must all their Perfections and Qualifications too for they are indeed the most Noble Things in their Natures Knowledge therefore and Wisdom Thought and Reasoning and all the excellent Powers and Faculties that are found in any Creatures must come from the same Power that produced those Beings and Natures in which they are inherent And if these Excellencies and Perfections are derived from this Necessarily existent Being they must certainly be in Him in the greatest Perfection for if they were not in Him they could not be derived from him since 't is unconceivable that any thing can give or communicate to another either what it hath not it self or a greater degree of any thing than it is Master of This Eternal and Self-existent Being therefore must have in it and that in the utmost Perfection all the Excellencies that we admire and value in any other things It must have the Power of doing all things that are possible to be done and therefore be Almighty it must know all things that are possible to be known and therefore be Omniscient In a word it must be All-Wise and Good Just and True Merciful and Gracious and contain in it all possible Excellencies and Perfections Now this may very well pass for a Description of the Deity and 't is such an One as is very Intelligible and Plain to the meanest Capacity that can but think at all And it gives us such an Idea of God as we see is easily attainable by an obvious and familiar Chain of Consequences and which puts our Minds not at all on the wrack to conceive As for the word Infinite which is often applied to God and which these Gentlemen quarrel so much at and of which they affirm that it is impossible to have any Conception or Idea I say that it is groundlessly and precariously asserted and that nothing but the wilful Darkness and Confusion which they have brought upon their own Minds can make it appear Unintelligible For as the Excellent Dr. Cudworth hath proved the Idea that we have of Infinite is the same with that which we have of Perfection And therefore when we say that God is Infinite in Power Wisdom or Goodness we mean by it that He is most perfectly or compleatly so and that he wants nothing which is necessary to render Him most Perfect and Excellent in that Respect of which we speak of Him Now a Being that any way is Deficient or Imperfect and that hath not all the possible Excellencies that are to be had is Finite and that in the same proportion as it is defective Thus for Instance those Beings which endure but for a time which had a Beginning and will have an end are finite or imperfect as to their existence But GOD who is was and is to come who is and will be from Everlasting to Everlasting He is properly said to be Infinite or Perfect as to Existence or Duration For there is no Restriction Limitation or Imperfection in His Nature in this respect as there is in that of all Creatures whatever A Being whose Power extends to but a few things is very imperfect or finite in Power and if there be any Possible thing that it cannot do 't is still so far imperfect in Power But a Being that can do all things that are not contradictory to his Nature or all possible things is properly said to be Infinite or Perfect in Power or Almighty so a Being that knows all things possible to be known is Infinite or Perfect in Knowledge and the like of any other Attributes or Perfections In all the Comparison or Proportion is the same A Being that wants no degree of Excellency or Perfection is God Infinite in Power Wisdom Justice Goodness and Truth But if a Being want any one or any degree or proportion of These Things it is Finite and Imperfect and that in the same degree or Proportion Now where is the Inconceivableness Confusion Absurdity and Nonsence of all This is it not as easie to conceive or apprehend that a Being may have in his Nature all possible Perfection as it is to have an Idea of one that is Imperfect and Deficient for how comes the Idea of Imperfection into our Mind how come we to know that a Thing is Finite Defective and Limited unless we have also an Idea or Notion of Infinity or Perfection how can we know what is wanting in any Being unless we have an Idea of it that it is in some other Being Most certain therefore it is that we may have as true and clear an Idea of the Existence of a God as of any thing in Nature and in Fact it is most notoriously true that a clear and distinct Notion that there is such a Being hath and doth still appear in the Minds of all Mankind and it is impressed there I doubt not by the peculiar Care of that Divine and Merciful Being Himself And therefore those that assert that we have not nor can have any Notion or Idea of a God nor of his Attributes and Perfections and that on that Account deny his Existence discover such wretched Ignorance as well as Obstinacy that they are really a Disgrace to Humane Nature For pretending to be over-Wise they become Fools they are vain in their Imaginations and their foolish heart is darkened Their vicious Inclinations have debauched their Reason and Understanding And though God be not far from every one of us since in Him we live move and have our being yet their Wickedness and Pride is such That they will not seek after God neither is God in all their Thoughts From which wilful Blindness and Stupidity may the God of Truth deliver them by the gracious Illuminations of his Blessed Spirit To whom with our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ be all Honour and Glory c. FINIS Books printed for Rich. Wilkin at the King's-Head in St. Paul's Church-yard MR. Harris's Sermon Preach'd at the Cathedral-Church of St. Paul January the 3d. 1697 8. being the First of the Lecture for that Year Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esquire His Remarks on some late Papers relating to the Universal Deluge and to the Natural History of the Earth In Octavo Dr. Woodward's Natural History of the Earth in Octavo Dr. Abbadie's Vindication of the Truth of the Christian Religion against the Objections of all Modern Opposers in Two Volumes In Octavo A Serious Proposal to the Ladies for the Advancement of their true and greatest Interest Part I. By a Lover of her Sex The Third Edition In Twelves A Serious Proposal to the Ladies Part II. Wherein a Method is offer'd for the Improvement of their Minds In Twelves Letters concerning the Love of God between the Author of the Proposal to the Ladies and Mr. John Norris In Octavo An Answer to W. P. his Key about the Quakers Light within and Oaths with an Appendix of the Sacraments In Octavo A Letter to the Honourable Sir Robert Howard Together with
