certainest things whatsoever. For instance: the demonstrable attributes of God are, that he is self-existent, independent, eternal, infinite, unchangeable, incorruptible, intelligent, free, all-powerful, wise, just, and good: The known properties of matter are, that it is not necessary or self-existent, but dependent, finite; (nay, that it fills but a few very small and inconsiderable portions of space,) that it is divisible, passive, unintelligent, and consequently incapable of any active powers. Now nothing can be more certain and evident, than that the substances to which these incompatible attributes or properties belong, or the essences from which they flow, are entirely different one from the other, though we do not distinctly know what the inmost substances or essences themselves are. If any man will think a mere hypothesis (the Cartesian or any other,) concerning the inmost nature of substances to be a more satisfactory discovery of the different essences of things than we can attain by reasoning thus from their demonstrable properties, and will choose rather to draw fond consequences from such hypotheses and fictions founded upon no proof at all, than to make use of such philosophy as is grounded only upon clear reason or good experiments,—I know no help for it, but he must be permitted to enjoy his opinion quietly.

HAVING, The introduction. in a former discourse, endeavoured to lay firmly the first foundations of religion, in the certainty of the existence and of the attributes of God, by proving, severally and distinctly:—

That something must needs have existed from eternity, and how great soever the difficulties are, which perplex the conceptions and apprehensions we attempt to frame of an eternal duration, yet they neither ought nor can raise in any man’s mind any doubt or scruple concerning the truth of the assertion itself that something has really been eternal:

That there must have existed from eternity some one unchangeable and independent being, because, to suppose an eternal succession of merely dependent beings, proceeding one from another in an endless progression, without any original independent cause at all, is supposing things that have in their own nature no necessity of existing, to be from eternity caused or produced by nothing; which is the very same absurdity and express contradiction as to suppose them produced by nothing at any determinate time:

That that unchangeable and independent being, which has existed from eternity, without any external cause of its existence, must be self-existent, that is, necessarily-existing:

That it must of necessity be infinite or everywhere present; a being most simple, uniform, invariable, indivisible, incorruptible, and infinitely removed from all such imperfections as are the known qualities and inseparable properties of the material world:

That it must of necessity be but one; because, to suppose two, or more, different self-existent independent principles may be reduced to a direct contradiction:

That it must necessarily be an intelligent being:

That it must be a free and voluntary, not a necessary agent:

That this being must of necessity have infinite power, and that in this attribute is included, particularly, a possibility of creating or producing things, and also a possibility of communicating to creatures the power of beginning motion, and a possibility of induing them with liberty or freedom of will; which freedom of will is not inconsistent with any of the divine attributes:

That he must of necessity be infinitely wise:

And lastly, that he must necessarily be a being of infinite goodness, justice, and truth, and all other moral perfections; such as become the supreme governor and judge of the world.

It remains now, in order to complete my design of proving and establishing the truth and excellency of the whole superstructure of our most holy religion, that I proceed, upon this foundation of the certainty of the being and attributes of God, to demonstrate in the next place the unalterable obligations of natural religion, and the certainty of divine revelation, in opposition to the vain arguings of certain vicious and profane men, who, merely upon account of their incredulity, would be thought to be strict adherers to reason, and sincere and diligent inquirers into truth; when, indeed, on the contrary, there is but too much cause to fear that they are not at all sincerely and really desirous to be satisfied in the true state of things, but only seek, under the pretence and cover of infidelity, to excuse their vices and debaucheries which they are so strongly inslaved to that they cannot prevail with themselves upon any account to forsake them: And yet a rational submitting to such truths, as just evidence and unanswerable reason would induce them to believe, must necessarily make them uneasy under those vices, and self condemned in the practice of them. It remains therefore, (I say) in order to finish the design I proposed to myself, of establishing the truth and excellency of our holy religion, in opposition to all such vain pretenders to reason as these, that I proceed at this time, by a continuation of the same method of arguing, by which I before demonstrated the being and attributes of God, to prove distinctly the following propositions:—

I. That the same necessary and eternal different relations that different things bear one to another, and the same consequent fitness or unfitness of the application of different things or different relations one to another, with regard to which the will of God always and necessarily does determine itself to choose to act only what is agreeable to justice, equity, goodness, and truth, in order to the welfare of the whole universe, ought likewise constantly to determine the wills of all subordinate rational beings, to govern all their actions by the same rules, for the good of the public in their respective stations: That is, these eternal and necessary differences of things make it fit and reasonable for creatures so to act: they cause it to be their duty, or lay an obligation upon them, so to do, even separate from the consideration of these rules being the positive will or command of God, and also antecedent to any respect or regard, expectation or apprehension, of any particular private and personal advantage or disadvantage, reward or punishment, either present or future, annexed, either by natural consequence, or by positive appointments, to the practising or neglecting those rules.

II. That though these eternal moral obligations are, indeed, of themselves incumbent on all rational beings, even antecedent to the consideration of their being the positive will and command of God, yet that which most strongly confirms, and in practice most effectually and indispensably enforces them upon us, is this, that both from the nature of things, and the perfections of God, and from several other collateral considerations, it appears, that as God is himself necessarily just and good in the exercise of his infinite power in the government of the whole world, so he cannot but likewise positively require that all his rational creatures should in their proportion be so too, in the exercise of each of their powers in their respective spheres: That is, as these eternal moral obligations are really in perpetual force merely from their own nature and the abstract reason of things, so also they are moreover the express and unalterable will, command, and law of God to his creatures, which he cannot but expect should, in obedience to his supreme authority, as well as in compliance with the natural reason of things, be regularly and constantly observed through the whole creation.

III. That, therefore, though these eternal moral obligations are also incumbent, indeed, on all rational creatures, antecedent to any respect of particular reward or punishment, yet they must certainly and necessarily be attended with rewards and punishments; because the same reasons which prove God himself to be necessarily just and good, and the rules of justice, equity, and goodness, to be his unalterable will, law, and command, to all created beings, prove also that he cannot but be pleased with and approve such creatures as imitate and obey him by observing those rules, and be displeased with such as act contrary thereto; and, consequently, that he cannot but some way or other make a suitable difference in his dealings with them, and manifest his supreme power and absolute authority, in finally supporting, maintaining, and vindicating effectually the honour of these his divine laws, as becomes the just and righteous governor and disposer of all things.

IV. That consequently, though, in order to establish this suitable difference between the fruits or effects of virtue and vice, so reasonable in itself, and so absolutely necessary for the vindication of the honour of God, the nature of things and the constitution and order of God’s creation was originally such, that the observance of the eternal rules of justice, equity, and goodness does indeed of itself tend, by direct and natural consequence, to make all creatures happy, and the contrary practice to make them miserable; yet since, through some great and general corruption and depravation, (whencesoever that may have arisen, the particular original whereof could hardly have been known now without revelation;) since, I say, the condition of men in this present state is such, that the natural order of things in this world is an event manifestly perverted, and virtue and goodness are visibly prevented, in great measure, from obtaining their proper and due effects in establishing men’s happiness proportionable to their behaviour and practice; therefore it is absolutely impossible, that the whole view and intention, the original and the final design, of God’s creating such rational beings as men are, and placing them in this globe of earth, as the chief and principal, or indeed (may we not say) the only inhabitants, for whose sake alone this part at least of the creation is evidently fitted up and accommodated; it is absolutely impossible (I say) that the whole of God’s design in all this should be nothing more than to keep up eternally a succession of such short-lived generations of men as at present are, and those in such a corrupt, confused, and disorderly state of things as we see the world is now in, without any due observation of the eternal rules of good and evil, without any clear and remarkable effect of the great and most necessary differences of things, and without any final vindication of the honour and laws of God in the proportionable reward of the best, or punishment of the worst of men. And consequently it is certain and necessary, (even as certain as the moral attributes of God before demonstrated,) that, instead of continuing an eternal succession of new generations in the present form and state of things, there must at some time or other be such a revolution and renovation of things, such a future state of existence of the same persons, as that, by an exact distribution of rewards or punishments therein, all the present disorders and inequalities may be set right, and that the whole scheme of providence, which to us who judge of it by only one small portion of it, seems now so inexplicable and much confused, may appear at its consummation to be a design worthy of infinite wisdom, justice, and goodness.

V. That, though the indispensable necessity of all the great and moral obligations of natural religion, and also the certainty of a future state of rewards and punishments, be thus in general deducible even demonstrably, by a chain of clear and undeniable reasoning, (yet in the present state of the world, by what means soever it came originally to be so corrupted, of which more hereafter,) such is the carelessness, inconsiderateness, and want of attention of the greater part of mankind; so many the prejudices and false notions imbibed by evil education; so strong and violent the unreasonable lusts, appetites, and desires of sense; and so great the blindness, introduced by superstitious opinions, vicious customs, and debauched practices, through the world,—that very few are able, in reality and effect, to discover these things clearly and plainly for themselves; but men have great need of particular teaching, and much instruction, to convince them of the truth and certainty, and importance of these things; to give them a due sense, and clear and just apprehensions concerning them; and to bring them effectually to the practice of the plainest and most necessary duties.