from Body therefore some have been so foolish as to conclude that it is not the Action or Accident of that Body in which it is but a real Substance by it self And 't is upon this Account that when a Man is dead and buried they will say his Soul that is his Life can walk separated from the Body and is seen by Night among the Graves whereas Life is only a Name of Nothing and the Soul or Mind of Man is in reality Nothing else but the result of Motion in the Organical Parts of his Body 'T is like the forms and qualities of Other things depending purely on the Mechanism Modification and Motion of the Parts of Matter according as it happens to be variously disposed figured and agitated and consequently it can be nothing at all distinct from that Body whose Form or Quality it is And this Soul or Mind or any other Faculty or Quality in Man coming once to be conceived as a thing distinct from the Body and being Invisible and Insensible hath been called by such Names as we use to give to fine Subtile and aereal Bodies Such as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spiritus and the like which do properly signifie the Wind or which is near akin to it the Breath of Man And so Mr. Hobbs tells us that in order to express our greater honour of God the name of Spirit hath been given to him likewise as better expressing to vulgar Apprehensions his fine aereal and Subtile Nature than the grosser word of Body But however Philosophers and Men of sense must take care and not be imposed upon by insignificant words so far as to imagine there can in reality be any such thing as an Incorporeal Substance for that is when throughly considered an absolute Contradiction and Nonsense 'T is nothing but an empty Name with which some poor Wretches are frighted as the Birds are from the Corn by an empty Doublet a Hat and a Crooked Stick as he is pleased to express himself And this is the summ of what this mighty Philosopher advances against Immaterial Substances Spinoza is the only Man besides which I have met with that aims at disproving the Existence of Incorporeal Beings Which in his Opera posthuma he pretends demonstratively to do But his chief and indeed only Argument is this as I hinted before that there is but one only Substance in the World and That is God Matter or Body he asserts to be one of the Attributes of this Substance or the Mode by which God is considered as Res extensa from whence he concludes that there can be no Substance but what is corporeal because Body is an Essential Property of his one only Substance the Divine Nature The Precariousness of which Obscure and Metaphysical way of Arguing I shall plainly shew below And Thus having given you the sum of what these Writers advance against the Doctrine of Incorporeal Substances I shall next proceed to Refute it and to shew you how weak and inconclusive their Arguments and Objections are In order to which I say In the First place 1. That 't is a very precarious and groundless way of arguing to deny the Existence of any thing only from our particular Apprehensions and Conceptions not being able to master it For it will not in the least follow that there can be no such thing as an Incorporeal Substance or a Spirit because some few Men pretend that they cannot conceive how any such thing can possibly be And I have already shewed that we have very just reason to allow the truth of and to be satisfied of the Existence of many things whose Nature neither we nor perhaps any one else can fully Understand and Comprehend These Gentlemen pretend that they cannot conceive or have any Idea of an Incorporeal Substance But yet they think I suppose that they have a clear Idaea and Conception of Body Tho' should you put them to describe it they would be very much at a loss For as one hath well observed Mr. Lock in his Essay of Humane Understanding Book 2. c. 23. if we carefully examine our Idea of Substance we shall find that it is a kind of complex one consisting as it were of several Idea's coexisting together which because we are apt to conceive as one thing we give it the General Name of Substance as imagining that word to express something tho' in reality we know not what which is the support of these Accidents or Qualities which occasion the Idea's we have in our Minds of it Let us therefore take any corporeal Substance as suppose Gold and inquire in our Mind what is that Support Substratum or Substance in which the Accidents of Yellowness great Specifick Weight and strange Ductility under the Hammer do inhere all which concurr to give us that complex Idea which we have of Gold Shall we not find our selves put to it how to conceive or to have a clear Idea of this If we should say that the subject of these Properties are the solid extended Parts we shall not be much the nearer Satisfaction for our Mind will be inquisitive agen what is the Support or Subject of that Extension and Impenetrability We may say indeed that 't is the Substance it self which is a word that we use and implies something or other that is the Support of these Properties but what that is we have I think no clear and certain Idea When yet we have clear and distinct Conceptions enough of these Properties which we find in this Body and from whence we pronounce it to be Gold So if on the other hand we take any Incorporeal Substance as suppose the Mind or Soul of Man and enquire what is the true Support of that Self-moving Power that Reasoning and Cogitative Faculty and that Liberty or Freedom of Action which we plainly perceive to be inherent in it we shall indeed be at a loss but yet no more than we were before in reference to Gold For as from considering the Properties peculiar to that Body we were satisfied that they must be inherent in something tho' how or in what we have no clear Idea so when we consider Life Cogitation and Spontaneous Motion in our Soul we know very well that those more real Properties must have something also for their Support or some Substance to inhere in tho' what that is and the peculiar manner of this we are wholly ignorant of But then we have as just reason to believe that this Substance is real as that the Substance of Gold is so For Cogitation Life and Spontaneous Action are Properties undoubtedly of as real a Nature as great Intensive Weight Yellowness and Ductility can possibly be And as we cannot but conclude both these to be real Substances so we cannot also but conceive them as Natures absolutely distinct and different from each other and which can have no necessary dependance upon and relation to each other for
For suppose the Mind would endeavour to amplifie the Idea of a Man into that of God which is the Way Sextus Empiricus says Men might and did come by the Notion of a Deity First he saith the Mind can give him Eternity of Duration But how came it by that Idea of Eternity was that Idea previous to the Invention of a Deity and had Mankind a clear Conception of it if they had the Notion of God could not be then invented for one of his chiefest Attributes was known before But I suppose they will say that the Notion of Eternity was gained by Ampliating the Idea of Duration or Time beyond the common and ordinary Term And thus by imagining a Man to live a Thousand or Ten Thousand Years I may come to frame the Notion of a Being that should always exist But that is a gross Mistake for a Being that should endure Ten Thousand or Ten Millions of Years is not therefore exempt from dying at last any more than one that endures but Ten Minutes Had I not in my Mind before a clear Idea of Eternity I could no more by this Ampliating Power gain a Notion of an Eternal Being than I could believe my self to be Eternal for every thing about me would contradict that Notion and 't is very strange that I should come to believe any Being could have an Eternal Duration from considering of things that are all perishable and mortal That which leads Men into this mistake is I suppose this We have all of us a Notion of a Being Perfect or Eternal as to his Duration because there is such a Being in Reality And therefore whenever we go about to consider of Time or of the Period or Term of the Duration of a Being we can ampliate it so as to suppose it shall never cease to be but have its Being still continued on without end That is we can connect the Idea that we have of Eternity with a Being and so render it Eternal But this could never be done if there were no Idea of Eternity at all if there were nothing Eternal if there were no God The case is the same as to all the other Perfections of the Divine Nature We have clear Idea's and Notions of them in our Minds and therefore we can talk about them and be understood because there are real Idea's that answer to those words that we use and something really existing that answers to those Idea's But were there no such Being nor any thing Real in Nature to deduce our Idea's from were there no God 't is impossible there could be any such Idea's at all But however this Assertion That the Mind of Man was able to Invent the Notion of a Deity and communicate it to the World is a most flat and palpable Contradiction to what the Atheist at other times urges and that too as founded on Principles that he is very fond of In my last Discourse I shewed you That he objected against the Being of a God from our not being able to have any Idea of Him and this he endeavours to support by asserting also That we have no Knowledge but Sense and that all our Conceptions are Passive Now both these are absolutely inconsistent with the Original that he is now attributing to the Notion of a God For if it be true as he saith it is That we can have no Idea of God 't is very strange to suppose that a Politick Man should Invent and the World Receive the Idea or Notion of That which 'tis impossible for any one to invent or receive 'T is a little odd that a Man should first cunningly devise he knew not what and then the affrighted World believe they knew not what and that we should prove and assert and the Atheist ridicule and deny the Existence of That which we do none of us all know any thing about But so it must be according to the Atheist's Uniform Scheme of Things Again If as he asserts all our Conceptions be Passive and all our Knowledge Sense which way could this Cunning Inventer of a God come by his Notion or Idea of Him how could his Mind attain any such feigning and ampliating Power For according to the Atheist's Principles the Mind could have no Active much less Spontaneous Power at all but all our Idea's and Conceptions would be meer necessary Motions mechanically occasioned by the Impressions of External Objects So that as Protagoras tells us in Plato's Theoetet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is neither possible to conceive that which is not nor indeed any thing else but only just as our Mind suffers it by Impressions from without And therefore no Man could ever possibly Invent any thing at all nor have any Power within him of putting or joining together two or more simple idea's or of ampliating or enlarging any Idea or Notion at all much less could he grow so very subtle as to Invent the Notion of a Deity And as no Law-giver nor Politician could we see have Invented the Notion of a Deity if he had had a mind so to do so it appears very weak and foolish in him to do it if he could For while there was no Belief among Men of any Divine and Almighty Power he would have been a mortal God himself as Hobbs calls the Commonwealth His Will would have been his Law and Men's Obedience to Him would have been founded in the Fear they were under of his great Power And this according to the Atheistical Principles would have been a much better Stay and Support to his Authority than the idle Obligations of Conscience and Religion For the aforesaid Author tells us That if the Fear of Spirits i. e. of a God were taken away Men would be much better fitted for Civil Obedience And in another place he goes a little further yet and saith That 't is impossible any Government can stand where any other than the Sovereign hath a Power of giving greater Rewards than Life and greater Punishments than Death That is where there is any Obligation on Mens Minds to a Divine and Almighty Power which they will chuse to obey rather than the Unlawful Commands of an Arbitrary Prince that can only kill the Body Now there is no doubt but that this is true of such a Power or Government as that he calculated his Leviathan for i. e. One absolutely Arbitrary and Tyrannical And all Power must be so if there be no God and no Antecedent Good and Evil but what the Will of the Sovereign shall make so as Mr. Hobbs positively asserts there is not Therefore that Man must act very unwisely who when he was possessed of Power enough to give Laws to and govern others by his sole Will and Pleasure would ever invent the Notion of a God and Religion For this was the direct way to cramp himself in his Power to tie up his own Hands and to let the People see that he himself is
we can never imagine that Gold can be ever brought to think reason or move it self spontaneously any more than we can conceive a Soul or Mind to be yellow heavy or ductile That is we have quite different Idea's of each of them and which nothing but wilful or long habituated Ignorance can ever make us confound together And thus it appears to me that we may have as clear an Idea of Incorporeal Substance as we have of Body and that the former is no more unconceivable than the latter And therefore 't is as absurd to argue against the Existence of a Spirit only from our not having any clear Idea of the Substance of a Spirit as it would be to say there is no such thing as Body because we don't know exactly what the Substance of Body is which I dare say no Man can affirm that he doth 'T is very possible that Men may be so blinded and prejudiced by false Principles so stupified by Ignorance Idleness or Vice and so engaged and enslaved to a peculiar sett of Notions which advance and support that way of acting and proceeding which they take delight in that a great many things may appear Unconceivable and Impossible to them which shall be far from being so to others whose Minds are free and more enured to thinking Should you tell a Man who is a Stranger to Geometry and Astronomy of the many admirable and surprizing Truths that can certainly be demonstrated from the Principles of those Noble Sciences he would boldly pronounce them Impossible and all your Discourse and Proof should you attempt any such thing would to such