VI. That, though in almost every age there have indeed been in the heathen world some wise, and brave, and good men, who have made it their business to study and practice these things themselves, and to teach and exhort others to do the like, who seem therefore to have been raised up by providence as instruments to reprove in some measure, and put some kind of check to the extreme superstition and wickedness of the nations wherein they lived: Yet none of these have ever been able to reform the world with any considerably great and universal success; because they have been but very few that have in earnest set themselves about this excellent work; and they that have indeed sincerely done it have themselves been entirely ignorant of some doctrines, and very doubtful and uncertain of others, absolutely necessary for the bringing about that great end; and those things which they have been certain of and in good measure understood, they have not been able to prove and explain clearly enough, and those that they have been able both to prove and explain by sufficiently clear reasoning, they have not yet had authority enough to enforce and inculcate upon men’s minds with so strong an impression as to influence and govern the general practice of the world.

VII. That therefore there was plainly wanting a divine revelation to recover mankind out of their universally degenerate estate, into a state suitable to the original excellency of their nature; which divine revelation, both the necessities of men and their natural notions of God gave them reasonable ground to expect and hope for, as appears from the acknowledgments which the best and wisest of the heathen philosophers themselves have made, of their sense of the necessity and want of such a revelation, and from their expressions of the hopes they had entertained that God would some time or other vouchsafe it unto them.

VIII. That there is no other religion now in the world, but the Christian, that has any just pretence or tolerable appearance of reason to be esteemed such a divine revelation; and therefore if Christianity be not true, there is no revelation of the will of God at all made to mankind.

IX. That the Christian religion, considered in its primitive simplicity, and as taught in the Holy Scriptures, has all the marks and proofs of its being actually and truly a divine revelation that any divine revelation, supposing it was true, could reasonably be imagined or desired to have.

X. That the practical duties which the Christian religion enjoins, are all such as are most agreeable to our natural notions of God, and most perfective of the nature, and conducive to the happiness and well-being of men: That is, Christianity,—even in this single respect, as containing alone, and in one consistent system, all the wise and good precepts (and those improved, augmented, and exalted to the highest degree of perfection,) that ever were taught singly and scatteredly, and many times but very corruptly, by the several schools of the philosophers; and this without any mixture of the fond, absurd, and superstitious practices of any of those philosophers,—ought to be embraced and practised by all rational and considering deists, who will act consistently, and steadily pursue the consequences of their own principles; as at least the best scheme and sect of philosophy that ever was set up in the world, and highly probable, even though it had no external evidence, to be of divine original.

XI. That the motives, by which the Christian religion enforces the practice of these duties, are such as are must suitable to the excellent wisdom of God, and most answerable to the natural expectations of men.

XII. That the peculiar manner and circumstances with which it enjoins these duties and urges these motives, are exactly consonant to the dictates of sound reason, or the unprejudiced light of nature, and most wisely perfective of it.

XIII. That all the [credenda, or] doctrines, which the true, simple, and uncorrupted Christian religion teaches,—(that is, not only those plain doctrines which it requires to be believed as fundamental and of necessity to eternal salvation, but even all the doctrines which it teaches as matters of truths,)—are, though indeed many of them not discoverable by bare reason unassisted with revelation, yet, when discovered by revelation, apparently most agreeable to sound unprejudiced reason, have every one of them a natural tendency, and a direct and powerful influence, to reform men’s lives and correct their manners, and do together make up an infinitely more consistent and rational scheme of belief than any that the wisest of the ancient philosophers ever did, or the cunningest of modern unbelievers can invent or contrive.

XIV. That as this revelation, to the judgment of right and sober reason, appears even of itself highly credible and probable, and abundantly recommends itself in its native simplicity, merely by its own intrinsic goodness and excellency, to the practice of the most rational and considering men, who are desirous in all their actions to have satisfaction, and comfort, and good hope within themselves, from the conscience of what they do; so it is moreover positively and directly proved to be actually and immediately sent to us from God, by the many infallible signs and miracles which the Author of it worked publicly as the evidence of his divine commission, by the exact completion both of the prophecies that went before concerning him, and of those that he himself delivered concerning things that were to happen after, and by the testimony of his followers, which in all its circumstances was the most credible, certain, and convincing evidence, that was ever given to any matter of fact in the world.

XV. And lastly, that they who will not, by such arguments and proofs as these, be convinced of the truth and certainty of the Christian religion, and be persuaded to make it the rule and guide of all their actions, would not be convinced, (so far as to influence their hearts, and reform their lives,) by any other evidence whatsoever; no, not though one should rise on purpose from the dead to endeavour to convince them.

I might here, Of the several sorts of deists. before I enter upon the particular proof of these several propositions, justly be allowed to premise, that, having now to deal with another sort of men than those against whom my former discourse was directed, and being consequently in some parts of this treatise to make use of some other kinds of arguments than those which the nature of that discourse permitted and required, the same demonstrative force of reasoning, and even mathematical certainty, which in the main argument was there easy to be obtained, ought not here to be expected; but that such moral evidence, or mixed proofs, from circumstances and testimony, as most matters of fact are only capable of, and wise and honest men are always satisfied with, ought to be accounted sufficient in the present case: Because all the principles indeed upon which atheists attempt to build their schemes, are such as may, by plain force of reason, and undeniably demonstrative argumentations, be reduced to express and direct contradictions. But deists pretend to own all the principles of reason, and would be thought to deny nothing but what depends entirely on testimony and evidence of matter of fact, which they think they can easily evade.

But, if we examine things to the bottom, we shall find that the matter does not in reality lie here. For I believe there are in the world, at least in any part of the world where the Christian religion is in any tolerable purity professed, very few such deists as will truly stand to all the principles of unprejudiced reason, and sincerely, both in profession and practice, own all the obligations of natural religion, and yet oppose Christianity merely upon account of their not being satisfied with the strength of the evidence of matter of fact. A constant and sincere observance of all the laws of reason and obligations of natural religion, will unavoidably lead a man to Christianity, if Christianity be fairly proposed to him in its natural simplicity and he has due opportunities of examining things and will steadily pursue the consequences of his own principles. And all others, who pretend to be deists without coming up to this, can have no fixed and settled principles at all, upon which they can either argue or act consistently, but must of necessity sink into downright atheism, (and consequently fall under the force of the former arguments,) as may appear by considering the several sorts of them.

1. Of the first sort of deists: And of Providence. Some men would be thought to be deists, because they pretend to believe the existence of an eternal, infinite, independent, intelligent being; and, to avoid the name of Epicurean atheists, teach also that this supreme being made the world: though

Omnis enim per se divûm natura necesse est Immortali ævo summa cum pace fruatur. Semota a nostris rebus, sejunctaque longe. Nam privata dolore omni, privata periclis, Ipsa suis pollens opibus, nihil, indiga nostri, Nec bene promeritis capitur, nec tangitur ira.

Lucret. lib. 1.

Τὸ μακάριον καὶ ἄφθαρτον, οὔτε αὐτὸ πράγματα ἔχει, οὔτε ἄλλῳ παρέχει· ὥστε οὔτε ἀργαῖς, οὔτε χάρισι συνέχεται.—Laert. in Vita Epicuri.

Nor is the doctrine of those modern philosophers much different, who ascribe every thing to matter and motion, exclusive of final causes, and speak of God as an intelligentia supramundana; which is the very cant of Epicurus and Lucretius.

Proposition I.

I. Proposition I. The same necessary and eternal different relations that different things bear one to another, and the same consequent fitness or unfitness of the application of different things or different relations one to another, with regard to which the will of God always and necessarily does determine itself, to choose to act only what is agreeable to justice, equity, goodness, and truth, in order to the welfare of the whole universe, ought likewise constantly to determine the wills of all subordinate rational beings, to govern all their actions by the same rules, for the good of the public, in their respective stations; that is, these eternal and necessary differences of things make it fit and reasonable for creatures so to act; They cause it to be their duty, or lay an obligation upon them so to do, even separate from the consideration of these rules being the positive will or command of God, and also antecedent to any respect or regard, expectation or apprehension, of any particular private and personal advantage or disadvantage, reward or punishment, either present or future, annexed either by natural consequence, or by positive appointment, to the practising or neglecting of those rules.

The several parts of this proposition may be proved distinctly, in the following manner.

I. That there are eternal and necessary differences of things. That there are differences of things, and different relations, respects, or proportions, of some things towards others, is as evident and undeniable as that one magnitude or number is greater, equal to, or smaller than another. That from these different relations of different things there necessarily arises an agreement or disagreement of some things with others, or a fitness or unfitness of the application of different things or different relations one to another, is likewise as plain as that there is any such thing as proportion or disproportion in geometry and arithmetic, or uniformity or difformity in comparing together the respective figures of bodies. Further, that there is a fitness or suitableness of certain circumstances to certain persons, and an unsuitableness of others, founded in the nature of things and the qualifications of persons antecedent to all positive appointment whatsoever; also, that, from the different relations of different persons one to another, there necessarily arises a fitness or unfitness of certain manners of behaviour of some persons towards others; is as manifest as that the properties which flow from the essences of different mathematical figures have different congruities or incongruities between themselves, or that, in mechanics, certain weights or powers have very different forces, and different effects one upon another, according to their different distances, or different positions and situations in respect of each other: For instance; that God is infinitely superior to men is as clear as that infinity is larger than a point, or eternity longer than a moment; and it is as certainly fit that men should honour and worship, obey and imitate God, than on the contrary in all their actions endeavour to dishonour and disobey him, as it is certainly true that they have an entire dependence on him, and he, on the contrary, can in no respect receive any advantage from them; and not only so, but also that his will is as certainly and unalterably just and equitable in giving his commands as his power is irresistible in requiring submission to it. Again: It is a thing absolutely and necessarily fitter in itself, that the supreme author and creator of the universe should govern, order, and direct all things to certain and constant regular ends, than that every thing should be permitted to go on at adventures, and produce uncertain effects merely by chance and in the utmost confusion, without any determinate view or design at all. It is a thing manifestly fitter in itself, that the all-powerful governor of the world should do always what is best in the whole, and what tends most to the universal good of the whole creation, than that he should make the whole continually miserable, or that, to satisfy the unreasonable desires of any particular depraved natures, he should at any time suffer the order of the whole to be altered and perverted. Lastly, it is a thing evidently and infinitely more fit, that any one particular innocent and good being should, by the supreme ruler and disposer of all things, be placed and preserved in an easy and happy estate, than that, without any fault or demerit of its own, it should be made extremely, remedilessly, and endlessly miserable. In like manner, in men’s dealing and conversing one with another, it is undeniably more fit, absolutely and in the nature of the thing itself, that all men should endeavour to promote the universal good and welfare of all, than that all men should be continually contriving the ruin and destruction of all. It is evidently more fit, even before all positive bargains and compacts, that men should deal one with another according to the known rules of justice and equity, than that every man, for his own present advantage, should, without scruple, disappoint the most reasonable and equitable expectations of his neighbours, and cheat and defraud, or spoil by violence, all others, without restraint. Lastly, it is, without dispute, more fit and reasonable in itself, that I should preserve the life of an innocent man, that happens at any time to be in my power, or deliver him from any imminent danger, though I have never made him any promise so to do, than that I should suffer him to perish, or take away his life, without any reason or provocation at all.