a Person be Nonsense and your words meer empty and insignificant Sounds And there are many Persons in the World on whom the clearest and strongest Method of Reasoning that ever was will make no manner of impression at all because their Minds are not at all enured to a close way of Arguing and Thinking And truly the Atheistical Writers do discover so poor a Knowledge in Philosophy and so very little acquaintance with true Reasoning and Science that 't is no wonder at all that they should not be able to conceive and comprehend a great many things which others are very well satisfied with I know very well saith the Ingenious Person before cited that People whose Thoughts are immersed in Matter and who have so subjected their Minds to their Senses that they seldom reflect on any thing beyond them are apt to say they cannot comprehend a thinking thing which perhaps is true c. And therefore such a Philosopher as Mr. Hobbs that defines Knowledge to be Sense and saith that the Mind of Man is nothing but Motion in the Organical Parts of his Body may easily be infatuated so far as to assert that there is no other Substance but Body and that a Spirit or Incorporeal Being is a Nonsensical Contradictory and Impossible Notion While Others who can raise their Minds a little higher and who can penetrate farther into things will be fully satisfied that such Philosophy is Nonsense and Impossibility As indeed some Persons in all Ages of the World of which we have any Account have ever been For 2. Which is another very good Ground from whence to refute this absurd Opinion that there is no such thing as an Incorporeal Being I say there have been always many Persons in the World that have firmly believed and embraced the Doctrine of Immaterial Substances and who have also asserted the Deity to be of that Nature And this will Undeniably refute the two great Points of Mr. Hobbs his Opinion For if it be proved plainly that there hath been all along a received Belief and Opinion that there are Immaterial Substances and that God himself is such an One it is then most clear and certain that the Notion is neither inconceivable contradictory nor nonsense and also that it did not take its Rise and Original only from the Abuse of the Philosophy of Aristotle Not the former for what is in its own Nature unconceivable nonsensical and absurd could never sure gain an Admittance into the Belief of so many great Men as we shall see presently this Opinion did Not the latter for what was commonly received in the World before the time of Aristotle could never be derived only from his and the Schoolmen's Philosophy as Mr. Hobbs is pleased to say this Belief of Immaterial Substances was And that there was always in the World a Notion and Belief of another more noble Substance than Body and that the Deity was of an Incorporeal or Spiritual Nature we have the united Suffrages of all the Ancient Writers that are preserved down to our time Cicero tells us That the Heathen Philosophers generally defined God to be Mens pura sincera soluta libera ab omni concretione mortali and speaking of Thales Milesius in particular he saith of him Aquam dixit esse Initium Rerum Deum autem cum Mentem quae ex aquâ cuncta fingeret Now this Mind they all distinguished plainly from Matter and looked upon it as a much more Noble Principle than 't was possible to conceive Matter to be Lactantius acquaints of Pythagoras Quòd unum deum confitetur dicens Incorporalem esse mentem quae per omnem Naturam diffusa intenta vitalem sensum cunctis Animalibus tribuat And Plutarch gives us much the same Account of him in his Books De Placitis Philosophorum viz. That he made two Principles one Active which was Mind or God The other Passive or the Matter of the World And those Verses of Empedocles are very remarkable wherein speaking of the Deity he asserts Him not to be of Humane shape And also that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. That he is no way perceivable by any of our Senses which is as much as to say he is Incorporeal And in the next Lines he doth expresly tell us what he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A sacred and ineffable Mind which by swift Thoughts moves and actuates the whole World Anaxagoras also asserted That an ordering and regulating Mind was the first Principle of all things and this Mind he made as Aristotle saith of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The only pure simple and unmixt thing in the World thereby plainly distinguishing it from Matter the Parts of which he who was as Sextus Empericus calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knew very well to be promiscuously blended and mixed togethere very where Sextus also tells us That That Mind which Anaxagoras asserted to be God was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Active Principle in opposition to Matter which is a Passive one and this is agreeable to what the Poets say of Spiritus intus alit mens agitat molem c. We are told likewise by Sextus That Xenophanes held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That there is but One God and he Incorporeal And
Plutarch describing the Deity hath these remarkable words God is Mind a separated Form perfectly unmixed with Matter and without any thing that is passible 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in another place he asserts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That 't is impossible Matter alone can be the sole Principle of all things Plato every where distinguisheth between corporeal and incorporeal Substances calling the former by the Names of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sensible and the latter always either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immaterial or intelligible and he saith That certain intelligible and incorporeal Forms are the true and first Substance and that incorporeal Things which are the greatest and most excellent of all others are discoverable by reason only and nothing else And in another place he saith That they were instructed by their forefathers that Mind and a certain wonderful Wisdom did at first frame and doth now govern all things His words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Phileb p. 28. Which sufficiently shews the Antiquity of the Notion of an Incorporeal Deity and the way also how they came by it Of the same Opinion also was Socrates as we are told by Plutarch and others Lib. de Placit Philos. 1. c. 3. Zeno and the Stoicks defined the Deity to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Intellectual and Rational Nature or as Plutarch recites their Opinion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Intelligent Spirit devoid of all Bodily shape Ibid. And Sextus Empericus tells us of Aristotle that he constantly asserted God to be Incorporeal and the Utmost Bounds of the Universe And Aristotle concludes his Book of Physicks with affirming that 't is impossible the first Mover or God can have any Magnitude but he must needs be devoid of Parts and Indivisible And Plutarch gives us this as the received and common Opinion of the Stoicks that God was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Spirit that was extended or did penetrate throughout the whole World De Placitis Philosoph lib. 1. c. 3. p. 882. Now by these Passages and many others that might easily be produced it appears very plain that the most Ancient Writers had a good clear Notion of God and that they speak of him as of a Mind perfectly distinct from Matter or as an immaterial or incorporeal Being Many of them also deliver themselves very expresly as to the Soul of Man which as Plutarch tells us they generally asserted to be Incorporeal and that it was naturally a Self-moving and Intelligible Substance But of this more in another place And that the Ancients did believe God to be a Spirit or a most Powerful Intelligent and Perfect Immaterial Substance will yet farther appear if we consider what Notion they had of and how they defined Matter or Body Plato describes it by the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which thrusts against other Bodies and resists their Touch or Impulse Others call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which so fills up a place as at that time to exclude from it any other Body Sometimes they called it the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in contradistinction to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is they distinguished it to be of a pure passive Nature and which was acted and determined only by Impulse from without it or distinct from it they knew very well that there was also besides it some Active Thing something that was the Cause of Motion and Action in the Universe For as Plutarch well observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is impossible Matter alone can produce any thing unless there be besides it some Active Cause Sextus Empiricus also gives this Definition of Matter or Body That it is that which resists other things which are brought against it for Resistance saith he or Impenetrability is the true Property of Body By these Accounts that they have given us of Matter or Body 't is very easie to understand their Notion or Idea of it which indeed was the Just and True one They thought Matter or Body to be a purely Passive Thing incapable of moving or acting by it self but wholly determined either by some Internal and Self-moving Mind or by the Motions and Impulses of other Bodies without it That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as we now adays speak Impenetrably extended and did so fill up space or place as to exclude any other Body from being in the same Place with it at the same Time If to this you add what Aristotle and some others said of it that it was also capable of all Forms Figures and Modifications you have then the whole that ever they thought Matter could do or be Now from hence 't is exceeding clear that they could not as indeed we find actually they did not think Matter or Body the only Substance in the World and that the Deity was Material or Corporeal For they always described the Divine Nature by Attributes and Properties that were the very Reverses of what they appropriated to Matter or Body God they have told us is an Intelligent Mind pervading and encompassing all things an Active Energetical Principle the Cause of all Motion and Operation whatever Intangible indivisible invisible and no ways the Object of our Bodily Senses But yet whose Essence is plainly discoverable by our reasoning and Understanding Faculty This was as we have seen the Notion or Idea that many of the Ancient Philosophers had of the Deity and this plainly shews us that they look'd upon him to be what St. John here defines him an Incorporeal Being or a Spirit There were indeed some even then as I have before shewed who being wholly immersed in Matter themselves did assert that there was nothing else but Body in the World Such were Leucippus and Democritus and afterwards Epicurus and his Sect who perverted the Ancient Atomical and true Philosophy to an Atheistical Sense and made use of it for the banishing the Notion and Belief of a God out of their own and others Minds as indeed some others long before them had attempted to do But in this 't is very plain as an Excellent Person of our Nation hath observed that these Men did not understand the Philosophy they pretended to For it doth most clearly follow from the Principles of the True Atomical or Corpuscular Philosophy that there must be some other Substance distinct from and more Noble than Matter and which is of an Immaterial Incorporeal or Spiritual Nature And this I hope it will not be judged impertinent briefly to prove at this Time because some who seem not so throughly to understand it have of late reckoned the Mechanical Philosophy among the Causes of the growth of Atheism and Infidelity It is very much to the Purpose that the Ancient Atomists before Democritus and Leucippus did plainly assert and maintain the Doctrine of
we cannot attain any Idea of or That what is absolutely Vnconceiveable is really nothing at all perhaps it may be true taking it in the most strict and proper sence of the words for though I am not of Protagoras's Mind that Man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet as I think that That which is absolutely Unconceivable in its own Nature is not possible to be Existent so what is absolutely so to us we can know nothing at all of nor reason nor argue about it since there is no doing of this but from our Ideas But I cannot see how this will be advantageous at all to the Cause of Infidelity For there is neither any one that asserts nor is the Atheist able to prove that That Being which we call God is absolutely Unconceiveable There is a vast difference between a thing 's being Vnconceivable and Incomprehensible between our having no Idea at all of a thing and our having an Imperfect one and between our knowing Nothing at all of a Being and our comprehending all the Possible Perfections and Excellencies of such a Being We readily grant that the Immense Nature of God is incomprehensible to our finite Understandings but we don't say 't is absolutely Unconceivable and that we can know nothing at all about it The common Notion which all Mankind have of a God is a sufficient Refutation of this Part of the Objection as it is also a very good Proof of the real Existence of a Deity for if there were no such Being 't is impossible to conceive how any Idea of him could ever have come into any one's Mind as I shall hereafter more largely prove 2. There is implied in this Objection That we can have no possible Idea nor Notion of the Existence of any thing that is not the Object of our Senses And from hence these Sublime Thinkers argue against the Existence of a Deity and conclude there is no God because they cannot see him and because he is not perceivable by any of our Bodily Senses Thus one of our Modern Atheistical Writers asserts That the only Evidence we can have of the Existence of any thing is from Sense And in another