These The absurdity of those who deny the eternal and necessary differences of things. things are so notoriously plain and self-evident that nothing but the extremest stupidity of mind, corruption of manners, or perverseness of spirit, can possibly make any man entertain the least doubt concerning them. For a man indued with reason, to deny the truth of these things, is the very same thing as if a man that has the use of his sight should, at the same time that he beholds the sun, deny that there is any such thing as light in the world; or as if a man that understands geometry or arithmetic, should deny the most obvious and known proportions of lines or numbers, and perversely contend that the whole is not equal to all its parts, or that a square is not double to a triangle of equal base and height. Any man of ordinary capacity, and unbiassed judgment, plainness, and simplicity, who had never read, and had never been told, that there were men and philosophers who had in earnest asserted, and attempted to prove, that there is no natural and unalterable difference between good and evil, would, at the first hearing, be as hardly persuaded to believe that it could ever really enter into the heart of any intelligent man to deny all natural difference between right and wrong, as he would be to believe that ever there could be any geometer who would seriously and in good earnest lay it down, as a first principle, that a crooked line is as straight as a right one. So that indeed it might justly seem altogether a needless undertaking to attempt to prove and establish the eternal difference of good and evil, had there not appeared certain men, as Mr. Hobbes and some few others, who have presumed, contrary to the plainest and most obvious reason of mankind, to assert, and not without some subtilty endeavoured to prove, that there is no such real difference originally, necessarily, and absolutely in the nature of things; but that all obligation of duty to God arises merely from his absolute irresistible power, and all duty towards men merely from positive compact; and have founded their whole scheme of politics upon that opinion: Wherein, as they have contradicted the judgment of all the wisest and soberest part of mankind, so they have not been able to avoid contradicting themselves also; for, not to mention now, that they have no way to show how compacts themselves come to be obligatory, but by inconsistently owning an eternal original fitness in the thing itself, which I shall have occasion to observe hereafter: Besides, this, I say, if there be naturally and absolutely in things themselves no difference between good and evil, just and, unjust, then, in the state of nature, before any compact be made, it is equally as good, just, and reasonable, for one man to destroy the life of another, not only when it is necessary for his own preservation, but also arbitrarily and without any provocation at all,

See Hobbes de Cive, c. 3. § 4.

Proposition II.

II. Proposition II. Though these eternal moral obligations are indeed of themselves incumbent on all rational beings, even antecedent to the consideration of their being the positive will and command of God, yet that which most strongly confirms, and in practice most effectually and indispensably enforces them upon us, is this; that both from the perfections of God, and the nature of things, and from several other collateral considerations, it appears, that as God is himself necessarily just and good in the exercise of his infinite power in the government of the whole world, so he cannot but likewise positively require that all his rational creatures should in their proportion be so too, in the exercise of each of their powers in their several and respective spheres: That is; as these eternal moral obligations are really in perpetual force, merely from their own nature, and the abstract reason of things; so also they are moreover the express and unalterable will, command, and law of God to his creatures, which he cannot but expect should, in obedience to his supreme authority, as well as in compliance with the natural reason of things, be regularly and constantly observed through the whole creation.

This proposition is very evident, and has little need of being particularly proved.

For 1st. That moral duties are the positive will and command of God, proved from the consideration of the divine attributes. The same reasons which prove to us that God must of necessity be himself infinitely holy, and just, and good, manifestly prove, that it must also be his will, that all his creatures should be so likewise, according to the proportions and capacities of their several natures. That there are eternal and necessary differences of things, agreements and disagreements, proportions and disproportions, fitnesses and unfitnesses of things, absolutely in their own nature, has been before largely demonstrated. That, with regard to these fixed and certain proportions and fitnesses of things, the will of God, which can neither be influenced by any external power, nor imposed upon by any error or deceit, constantly and necessarily determines itself to choose always what in the whole is best and fittest to be done, according to the unalterable rules of justice, equity, goodness, and truth; has likewise been already proved. That the same considerations ought also regularly to determine the wills of all subordinate rational beings, to act in constant conformity to the same eternal rules, has in like manner been shown before. It remains therefore only to prove, that these very same moral rules, which are thus of themselves really obligatory, as being the necessary result of the unalterable reason and nature of things, are moreover the positive will and command of God to all rational creatures; and, consequently, that the wilful transgression or neglect of them, is as truly an insolent contempt of the authority of God, as it is an absurd confounding of the natural reasons and proportions of things. Now this also plainly follows from what has been already laid down: For, the same absolute perfection of the divine nature, which (as has been before shown) makes us certain that God must himself be of necessity infinitely holy, just, and good; makes it equally certain, that he cannot possibly approve iniquity in others. And the same beauty, the same excellency, the same weight and importance of the rules of everlasting righteousness, with regard to which God is always pleased to make those rules the measure of all his own actions, prove it impossible but he must likewise will and desire that all rational creatures should proportionably make them the measure of theirs. Even among men, there is no earthly father, but in those things which he esteems his own excellencies, desires and expects to be imitated by his children. How much more is it necessary that God, who is infinitely far from being subject to such passions and variableness as frail men are; and who has an infinitely tenderer and heartier concern for the happiness of his creatures, than mortal men can have for the welfare of their posterity; must desire to be imitated by his creatures in those perfections which are the foundation of his own unchangeable happiness? In the exercise of his supreme power, we cannot imitate him; in the extent of his unerring knowledge, we cannot attain to any similitude with himJob xl. 9. . We cannot at all thunder with a voice like him; nor are we able to search out and comprehend the least part of the depth of his unfathomable wisdom. But his holiness and goodness, his justice, righteousness, and truth; these things we can understand; in these things we can imitate him; nay, we cannot approve ourselves to him as obedient children, if we do not imitate him therein. If God be himself essentially of infinite holiness and purity; (as, from the light of nature, it is of all things most manifest that he is,) Hab. i. 13. it follows, that it is impossible but he must likewise be of purer eyes than to behold with approbation any manner of impurity in his creatures; and consequently it must needs be his will, that they should all (according to the measure of their frail and finite nature) be holy as he is holy. If God is himself a being of infinite justice, righteousness, and truth, it must needs be his will, that all rational creatures, whom he has created after his own image, to whom he has communicated some resemblance of his divine perfections, and whom he has indued with excellent powers and faculties to enable them to distinguish between good and evil, should imitate him in the exercise of those glorious attributes, by conforming all their actions to the eternal and unalterable law of righteousness. If God is himself a being of infinite Mat. v. 45. goodness, making the sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sending rain on the just and on the unjust; Acts xiv. 17. having never left himself wholly without witness, but always doing good, given men rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, and filling their hearts with food and gladness; it cannot but be his will that all reasonable creatures should, by mutual love and benevolence, permit and assist each other to enjoy in particular the several effects and blessings of the divine universal goodness. Lastly, if God is himself a being of infinite mercy and compassion, as it is plain he bears long with men before he punishes them for their wickedness, and often freely forgives them his ten thousand talents; it must needs be hisMat. xviii. 24. 28. will, that they should forgive one another their hundred pence; being merciful one to another, as he isLu. vi. 36. merciful to them all; and having compassion eachMat. xi. 23. on his fellow-servants, as God has pity on them. Thus from the attributes of God, natural reason leads men to the knowledge of his will: All the same reasons and arguments, which discover to men the natural fitnesses or unfitnesses of things, and the necessary perfections or attributes of God, proving equally at the same time, that

Ita principem legem illam et ultimam, mentem esse omnia ratione aut cogentis aut vetantis Dei.—Cic. de Leg. lib. 2.

Quæ vis non modo senior est quam ætas populorum et civitatum, sed æqualis illius cœlum atque terras tuentis et regentis Dei. Neque enim esse mens divina sine ratione potest, nec ratio divina non hanc vim in rectis pravisque sanciendis habere.—Ibid.

Proposition III.