place Whatsoever we can conceive saith he hath been perceived first by Sense either at once or in Parts and a Man can have no Thought representing any thing not subject to Sense And he defines Sense to be Original Knowledge Which is but the Reverse of what Protagoras long ago determin'd for Plato in his Theaetetus tells us That he defined all Knowledge to be Sense Now is not this admirable Philosophy and worthy of those that pretend to a sublimer pitch of Knowledge than the Vulgar There is no Knowledge say they but Sense If so then as Protagoras saith all Sense must be Knowledge and consequently he that sees hears smells or feels any thing must immediately know all that is to be known about it By seeing the Letters of any Language or hearing the Words pronounced a Man or a Beast must needs understand all the Sense and Meaning of it and the Philosophick Nature of all Bodies will be perfectly comprehended as soon as ever they once come within the reach of our Senses This is indeed a good easie method of attaining Learning and perhaps very suitable to the Genius of these Gentlemen But I cannot account from this Notion how they come to have so much more Penetration and Knowledge than their Neighbours Are their Eyes and Ears Noses and Feeling so much more accurate than those of the Vulgar Yes doubtless these are truly Men of Sense their Lyncean Eyes can penetrate Mill-stones and the least silent whisper of Nature moves the Intelligent Drum of their tender Ears nothing escapes their Knowledge but what is undiscoverable by the nicest Sense and can only be comprehended by Reason Reason an Ignis Fatuus of the Mind whose uncertain Direction they scorn to follow while this Light of Nature Sense can be their Guide Nor will it avail them to alledge here that when they say we have no Knowledge but what we have from our Senses they mean only that all our Knowledge comes in that way and not by Innate Idea's for the Author I have mentioned above is express that we can have no thought of any thing not subject to Sense that the only Knowledge we have of the Existence of all things is from Sense and that Sense is Original Knowledge And if so there can be no such thing as comparing or distinguishing of Idea's in our Mind but the simple Idea's of Sensible Objects being impressed upon our Brain must needs convey to us by that means all the Knowledge that we can ever obtain about them and that as soon too as ever the Objects are perceived But than this nothing can be more false and absurd for 't is plain that by our bare Sensations of Objects we know nothing at all of their Natures Our Mind indeed by these Sensations is vigorously excited to enquire further about them but this we could by no means do if Sense were the highest Faculty and Power in our Natures and we were quite devoid of a Reasoning and Thinking Mind This Democritus of old was very well aware of however he comes now to be deserted by the Modern Atheistick Writers for saith he There is in us two kinds of Knowledges one Dark and Obscure which is by the Senses the other Genuine and Proper which is by the Mind And nothing can be more plain than that we have certain Knowledge of the Existence of many things which never were nor perhaps can possibly be the Objects of our Bodily Senses Protagoras himself saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Take heed that none of the Uninitiated hear you who are such as think nothing to Exist but what they can lay hold of with their Hands and who will not allow any thing that is Invisible to have a place among Beings The Epicurean Atheist must needs grant the Existence of his Atoms and his Empty Space when yet they must be both acknowledged to be no way sensible Those that hold a Soul or Life in Matter Plastically diffused through all Parts of the Universe by which all things are actuated and regulated cannot deny but this Power is Invisible and no way the Object of Bodily Sense Nay those that assert a Corporeal Deity and say that nothing can possibly exist but Body must needs own that something of this Deity as his Wisdom Power and Understanding which is certainly the Chief and most Noble of all his Essence can no ways fall under our Bodily Senses Let him that asserts That what is not the Object of Sense is really nothing at all let him tell me if he ever saw that Power Faculty Understanding or Mind by which he is enabled to make such a Determination That there is such a Power or Mind in him 't is impossible for him to doubt or deny for that
very doubting and denying will refute him and must convince him that there must be something in him of a Real Nature that can thus Think and Consider Doubt and Deny and at last conclude That there is nothing Actually Existent but what is Sensible For what is really and absolutely Nothing can never Think Consider Doubt or Determine Now let him call this Mind or Soul of his what he pleases I do not here consider its Nature let it be a Substance distinct from Matter be it a happy Combination of Animal Spirits or the brisk Agitation of any fine and subtile Parts of Matter 't is all one to our present purpose it certainly Exists or is and yet is it by no means an Object of Sense For Animal Spirits Motion and the sinest and subtilest Parts of Matter are no more sensible to us now than an Incorporeal Substance is And as he is thus assured that there is something real in himself which yet is the Object of none of his Senses so he cannot but conclude the same of other Men that are round about him that they also have a Soul or Mind of the same Nature for he must know and be satisfied that they can think reason doubt affirm deny and determine as well as himself Now if he must grant that there are on this Account many things existent in the World which do no way fall under the cognisance of our Senses it will be strangely senseless and ridiculous to argue against the Being of a God from His not being so and to deny that there is any such thing because he cannot see Him with his Bodily Eyes because he cannot feel Him with his Hands and hear the Sound of his Voice actually speaking from Heaven For the Existence of that Divine Being whom no Eye hath seen nor can see is as plainly demonstrable from Reason and Nature from his visible Works in the World and from the inward Sentiments of our unprejudiced Minds as the Being of our Own and Others Minds is from the power of thinking and reasoning that we find in our selves and them 3. But Thirdly 't is objected further That we cannot have any Idea of God and consequently may conclude There is no such Being because he is by Divines said to be Incomprehensible and Infinite That is say they something which we can know nothing at all about for we cannot have any Phantasm or Conception of any such thing Thus saith that famous Atheistical Writer Whatever we know we learn from our Phantasms but there is no Phantasm of Infinite and therefore no Knowledge or Conception of it No Man saith he can have in his mind an Image of Infinite Power or Time And there is no Conception or Idea of that