III. Proposition III. Though the fore-mentioned eternal moral obligations are incumbent indeed on all rational creatures, antecedent to any respect of particular reward or punishment, yet they must certainly and necessarily be attended with rewards and punishments: Because the same reasons, which prove God himself to be necessarily just and good, and the rules of justice, equity, and goodness, to be his unalterable will, law, and command, to all created beings; prove also that he cannot but be pleased with and approve such creatures as imitate and obey him by observing those rules, and be displeased with such as act contrary thereto; and consequently, that he cannot but some way or other, make a suitable difference in his dealings with them; and manifest his supreme power and absolute authority, in finally supporting, maintaining, and vindicating effectually the honour of these his divine laws, as becomes the just and righteous governor and disposer of all things.

This proposition also is in a manner self-evident.

For 1st, That the practice of virtue or vice must be attended with rewards and punishments, proved from the attributes of God. If God is himself necessarily a being (as has been before shown) of infinite goodness, justice, and holiness; and if the same reasons which prove the necessity of these attributes in God himself, prove moreover (as has likewise been shown already,) that the same moral obligations must needs be his positive will, law, and command, to all rational creatures; it follows also necessarily, by the very same argument, that he cannot but be pleased with and approve such creatures as imitate and obey him by observing those rules, and be displeased with such as act contrary thereto. And if so; then in the nature of the thing itself it is evident, that having absolute power and uncontrollable authority, as being supreme governor and disposer of all things, he cannot but signify, by some means or other, his approbation of the one, and his displeasure against the other. And this can no way be done to any effectual purpose but by the annexing of respective rewards and punishments. Wherefore, if virtue goes finally unrewarded, and wickedness unpunished, then God never signifies his approbation of the one, nor his displeasure against the other; and if so, then there remains no sufficient proof that he is really at all pleased or displeased with either, and the consequence of that will be, that there is no reason to think the one to be his will and command, or that the other is forbidden by him; which being once supposed, there will no longer remain any certain evidence of his own moral attributes contrary to what has been already demonstrated.

2. And from the necessity there is, that there should be some vindication of the honour of God’s laws and government. The certainty of rewards and punishments in general may also somewhat otherwise be deduced from their being necessary to support the honour of God and of his laws and government, in the following manner. It is evident we are obliged, in the highest ties of duty and gratitude, to pay all possible honour to God, from whom we receive our being, and all our powers and faculties, and whatever else we enjoy. Now it is plain likewise, that we have no other way to honour God, (whose happiness is capable of no addition from any thing that any of his creatures are capable of doing,) than by honouring, that is, by obeying, his laws. The honour therefore that is thus done to his laws, God is pleased to accept as done immediately to himself. And though we were indeed absolutely obliged, in duty, to honour him in this manner, notwithstanding that there had been no reward to be expected thereupon, yet it is necessary, in the government of the world, and well-becoming an infinitely wise and good governor, that those who honour him he should honour; 1 Sam. ii. 30. that is, should distinguish them with suitable marks of his favour. On the contrary; though nothing that weak and finite creatures are able to do, can in the least diminish from the absolute glory and happiness of God, yet, as to us, the dishonouring, that is, the disobeying his laws, is a dishonouring of himself: that is, it is, as much as in us lies, a despising his supreme authority, and bringing his government into contempt:—Now the same reason that there is, why honour should be paid to the laws of God at all; the same reason there is, that that honour should be vindicated, after it has been diminished and infringed by sin: For no lawgiver who has authority to require obedience to his laws, can or ought to see his laws despised and dishonoured, without taking some measures to vindicate the honour of them, for the support and dignity of his own authority and government. And the only way, by which the honour of a law, or of its author, can be vindicated after it has been infringed by wilful sin, is either by the repentance and reformation of the transgressor, or by his punishment and destruction. So that God is necessarily obliged, in vindication of the honour of his laws and government, to punish those who presumptuously and impenitently disobey his commandments. Wherefore if there be no distinction made by suitable rewards and punishments, between those who obey the laws of God and those who obey them not, then God suffers the authority of his laws to be finally trampled upon and despised, without ever making any vindication of it: Which being impossible, it will follow that these things are not really the laws of God, and that he has no such regard to them as we imagine. And the consequence of this must needs be the denial of his moral attributes, contrary, as before, to what has been already proved: And consequently the certainty of rewards and punishments, in general, is necessarily established.

Proposition IV.

IV. Proposition IV. Though in order to establish this suitable difference between the fruits or effects of virtue and vice, so reasonable in itself, and so absolutely necessary for the vindication of the honour of God, the nature of things, and the constitution and order of God’s creation, was originally such, that the observance of the eternal rules of justice, equity, and goodness, does indeed of itself tend by direct and natural consequence to make all creatures happy, and the contrary practice to make them miserable; yet since, through some great and general corruption and depravation, (whencesoever that may have arisen,) the condition of men in this present state is such, that the natural order of things in this world is an event manifestly perverted, and virtue and goodness are visibly prevented in great measure from obtaining their proper and due effects in establishing men’s happiness, proportionable to their behaviour and practice; therefore, it is absolutely impossible that the whole view and intention, the original and the final design, of God’s creating such rational beings as men are, and placing them on this globe of earth, as the chief and principal, or indeed (to speak more properly) the only inhabitants, for whose sake alone this part at least of the creation is manifestly fitted up and accommodated; it is absolutely impossible (I say) that the whole of God’s design in all this should be nothing more than to keep up eternally a succession of such short-lived generations of men as we at present are, and those in such a corrupt, confused, and disorderly state of things, as we see the world is now in; without any due observation of the eternal rules of good and evil; without any clear and remarkable effect of the great and most necessary difference of things; and without any final vindication of the honour and laws of God, in the proportionable reward of the best, or punishment of the worst of men. And, consequently, it is certain and necessary (even as certain as the moral attributes of God before demonstrated,) that instead of continuing an eternal succession of new generations in the present form and state of things, there must at some time or other be such a revolution and renovation of things, such a future state of existence of the same persons, as that, by an exact distribution of rewards and punishments therein, all the present disorders and inequalities may be set right, and that the whole scheme of providence, which, to us who judge of it by only one small portion of it, seems now so inexplicable and confused, may appear, at its consummation, to be a design worthy of infinite wisdom, justice, and goodness.

1. That, according to the original constitution of things, virtue and vice are attended with natural rewards and punishments. In order to establish a just and suitable difference between the respective fruits or effects of virtue and vice, the nature of things, and the constitution and order of God’s creation, was originally such that the observance of the eternal rules of piety, justice, equity, goodness, and temperance, does of itself plainly tend, by direct and natural consequence, to make all creatures happy, and the contrary practice to make them miserable. This is evident in general; because the practice of universal virtue is (in imitation of the divine goodness) the practice of that which is best in the whole; and that which tends to the benefit of the whole, must, of necessary consequence, originally, and in its own nature, tend also to the benefit of every individual part of the creation. More particularly; a frequent and habitual contemplating the infinitely excellent perfections of the almighty creator and all-wise governor of the world, and our most bountiful benefactor; so as to excite in our minds a suitable adoration, love, and imitation of those perfections; a regular employing all our powers and faculties, in such designs and to such purposes only, as they were originally fitted and intended for by nature; and a due subjecting all our appetites and passions to the government of sober and modest reason; are evidently the directest means to obtain such settled peace and solid satisfaction of mind, as the first foundation, and the principal and most necessary ingredient of all true happiness. The temperate and moderate enjoyment of all the good things of this present world, and of the pleasures of life, according to the measures of right reason and simple nature, is plainly and confessedly the certainest and most direct method to preserve the health and strength of the body. And the practice of universal justice, equity, and benevolence, is manifestly (as has been before observed) as direct and adequate a means to promote the general welfare and happiness of men in society, as any physical motion, or geometrical operation, is to produce its natural effect. So that if all men were truly virtuous, and practised these rules in such manner that the miseries and calamities arising usually from the numberless follies and vices of men were prevented, undoubtedly this great truth would evidence itself visibly in fact, and appear experimentally in the happy state and condition of the world. On the contrary; neglect of God, and insensibleness of our relation and duty towards him; abuse and unnatural misapplication of the powers and faculties of our minds; inordinate appetites, and unbridled and furious passions,—necessarily fill the mind with confusion, trouble, and vexation. And intemperance naturally brings weakness, pains, and sicknesses into the body. And mutual injustice and iniquity; fraud, violence, and oppression; wars, and desolation; murders, rapine, and all kinds of cruelty,—are sufficiently plain causes of the miseries and calamities of men in society. So that the original constitution, order, and tendency of things, is evidently enough fitted and designed to establish naturally a just and suitable difference in general between virtue and vice, by their respective fruits or effects.