which we call Infinite In another place he asserts That the Attributes of God signifie Nothing true nor false nor any Opinion of our Brain and are not sufficient Premises to inferr Truth or convince Falshood And the Name of God he saith is used 〈◊〉 to make us Conceive him but that we may Honour him And he elsewhere saith That those that venture to discourse Philosophically of the Nature of God or to reason of his Nature from his Attributes losing their Understanding in the very first attempt fall from one Inconvenience to another without end or number and do only discover their Astonishment and Rusticity This Bold Writer doth in another place tell us That God must not be said to be Finite and so being neither Finite nor Infinite he must be nothing at all Which is the very same Dilemma that the Sceptick Sextus Empiricus makes use of against a Deity Another Modern Author of the same stamp tells us That he that calls any thing Infinite doth but Rei quam non capit attribuere nomen quod non Intelligit Give an unintelligible Name to a thing which he doth not understand All which agrees exactly with what Sextus also saith in many places of his Book and whom these Gentlemen follow pretty closely in most things without taking any notice at all of him Now to this I return That as 't is very foolish and precarious to deny the Existence of a God because He is not an Object of our Bodily Senses so to conclude that there is no such Being from our not being able perfectly to comprehend Him and to have a true and adequate Idea of him is equally absurd and unaccountable For at this rate we may soon come to deny the Existence of most things in Nature since there are very many of which we do not adequately comprehend the Nature of and know all that is to be known about them There is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 something Incomprehensible in the Nature of all things Are there not a thousand Beings which we are sure are truly and actually existent in Nature the manner of whose Operation and Action we cannot comprehend and whose Phaenomena we cannot Philosophically explain Let any of these Penetrating Gentlemen try their Skill at Gravity Light Sound Magnetism and Electricity and oblige the World with such an adequate Account of any one of them as shall make all impartial and curious Men acquiesce in it as satisfactory Let him clearly shew us how his own Sensations are made how the Circulation of the Blood first begins and continues its Vital Tour round his Body how Pestilential and Contagious Diseases first invade and are propagated how several Medicines that may be properly enough call'd Specifick's operate and particularly how the Cortex Peruvianus cures an Intermitting Fever In a word let him tell us how his own Body setting aside Accidents decays grows old and dies when the same Digestions and Assimulations are made to Day as were Yesterday and there is no apparent defect in the Nutriment of any one part of it He that can account for these and many other such like things which are obvious to every one's daily Observation will certainly approve himself to be a Man of very curious and acute Thought and of very deep Insight into Nature and when he hath fully convinced me that he throughly comprehends the Nature of but these few things I will allow that he hath some ground to disbelieve the Existence of whatever appears to him Incomprehensible But if a Person will candidly own as he that hath any Knowledge and Modesty must do That there are many things in the History of Nature of which he cannot meet with a satisfactory Solution and Explication he hath certainly no manner of reason to disbelieve the Existence of a God on the same account and to say There is no such Thing because his Nature is Incomprehensible to our finite and imperfect Capacities We cannot by searching find out God nor discover the Almighty unto perfection Job xi 7 But again There is a vast difference between Apprehending and Comprehending of a thing between knowing a thing really to be and knowing all that is possible to be known about that
some Animadversions on a Book entituled Christianity not Mysterious In Octavo The Notion of a GOD Neither from FEAR nor POLICY A SERMON Preach'd at the CATHEDRAL-CHURCH of St. Paul March the 7 th 1697 8. BEING The Third of the LECTURE for that Year Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esq By JOHN HARRIS M. A. and Fellow of the ROYAL-SOCIETY LONDON Printed by J. L. for Richard Wilkin at the King's-Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1698. PSALM x. 4 The Wicked through the Pride of his Countenance will not seek after God neither is God in all his Thoughts IN my last Discourse on these words I came to consider the Third Particular I had before observed in them which was The great Charge the Psalmist brings against the Wicked and Proud Person here spoken of viz. Wilful Atheism and Infidelity He will not seek after God and all his thoughts are There is no God Under which I proposed to Consider and Refute the Atheist's Objections against the Being of a God in general And these I found might be reduced to these Two Heads I. That we can have no Idea of God II. That the Notion of Him which is about in the World owes its Original to the foolish Fears and Ignorance of some Men and to the crafty Designs of others The former of these I have already refuted and shewed that it is Groundless and Precarious in all its Parts I shall now therefore consider the Second Objection against the Being of a God in general viz. That the Notion of a Deity which is so generally found among Mankind owes its Original to the foolish Fears and Ignorance of some Men and to the designing and crafty Figments of others And here I shall first give you the Sense of these kind of Writers on this Point And then endeavour to shew you how very weak and trivial their Arguments are and how very far short they come of Disproving the Existence of a Deity And first I shall give you the full sense of this Objection from the words of those that bring it beginning with the Modern Writers who as you will find by and by have little or nothing new but like Carriers Horses follow one another in a Track and because the first went wrong all the rest will succeed him in the same Errour not considering that he who comes behind may take an advantage to avoid that Pit which those that went before are fallen into as it is in the words of the Translator of Philostratus But here it must be premised That since these kind of Men do frequently disguise their true meaning It is not the bare Words only but the Scope of a Writer that giveth the true Light by which any Writing is to be interpreted as Mr. Hobbs very well observes yet this must be said for both him and the other Modern Atheistick Writers That their Disguise is so very thin and superficial that any one may easily see through it and discover their true Meaning and Design Nothing can be clearer than that 't is the great scope of the Author of Great is Diana of the Ephesians to persuade the World