2. But that now in this present world, the natural order of things is so perverted that vice often flourishes in great prosperity, and virtue falls under the greatest calamities of life. But though originally the constitution and order of God’s creation was indeed such, that virtue and vice are, by the regular tendency of things, followed with natural rewards and punishments; yet, in event, through some great and general corruption and depravation, (whencesoever that may have arisen, of which more hereafter;) the condition of men in the present state is plainly such, that this natural order of things in the world is manifestly perverted. Virtue and goodness are visibly prevented in great measure from obtaining their proper and due effect, in establishing men’s happiness proportionable to their behaviour and practice; and wickedness and vice very frequently escape the punishment which the general nature and disposition of things tends to annex unto it. Wicked men, by stupidity, inconsiderateness, and sensual pleasure, often make shift to silence the reproaches of conscience, and feel very little of that confusion and remorse of mind which ought naturally to be consequent upon their vicious practices. By accidental strength and robustness of constitution, they frequently escape the natural ill consequences of intemperance and debauchery; and enjoy the same proportion of health and vigour as those who live up to the rules of strict and unblameable sobriety. And injustice and iniquity, fraud, violence, and cruelty, though they are always attended indeed with sufficiently calamitous consequences in the general; yet the most of those ill consequences fall not always upon such persons in particular as have the greatest share in the guilt of the crimes, but very commonly on those that have the least. On the contrary; virtue and piety, temperance and sobriety, faithfulness, honesty and charity; though they have indeed both in themselves the true springs of happiness, and also the greatest probabilities of outward causes to concur in promoting their temporal prosperity; though they cannot indeed be prevented from affording a man the highest peace and satisfaction of spirit, and many other advantages both of body and mind in respect of his own particular person; yet in respect of those advantages which the mutual practice of social virtues ought to produce in common, it is in experience found true, that the vices of a great part of mankind do so far prevail against nature and reason, as frequently to oppress the virtue of the best; and not only hinder them from enjoying those public benefits, which would naturally and regularly be the consequences of their virtue; but oft-times bring upon them the greatest temporal calamities, even for the sake of that very virtue. For it is but too well known that good men are very often afflicted and impoverished, and made a prey to the covetousness and ambition of the wicked; and sometimes most cruelly and maliciously persecuted, even upon account of their goodness itself. In all which affairs the providence of God seems not very evidently to interpose for the protection of the righteous. And not only so, but even in judgments also, which seem more immediately to be inflicted by the hand of heaven, it frequently suffers the righteous to be involved in the same calamities with the wicked, as they are mixed together in business and the affairs of the world.

3. That therefore there must needs be a future state of rewards and punishments.Which things being so; (viz. that there is plainly in event no sufficient distinction made between virtue and vice; no proportionable and certain reward annexed to the one, nor punshment to the other, in this present world:) And yet it being no less undeniably certain in the general, as has been before shown, that if there be a God, (and that God be himself a being of infinite justice and goodness; and it be his will, that all rational creatures should imitate his moral perfections; and he

Ἐι δε μὴ λανθάνετον τοὺς θεοὺς, ὁ μεν δ͗καιος θεοφιλὴς ἂν εἔη, ὁ δε ἄδικος θεομισὴς——Τῷ δε θεοφιλεῖ, ὅσα γε ὑπὸ θεῶν γίγνεται, πάντα γίγνεται ὡς οἶόντε, ἄριστα.——Ὅυτως ἅρα ὑποληπτέον περὶ τοῦ δικαίου ἀνδρὸς, ἐάν τ᾽ εν πενία γίγνεται, ἒαν τ᾽ εν νόσοις, ἤ τινι ἄλλῳ τῶν δοκούντων κακῶν, ὡς τούτῳ ταῦτα εἰς ἀγαθόν τι τελευτήσει ζῶντι ἢ καὶ ἀποθανόντι. Ὀυ γὰρ δη ὑπό γε θεῶν ποτὲ ἀμελεῖται, ὃς ἂν προ θυμεῖσθαι ἐθέλῃ δίκαιος γίγνεσθαι, καὶ ἐπιτηδευων ἀρετην είς ὅσον δυνατὸν ἀνθρώπῳ ὁμοιοῦσθαι θεῷ.—Plato de Republ. lib. 10.

Proposition V.

V. Proposition V. Though the necessity and indispensableness of all the great and moral obligations of natural religion, and also the certainty of a future state of rewards and punishments, be thus in general deducible, even demonstrably, by a chain of clear and undeniable reasoning; yet (in the present state of the world, by what means soever it came originally to be so corrupted, the particular circumstances whereof could not now be certainly known but by revelation,) such is the carelessness, inconsiderateness, and want of attention of the greater part of mankind; so many the prejudices and false notions taken up by evil education; so strong and violent the unreasonable lusts, appetites, and desires of sense; and so great the blindness introduced by superstitious opinions, vicious customs, and debauched practices through the world; that very few are able, in reality and effect, to discover these things clearly and plainly for themselves: But men have great need of particular teaching, and much instruction, to convince them of the truth, and certainty, and importance of these things; to give them a due sense, and clear and just apprehensions concerning them, and to bring them effectually to the practice of the plainest and most necessary duties.

1. Men hindered from discovering and understanding religious truths, by carelessness and want of attention. There is naturally in the greater part of mankind such a prodigious carelessness, inconsiderateness and want of attention, as not only hinders them from making use of their reason, in such manner as to discover these things clearly and effectually for themselves, but is the cause of the grossest and most stupid ignorance imaginable. Some seem to have little or hardly any notion of God at all; and more take little or no care to frame just and worthy apprehensions concerning him, concerning the divine attributes and perfections of his nature; and still many more are entirely negligent and heedless to consider and discover what may be his will. Few make a due use of their natural faculties, to distinguish rightly the essential and unchangeable difference between good and evil; fewer yet so attend to the natural notices which God has given them, as by their own understanding to collect that what is good is the express will and command of God, and what is evil is forbidden by him; and still fewer consider with themselves the weight and importance of these things, the natural rewards or punishments that are frequently annexed in this life to the practice of virtue or vice, and the much greater and certainer difference that shall be made between them in a life to come. Hence it is that (as travellers assure us) even some whole nations seem to have very little notion of God, or at least very poor and unworthy apprehensions concerning him; and a very small sense of the obligations of morality; and very mean and obscure expectations of a future state. Not that God has anywhere left himself wholly without witness; or that the difference of good and evil is to any rational being undiscernible; or that men at any time or in any nation, could ever be firmly and generally persuaded in their own minds that they perished absolutely at death: But through supine negligence and want of attention, they let their reason (as it were) sleep,

Multis signis natura declarat quid velit;—obsurdescimus tamen, nescio quomodo, nec audimus.—Cic. de Amicit.

2. And by early prejudices and false notions. The greater part of mankind are not only inattentive, and barely ignorant, but commonly they have also, through a careless and evil education, taken up early prejudices, and many vain and foolish notions, which pervert their natural understanding, and hinder them from using their reason in moral matters to any effectual purpose. This cannot be better described than in the words of Cicero: If we had come into the world, saith he,

Si tales nos natura genuisset, ut eam ipsam intueri et perspicere, eâ que optimâ duce cursum vitæ conficere possemus; haud esset sanè quod quisquam rationem et doctrinam requireret. Nunc vero, &c.—Cic. Tusc. Quœst. lib. 3.

Nunc parvulos nobis dedit igniculos, quos celeriter malis moribus opinionibusque depravatis sic restinguimus, ut nusquam naturæ lumen appareat.——Simul atque editi in lucem et suscepti sumus, in omni continuo pravitate, et in summa opinionum perversitate, versamur; ut pene cum lacte nutricis, errorem suxisse videamur. Cum vero parentibus redditi, deinde magistris traditi sumus; tum ita variis imbuimur erroribus, ut vanitati veritas, et opinioni confirmatæ natura ipsa cedat.——Cum vero accedit eodem, quasi maximus quidem magister, populus, atque omnis undique ad vitia consentiens multitudo, tum plane inficimur opinionum pravitate, a naturaque ipsa desciscimus.—Ibid.

Proposition VI.

VI. Proposition VI. Though in almost every age there have indeed been in the heathen world some wise and brave and good men, who have made it their business to study and practise the duties of natural religion themselves, and to teach and exhort others to do the like, who seem therefore to have been raised up by Providence, as instruments to reprove in some measure, and put some kind of check to the extreme superstition and wickedness of the nations wherein they lived; yet none of these have ever been able to reform the world with any considerable great and universal success, because they have been but very few that have in earnest set themselves about this excellent work; and they that have indeed sincerely done it have themselves been entirely ignorant of some doctrines, and very doubtful and uncertain of others, absolutely necessary for the bringing about that great end; and those things which they have been certain of, and in good measure understood, they have not been able to prove and explain clearly enough; and those that they have been able both to prove and explain by sufficiently clear reasoning, they have not yet had authority enough to enforce and inculcate upon men’s minds with so strong an impression as to influence and govern the general practice of the world.

1. There have, indeed, in almost every age been, in the heathen world, some wise, and brave, and good men, who have made it their business to study and practise the duties of natural religion themselves, and to teach and exhort others to do the like: An eminent instance whereof, in the eastern nations, the Scripture itself affords us in the history of Job; concerning whom it does not certainly appear that he knew any positive revealed institution of religion, or that, before his sufferings, any immediate revelation was made to him, as there was to Abraham and the rest of the patriarchs. Among the Greeks Socrates seems to be an extraordinary example of this kind, concerning whom Plato tells us, in his apology,

Ὀυδὲν γὰρ ἄλλο πράττων ἐγὼ περιέρχομαι, ἢ πείθων ὑμῶν καὶ νεωτέρους καὶ π9ρεσβυτέρους, μήτε σωμάτων ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, μήτε χρηματων πρότερον, μήτε ἄλλου τινὸς, οὕτω σφόδρα, ὡς τῆς ψυχῆς, ὅπως ὡς ἀρίστη ἔσται· λέγων. ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ χρημάτων ἡ ἀρετὴ γίνεται, ἀλλ᾽ ἐξ ἀρετὴς χρήματα καὶ τἄλλα ταγαθὰ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἅπαν9τα, καὶ ἐδίᾳ καὶ δημοσίᾳ.—Plato in Apol. Socrat.

Proposition VII.

VII. Proposition VII. For these reasons there was plainly wanting a divine revelation, to recover mankind out of their universally degenerate estate, into a state suitable to the original excellency of their nature: Which divine revelation both the necessities of men and their natural notions of God gave them reasonable ground to expect and hope for; as appears from the acknowledgments which the best and wisest of the heathen philosophers themselves have made of their sense of the necessity and want of such a revelation; and from their expressions of the hopes they had entertained that God would some time or other vouchsafe it unto them.

1. A divine revelation absolutely necessary for the recovery of mankind. There was plainly wanting a divine revelation, to recover mankind out of their universal corruption and degeneracy; and without such a revelation it was not possible that the world should ever be effectually reformed; for if (as has been before particularly shown) the gross and stupid ignorance, the innumerable prejudices and vain opinions, the strong passions and appetites of sense, and the many vicious customs and habits which the generality of mankind continually labour under, make it undeniably too difficult a work for men of all capacities to discover every one for himself, by the bare light of nature, all the particular branches of their duty; but most men, in the present state of things, have manifestly need of much teaching and particular instruction; if those who were best able to discover the truth, and instruct others therein, namely the wisest and best of the philosophers, were themselves unavoidably altogether ignorant of some doctrines, and very doubtful and uncertain of others, absolutely necessary to the bringing about that great end, the reformation of mankind; if those truths, which they were themselves very certain of, they were not yet able to prove and explain clearly enough to vulgar understandings; if even those things which they proved sufficiently, and explained with all clearness, they had not yet authority enough to enforce and inculcate upon men’s minds with so strong an impression as to influence and govern the general practice of the world; nor pretended to afford men any supernatural assistance, which yet was very necessary to so great a work; And if, after all, in the discovery of such matters as are the great motives of religion, men are apt to be more easily worked upon, and more strongly affected, by good testimony, than by the strictest abstract arguments; so that, upon the whole, it is plain the philosophers were never by any means well qualified to reform mankind with any considerable success; then there was evidently wanting some particular revelation, which might supply all these defects. There was plainly a necessity of some particular revelation, to discover in what manner,

Νομοθέτης ὅστις νοῦν κέκτηται, οὔτοτε μὴ τολμήσῃ καινοτομῶν ἐπὶ θεοσεβειαν, ἥτιις μὴ σαφὲς ἔχει τι, τρέψαι πόλιν ἐαυτοῦ.——μηδὲν τοπαράπαν ἐιδὼς, ὥσπερ οὐδ᾽ ὃν δυνατὸν εἰδέναι τῇ θνητῇ φύσει τῶν τοιούτων πέρι.—Plato in Epinomide.

Τα γὰρ δὴ τοιαῦτα [θεῶν θεραπέιας] οὐτ᾽ ἐπιστάμεθα ἡμεῖς, οἰκίζοντές τε πόλιν οὐδενὶ ἄλλῳ πεισόμεθα ἔαν νοῦν ἔχομεν, οὐδὲ χρ9ησόμεθα ἐξηγητῇ, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ τῷ πατρίῳ Θεῷ.—Plato de Republ. 4.

Proposition VIII.

VIII. Proposition VIII. There is no other religion now in the world but the Christian that has any just pretence or tolerable appearance of reason, to be esteemed such a divine revelation; and, therefore, if Christianity be not true, there is no revelation of the will of God at all made to mankind.

This proposition will easily be granted by all modern unbelievers; and therefore I need not be particular in the proof of it.

Of the Mahometan religion. The Mahometan religion was founded by a vicious person, proposes ridiculous and trifling doctrines to be believed, was propagated merely by violence and force of arms, was confirmed by no public and incontestable miracles, promises vain and sensual rewards to its professors, and is every way encompassed with numberless such absurdities and inconsistencies (as those who have given us accounts of the life of Mahomet, and the nature of his religion, have abundantly made out; and is sufficiently evident even from the Alcoran itself;) that there is no great danger of its imposing upon rational and considerate men.

Of the Jewish religion. The Jewish religion was founded wholly upon the expectation of a Messiah to come: And the time of his appearance was limited by such plain and determinate prophecies that what difficulties soever there may be in computing the very nice and exact time of their completion, or what different periods soever may be fixed from whence to begin several computations; yet the time of their being fulfilled is now, in all possible ways of computing, so very far elapsed, that if the Christian doctrine be false, there is no supposition left, upon which the Jewish religion can, with any colour of reason, be believed to be true.

It being evident, therefore, that either the Christian revelation is true, or else (how great want soever there may be of it) there is no such thing as revelation at all;—it remains that I proceed to consider what positive and direct evidence there is to prove the actual truth of this divine revelation.

Proposition IX.

IX. Proposition IX. The Christian religion, considered in its primitive simplicity, and as taught in the Holy Scriptures, has all the marks and proofs of being actually and truly a divine revelation, that any divine revelation, supposing it was true, could reasonably be imagined or desired to have.

The marks of a religion coming from God. The necessary marks and proofs of a religion coming from God, are these. First, that the duties it enjoins be all such as are agreeable to our natural notions of God, and perfective of the nature and conducive to the happiness and well-being of men. And that the doctrines it teaches be all such, as, though not indeed discoverable by the bare light of nature, yet, when discovered by revelation, may be consistent with and agreeable to sound and unprejudiced reason; for otherwise no evidence whatsoever can be of so great force to prove that any doctrine is true; as its being either contradictory in itself, or wicked in its tendency, is to prove that it must necessarily be false. Secondly, for the same reason, the motives likewise, by which it is recommended to men’s belief and practice, and all the peculiar circumstances with which it is attended, must be such as are suitable to the excellent wisdom of God, and fitted to amend the manners and perfect the minds of men. Lastly, it must moreover be positively and directly proved to come from God, by such certain signs and matters of fact as may be undeniable evidences of its author’s having actually a divine commission: For otherwise, as no evidence can prove a doctrine to come from God, if it be either impossible or wicked in itself, so, on the other hand, neither can any degree of goodness or excellency in the doctrine itself make it demonstrably certain, but only highly probable, to have come from God; unless it has moreover some positive and direct evidence of its being actually revealed.

The entire proof therefore of this proposition must be made by an induction of particulars, as follows.

Proposition X.

X. Proposition X. First, the practical duties which the Christian religion enjoins, are all such as are most agreeable to our natural notions of God, and most perfective of the nature, and conducive to the happiness and well-being of men. That is, Christianity even in this single respect, as containing alone, and in one consistent system, all the wise and good precepts (and those improved, augmented, and exalted to the highest degree of perfection,) that ever were taught singly and scatteredly, and many times but very corruptly by the several schools of the philosophers; and this without any mixture of the fond, absurd, and superstitious practices of any of these philosophers; ought to be embraced and practised by all rational and considering deists, who will act consistently, and steadily pursue the consequences of their own principles; as at least the best scheme and sect of philosophy that ever was set up in the world; and highly probable, even though it had no external evidence to be of divine original.

The proposition proved in the several instances of duty. This proposition is so very evident, that the greatest adversaries of the Christian institution have never been able to deny it any otherwise than by confounding the inventions of men, the superstitious practices of particular persons, or the corrupt additions of certain particular churches or societies of Christians, with the pure and simple precepts of the gospel of Christ. In all those instances of duty which pure and uncorrupt Christianity enjoins, the proposition is manifest, and altogether undeniable; the duties of love, fear, and adoration, which the Christian religion obliges us to render unto God, are so plainly incumbent upon us from the consideration of the excellent attributes of the divine nature, and our relation to him as our creator and preserver, that no man who considers can think himself free from the obligations which our religion lays upon him to practise these duties, without denying the very being of God, and acting contrary to the reason and all the natural notions of his own mind. It is placing the true and acceptable worship of God, not so much in any positive and ritual observances, as in approaching him with pure hearts and undefiled bodies, with unfeigned repentance for all past miscarriages, and sincere resolutions of constant obedience for the future, in praying to him for whatever we want, and returning him our most hearty thanks for whatever good things we receive, with such dependence and humility, such submission, trust, and reliance, as are the proper affections of dutiful children: All this is plainly most agreeable to our natural notions and apprehensions of God; and that the prayers of sinful and depraved creatures, sincerely repenting, should be offered up to God, and become prevalent with him, through and by the intercession of a mediator, is very consonant to right and unprejudiced reason, as I shall have occasion to show more particularly hereafter, when I come to consider the articles of our belief. Again: The duties of justice, equity, charity, and truth, which the Christian religion obliges us to exercise towards men, are so apparently reasonable in themselves, and so directly conducive to the happiness of mankind, that their unalterable obligations are not only in great measure deducible from the bare light of nature and right reason, but even those men also, who have broken through all the bonds of natural religion itself, and the original obligations of virtue, have yet thought it necessary, for the preservation of society and the well-being of mankind, that the observation of these duties, to some degree, should be enforced by the penalties of human laws; and the additional improvements Mat. v. 16, &c. which our Saviour has made to these duties, by commanding his disciples to be, as it were, lights in the world, and examples of good works to all men; to be so far from injuring others, that, on the contrary, they should not indulge themselves in any degree of anger or passion; to seek reconciliation immediately upon any difference or offence that may arise; to bear injuries patiently, rather than return evil for evil; to be always willing to forgive one another their trespasses, as they all expect forgiveness at the hands of God; to be kind and charitable to all men; to assist readily, and be willing to do all good offices, not only to their friends, but even to their bitterest enemies also; in a word, to raise their virtue and goodness far above the common practice of men, extending their charity universally in imitation of the goodness of God himself, who maketh the sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust; these precepts, I say, are such as no unprejudiced philosopher would have been unwilling to confess were the utmost improvements of morality, and to the highest degree perfective of human nature. In like manner, the duties of sobriety, temperance, patience, and contentment, which our religion enjoins us to practise in ourselves, are so undeniably agreeable to the inward constitution of human nature, and so perfective of it, that the principal design of all true philosophy has ever been to recommend and set off these duties to the best advantage, though, as the philosophers themselves have always confessed, no philosophy was ever able to govern men’s practice effectually in these respects: But the additional precepts, and the new weight and authority, which our Saviour has added to his instructions of this kind, teaching his disciples to governMatt. v. 28.
Matt. vi. 19, 24, &c. their very thoughts, desires, and inclinations, to contemn and get above all the desires of this present world, and to set their affections principally upon that which is to come; these are the things which, when the Christian religion was in its primitive and purest state, worked men up actually to such a pitch of cheerful and generous obedience to the laws of God, and taught them to obtain such a complete victory over the world, and over all the desires and appetites of sense, as the best philosophers have acknowledged their instructions were never able to do. Lastly, even those positive and external observances, (the two sacraments,) which are instituted in the Christian religion, as means and assistances to keep men stedfast in the practice of those great and moral duties which are the weightier matters of the law; even those positive institutions (I say) are so free from all appearance of superstition and vanity, and so wisely fitted to the end for which they were designed, that no adversaries of Christianity have ever been able to object any thing at all against the things themselves, but only against certain corruptions and superstitions, which some who call themselves Christians, have, directly in opposition to the true design of Christianity, introduced and annexed to them. For what reasonable man can pretend to say, that it is any way unreasonable or superstitious for every member of the society to be solemnly admitted into his profession, by a plain and significant rite, entitling him to all the privileges, and charging him with all the obligations, which belong to the members of that society as such? which is the design of one of the sacraments: Or that it is unreasonable and superstitious for men frequently to commemorate, with all thankfulness, the love of their greatest benefactor, and humbly and solemnly to renew their obligations and promises of obedience to him? which is the design of the other.

This a great evidence of a religion coming from God. Let now any impartial person judge whether this be not a wise and excellent institution of practical religion, highly conducive to the happiness of mankind, and worthy to be established by a revelation from God; when men had confessedly corrupted themselves to such a degree, that not only the light of nature, and right reason, was altogether insufficient to restore true piety; but even that light itself (as Cicero expressly acknowledges) nowhere appeared.

——Ut naturæ lumen nusquam appareat.—Cic. Tusc. Qu. lib. 3. See this passage cited before at large.

Proposition XI.

XI. Proposition XI. Secondly, The motives by which the Christian religion enforces the practice of the duties it enjoins are such as are most suitable to the excellent wisdom of God, and most answerable to the natural expectations of men.

1. Of the acceptableness of true repentance, a motive to obedience. The acceptableness of true repentance, in the sight of God, and the certain assurance of pardon upon such repentance, which the Christian religion affords us, is a most powerful and necessary motive to frail and sinful creatures, to encourage and support them effectually in the practice of their duty. It is indeed in general evidently most agreeable to right reason, and to men’s natural notions of God, to believe him placable, and merciful, and willing to forgive. But since at the same time it cannot be proved, by any arguments from reason, that God is absolutely obliged to forgive, and it is confessedly evident that it becomes the supreme governor of the universe to vindicate the honour and authority of his laws and government, to give some evidences of his hatred and indignation against sin, and sometimes, by instances of severity, to prevent sinners from abusing his mercy and patience, no less than that it is agreeable to his infinite wisdom and goodness to suffer his anger to be by some means appeased: No motive in this case can be imagined more expedient and powerful to encourage sinners to return to the practice of their duty, and to persuade them to continue therein immoveably for the future; nothing can be imagined more seasonable and satisfactory to the mind of man, and >more agreeable to the excellent wisdom of God, and worthy of the supreme and infinitely merciful governor of all things, than such a positive declaration of the acceptableness of sincere repentance, and such an authentic assurance of pardon and forgiveness thereupon, as under the Christian dispensation the divine goodness and mercy has found means to afford unto us, in such manner as is at the same time abundantly consistent with the honour and dignity of the laws of God, and with his irreconcileable hatred against all unrighteousness and sin.

2. Of the divine assistance, as another motive to obedience. That divine and supernatural assistance, which, under the Christian dispensation, they who sincerely endeavour to obey the will of God, have encouragement to hope for, upon all necessary occasions, is another powerful motive to support men effectually in the practice of their duty. The wisest of the philosophers were so far sensible of the great corruption and depravity of human nature in its present state; they were sensible that such was the carelessness, stupidity, and want of attention, of the greater part of mankind; so many the early prejudices and false notions taken in by evil education; so strong and violent the unreasonable lusts, appetites, and desires of sense; and so great the blindness, introduced by superstitious opinions, vicious customs, and debauched practices through the world; that (as has been before shown,) they themselves openly confessed they had very little hope of ever being able to reform mankind with any considerably great and universal success, by the bare force of philosophy and right reason; but that, to produce so great a change, and enable men effectually to conquer all their corrupt affections, there was need of some supernatural and divine assistance, or the immediate interposition of God himself. Now this divine assistance is vouchsafed to men under the Christian dispensation, in such a manner, as (from what has been already said concerning the judgment of the wisest of the ancient philosophers in this matter,) appears to be undeniably agreeable to the natural expectations of right reason, and suitable to the best and worthiest notions that men have ever by the light of nature been able to frame to themselves, concerning the attributes and perfections of God. Luke xi. 13. If ye, says our Saviour, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly father give the holy spirit to them that ask him? The effect of this divine assistance evidenced itself in a very visible and remarkable manner in the primitive times,

Da mihi virum, qui sit iracundus, maledicus, effrænatus, paucissimis Dei verbis tam placidum quam ovem reddam. Da libidinosum, &c.—Lactant. lib. 3.

Παρα μεν τοῖς Ελλησίν εἶς τις, &c,—Origen, advers. Cels. lib. 1. See this passage cited above.

3. Of the clear discovery of future rewards and punishments, as another motive to obedience. The rewards and punishments which the Christian religion proposes, to obedience or disobedience, are a motive perfectly agreeable to men’s natural hopes and fears, and worthy of God to make known by positive and express revelation. For since it is confessedly suitable to the divine wisdom, to make variety of creatures, indued with very different powers and faculties, and capable of very different kinds and degrees of improvement, and since all rational creatures, by reason of that natural liberty of will which is essentially necessary to their being such, cannot but be capable of exalting and improving their nature by the practice of virtue and the imitation of God, and on the contrary of depraving and debasing their nature by the practice of vice and alienation of themselves from God; it follows undeniably, (as has been before shown by a more particular deduction,) that it is highly agreeable to the light of nature and to right reason to suppose that God, the supreme governor and disposer of all things, will finally make a just and suitable distinction between his creatures, by the distribution of proportionable rewards and punishments. Nevertheless, both the truth itself of these final rewards and punishments was so far called in question, and rendered doubtful and uncertain, by the disputations even of the wisest philosophers that ever lived; and those who did in general believe the truth and certainty of them, had yet so very blind and obscure notions of what nature and kind they were to be, having their imaginations strangely prejudiced with poetical fictions and fabulous stories, that the setting this matter clear and right, and the supplying this single defect in the light of nature, was a thing highly worthy of divine revelation: It being plainly a very different thing, and of very different force as to the influencing men’s actions, for men to be able to argue themselves into a reasonable expectation of future rewards and punishments; and to be certainly assured of the reality of them by express testimony of divine revelation. And accordingly, by divine revelation in the gospel, this defect of the light of nature is now actually supplied in such a manner; life and immortality are so brought to light, and the wrath of God is so revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, that this very thing, the clear and distinct and consistent account which the gospel gives us of these final rewards and punishments, (which, though indeed in themselves so absolutely necessary, that without them no tolerable vindication could be made of the attributes of God, yet neither by the light of nature, nor by any positive institution of religion, excepting only the Christian, were they ever so clearly and plainly represented to mankind, as to have their full and proper effect upon the hearts and lives of men;) this very thing (I say) the clear, distinct, and consistent account which the gospel gives us of these final rewards and punishments, is itself no contemptible argument of the truth and divine authority of the Christian revelation. By the certain knowledge of these rewards and punishments it is that the practice of virtue is now established upon a sure foundation. Men have now abundantly sufficient encouragement to support them in their choice of virtue, and in their constant adherence to it, in all cases and under all circumstances that can be supposed. There is now sufficient weight on the side of virtue to enable men to conquer all the temptations of the devil, the flesh, and the world; and to despise the severest threatenings, even death itself. This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. The only difficulty in this matter, arising from the duration of the final punishment of the wicked, shall be considered when I come to discourse of the articles of our belief.

Proposition XII.

XII. Proposition XII. Thirdly, the peculiar manner and circumstances with which the Christian religion enjoins the duties, and urges the motives before mentioned, are exactly consonant to the dictates of sound reason, or the unprejudiced light of nature, and most wisely perfective of it.

The proposition proved by particular instances. For what can be more agreeable to the light of nature, and more evidently perfective of it, than to have those duties, which nature hints at only in general, explained fully and largely, and urged in particular, and inculcated upon the meanest capacities with great weight and authority, and exemplified in the lives of holy persons, proposed as patterns for our imitation? What can be more perfective of the light of nature than to have those great motives of religion, the rewards and punishments of a future state, which nature only obscurely points at, described to us most plainly, affectionately, and lively? What can be more perfective of the light of nature, than to have the means of atoning for sin, which nature discovers only the want of, plainly declared and exhibited to us? What can be more perfective of the light of nature, than such a discovery of the heinousness of sin and the necessity of holiness, as the death of Christ and the purity of the gospel does make unto us? In fine, what can more effectually perfect the religion of nature, than the gathering together the worshippers of the true God into one body; the causing them to enter into solemn obligations to live suitably to their holy profession? The giving them gracious assurances that true repentance shall be accepted for what is past, and sincere renewed obedience for the future? The uniting them by a few positive rites in one religion as well as civil communion, for mutual assistance and improvement? And the establishing a certain order or perpetual succession of men, whose constant business it may be to explain the great duties of religion to persons of meaner capacities; to urge and enforce the practice of them; to set before men the reasons of their duty, and the necessity of it; to show them clearly and impartially the danger of neglecting it, and the great advantage of performing it sincerely; in a word, to instruct the ignorant, and to admonish the wicked; to reclaim those that err, to comfort the doubting, to reprove the obstinate; and to be instruments of conveying to men all proper assistances, to enable them to perform their whole duty effectually?

If these things be the ordinances of one who came to contradict the dictates of right reason, and not to perfect the law of nature, but to destroy it; then let all wise men for ever forsake the assemblies of Christians, and profess themselves again disciples of the philosophers. But if these things be perfectly agreeable to nature and right reason, and tend exceedingly to the supplying the deficiences there of; then let none, under pretence of maintaining natural religion, revile and blaspheme the Christian, lest they be found liars unto God.

An answer to the objection drawn from the division among Christians. The many contentions, indeed, about opinions of great uncertainty and little importance, which, to the very great scandal of Christianity, have in several ages of the church been, with unreasonable zeal, kept up, instead of promoting the universal interest of true practical religion and virtue, have, it must be confessed, given some occasion to the enemies of our most holy religion to blaspheme and revile both it and the teachers of it. But though such things as these have indeed afforded them too plausible an occasion, yet they have not given them any just reason so to do: For the acknowledged corruption of a doctrine or institution, in any particular part or respect, is by no means a weighty or real objection against the truth of the whole: And there has always been extant a sufficient rule to enable sincere persons, in the midst of the greatest disputes and contentions, to distinguish the doctrine which is of God from the opinions of men; the doctrine of Christ having been plainly and fully delivered in our Saviour’s own discourses, and in the writings of his immediate followers the Apostles, who cannot, with any reason, be imagined either to have misrepresented it, or to have represented it imperfectly. But besides, I think it can hardly be denied, even by our adversaries themselves, but that in all times and places, wherein Christianity has been professed in any tolerable degree of purity; whatever contentions and disputes may have arisen about particular, and perhaps unnecessary doctrines; yet the great, the most necessary, and fundamental doctrines of religion, concerning God and providence; concerning the gracious method of God’s reconciliation with penitent sinners; concerning the necessity of true piety, righteousness, and sobriety; concerning a judgment to come, and the final reward of the righteous, and the punishment of wicked men, in such a manner as will effectually vindicate both the justice and goodness, the wisdom and honour of God; these things (I say) have, notwithstanding all differences concerning smaller matters, been nevertheless at the same time universally and constantly taught, pressed and inculcated upon persons of all capacities, by the earnest and continual preaching of all the ministers of the gospel; with an effect infinitely more considerable and visible, both in extent and duration, than by the teaching of any heathen philosophers that ever lived: Which shows undeniably the excellency at least, if not the divine authority of the Christian institution, in this particular respect.

Proposition XIII.

XIII. Proposition XIII. Fourthly; all the [credenda, or] doctrines, which the true, simple, and uncorrupted Christian religion teaches, (that is, not only those plain doctrines which it requires to be believed as fundamental and of necessity to eternal salvation, but even all the doctrines which it teaches as matters of truth,) are, though indeed many of them not discoverable by bare reason unassisted with revelation; yet, when discovered by revelation, apparently most agreeable to sound unprejudiced reason, have every one of them a natural tendency, and a direct and powerful influence to reform men’s minds, and correct their manners, and do together make up an infinitely more consistent and rational scheme of belief than any that the wisest of the ancient philosophers ever did, or the cunningest of modern unbelievers can invent or contrive.

1. Of the one supreme God. That there is one only living and true God, existing of himself, by the necessity of his own nature, absolutely independent, eternal, omnipresent, unchangeable, incorruptible, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, knowledge, and wisdom; of perfect liberty, and freedom of will; of infinite goodness, justice, and truth, and all other possible perfections; so as to be absolutely self-sufficient to his own infinite and unalterable happiness: This is not only the first and principal article of the Christian faith, but also the first and most evident truth that the light of nature itself teaches us, being clearly demonstrable, upon certain and undeniable principles of right reason.

2. Of the only begotten son of God. That this supreme self-existent cause and father of all things did, before all ages, in an incomprehensible manner, by his almighty power and will, beget or produce a divine person, styled the Logos, the word, or wisdom, or son, of God; God, of God;

Θεὸς ἐκ Θεοῦ, in contradistinction to Ἀυτόθεος.

Indeed, if any men, pretending to be wise above and beyond what is written, have at any time given such explications of the manner how the son of God derived his being from the father, or have offered such accounts of his nature and attributes, as can by any just and necessary consequence be reduced to imply or involve any contradiction, (which perhaps many of the schoolmen have but too justly been accused of doing,)

It is not to be denied but that the schoolmen, who abounded in wit and leisure, though very few among them had either exact skill in the Holy Scriptures, or in ecclesiastical antiquity, and the writings of the ancient fathers of the Christian Church; I say, it cannot be denied but that these speculative and very acute men, who wrought a great part of their divinity out of their own brains, as spiders do cobwebs out of their own bowels, have started a thousand subtilties about this mystery, such as no Christian is bound to trouble his head withal, much less is it necessary for him to understand those niceties which we may reasonably presume that they who talk of them did themselves never thoroughly understand; and, least of all, is it necessary to believe them.—Archbishop Tillotson. Sermon concerning the Unity of the Divine Nature.

It were to be wished, that some religionists did not here symbolize too much with the atheists, in affecting to represent the mystery of the Christian trinity as a thing directly contradictory to all human reason and understanding.—Cudworth’s System, page 560.

Proposition XIV.

XIV. Proposition XIV. Fifthly, As this revelation, to the judgment of right and sober reason, appears of itself highly credible and probable, and abundantly recommends itself in its native simplicity, merely by its own intrinsic goodness and excellency, to the practice of the most rational and considering men, who are desirous in all their actions to have satisfaction and comfort and good hope within themselves, from the conscience of what they do: So it is moreover positively and directly proved to be actually and immediately sent to us from God, by the many infallible signs and miracles which the author of it worked publicly as the evidence of his divine commission, by the exact completion both of the prophecies that went before concerning him, and of those that he himself delivered concerning things that were to happen after; and by the testimony of his followers, which in all its circumstances was the most credible, certain, and convincing evidence, that was ever given to any matter of fact in the world.

First, The Christian revelation is positively and directly proved to be actually and immediately sent to us from God, by the many infallible signs and miracles which the author of it worked publicly as the evidence of his divine commission.

Of the life and character of our Saviour, as an evidence of the truth of the Christian revelation. Besides the great excellency and reasonableness of the doctrine considered in itself, of which I have already treated, it is here of no small moment to observe, that the author of it (separate from all external proof of his divine commission) appeared in all his behaviour, words, and actions, to be neither an impostor nor an enthusiast.

Πευστέον δὴ ἀυτῶν, εἴ ποτέ τις ἄλλος τοιοῦτος πλάνος ἱστόρηται, πραότητος καὶ ἐπιεικείας σωφροσυνης τε καὶ τῆς ἄλλης ἀρετῆς διδάσκαλος τοῖς ἀπατωμένοις γεγονὼς ἄιτιος,, &c.—Easeb. Demonstrat. Evangelic. lib. 3. c. 3.

Proposition XV.

XV. Proposition XV. Lastly; They who will not, by the arguments and proofs before mentioned, be convinced of the truth and certainty of the Christian religion, and be persuaded to make it the rule and guide of all their actions, would not be convinced, (so far as to influence their practice and reform their lives,) by any other evidence whatsoever; no, not though one should rise on purpose from the dead to endeavour to convince them.

That the evidence which God has afforded us of the truth of our religion is abundantly sufficient. From what has been said, upon the foregoing heads, it is abundantly evident that men are not called upon to believe the Christian religion without very reasonable and sufficient proof; much less are they

Ἄλλοις δὲ, ὅση δύναμις, ἀποδεικτικῶς δἰ ἐρῶτήσεων καὶ ἀποκρίσεων προσερχόμεθα· Ὀυδὲ λέγομὲν, (τὸ μετὰ χλεύης ὑπὸ τοῦ Κέλσο ἐιρημὲνον) ὅτι Πίστευσον, ὃν ἐισηγοῦμαι σοι, τοῦτον εἶναι ὑιὸν Θεοῦ, κἄν ἦ δεδεμένος ἀτιμότατα, ἢ κακολασμένος ἄισχιστα——Ὀυδὲ φαμὲν, ταύτη καὶ μάλλον πίστευσον.—Orig. advers. Cels. lib. 1.

Index of Scripture References

Index of Greek Words and Phrases

Index of Hebrew Words and Phrases

Index of Latin Words and Phrases

Index of Pages of the Print Edition