That the first Original of all Religion was from Craft and Imposture and that it was cultivated and carried on by the Cunning and Avarice of the Priests And in his Anima Mundi pag. 13 14. he tells us That Superstition by which these kind of Writers always mean Religion in general did certainly proceed from some Crafty and Designing Person who observed what were the Inclinations of Mankind and so adapted his Fictions accordingly He pretended to have some extraordinary way revealed to him from an Invisible Power whereby he was able to instruct the People and to put them into a way of being happy in a Future State And in another place he saith That Mankind being ill-natured and unapt to oblige others without Reward as also judging of God Almighty by themselves did at first conceive the Gods to be like their Eastern Princes before whom no Man might come empty-handed and thus came the Original of Sacrifices And this Institution he saith was improved by the crafty Sacerdotal Order into all that costly and extravagant Superstition that did afterwards so abound in the World Now in this passage 't is plain that he makes all the Jewish Religion to be nothing but Priest-craft and Imposture tho' on wretched poor grounds as I shall hereafter sufficiently make appear And his Opinion of the Christian Religion may easily be guessed by what he delivers Anim. Mund. pag. 124. viz. That most Christian Churches like the Musk-melon from the Dunghill were raised from the filthy Corruption and Superstition of Paganism And in another place he saith That he will engage to make appear That a Temporal Interest was the great Machine on which all Humane Actions ever moved he means in the Establishing of the Jewish and Christian Religions and that the common Pretence of Piety and Religion was but like Grace before a Meal i. e. according to him nothing but a meer customary piece of Folly that signifies nothing at all and which he frequently ridicules and exposes Now all this though not in plain and express words yet in the most obvious sense and meaning is equally applicable to the Notion of a God and no doubt was so intended by the Author And indeed take away Religion and the Notion of a God must of course follow For 't is impossible to think that if there be a God he should not expect Veneration and Worship from those Creatures of his that he hath rendred capable of doing it which therefore is their reasonable Service Rom. 12.1 After the same manner doth Spinoza declare himself as to the Origin of Religion which he also calls by the Name of Superstition He tells us That the true Cause from whence Superstition took its rise is preserved and maintained is Fear That if all things would but succeed according to Mens Minds they would never be enslaved by Superstition But because they are often in great streights and so put to it that no Counsel or Help will be beneficial to them they are tossed and bandied about between Hope and Fear and at last have their Mind so debilitated that they are prone to believe any thing But that in reality all those things which have been the Objects of Mens vain Religious Worship are nothing but the dreadful Phantasms and mad Figments of a sorrowful and timorous Mind And the reason he saith why all Men are thus subject by Nature to Superstition is only from Fear and not as some have fansied from any confused Idea of a God which they will have to be impressed on all Mankind The Author of the Leviathan speaks yet a little plainer as to this Point Ignorant Men saith he feign to themselves several kinds of Invisible Powers stand in awe of their own Imaginations in time of Distress invoke them in time
Divine and Almighty Being Universally impressed upon the Minds of Men as no doubt but there is this I say is a very convincing Argument that such a Belief hath a good Foundation in the Nature of the thing and consequently hath Truth at the bottom And therefore 't is plain that these Men did not Invent but find this Notion and Belief actually Existing by a kind of Anticipation in the Hearts of all Mankind And that they could not possibly invent it had there been no Ground nor Reason for such a Belief I shall plainly prove by and by But again That the Notion of a God did not arise only from Fear is plain from hence That Mankind hath gotten an Idea of Him that could never proceed only from that Passion If Fear only were to make a God it would compose him of nothing but black and terrible Idea's it would represent Him to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all envious and spiteful a grim angry and vindicative Being one that delights in nothing but to exercise his Tyrannical Power and Cruelty upon Mankind we should then believe him to be such a Power as the Indians do their Evil God and we do the Devil a mischievous and bloody Deity that is the Author of nothing but Evil and Misery in the World for these must be the dreadful Attributes of a Being which Fear only would create and set up in our Hearts But now instead of this we find a quite different Notion of God in the World We justly believe Him to be a most Kind Loving and Gracious Being and whose mercies are over all his works We are taught by the Scriptures those Sacred Volumes of his Will to believe that He at first Created the World and all things that are therein to display his Goodness and Kindness to his Creatures That he wills not nor delights in the death of a sinner nor in the evil and misery of any thing but that He hath by most admirable methods of Divine Love provided for our Happiness both here and hereafter Now such an Account as this of the Deity could never take its Rise from Fear only And therefore since it cannot be denied but that we have such a Notion of God it must have some more Noble and Generous an Original We find indeed in our selves a just Fear and Dread of Offending so Good and Gracious a God and we believe it suitable to his Justice to punish those that will pertinaciously continue in a state of Rebellion against Him after having refused and slighted the repeated Overtures of his Mercy But then we know very well That the Notion we have of a Deity is not occasioned by and derived from this Fear but on the contrary this Fear from it 'T is the Natural Consequence and Effect of the Belief and Knowledge of a God but it cannot be the Cause and Original of it For Fear alone can never dispose the Mind of Man to imagine a Being that is infinitely Kind Merciful and Gracious The Atheist therefore must here taken in Hope too as well as Fear as a joint Cause of his pretended Origin of the Belief of a God and say That Mankind came to imagine that there was some Powerful and Invisible Being which they hoped would do them as much good as they were afraid it would do them hurt But these two contrary Idea's like Equal Quantities in an Equation with contrary Signs will destroy one another and consequently the Remainder will be nothing And therefore the Mind of Man must lay aside such an Idea of God as soon as he hath well considered it for it will signifie just nothing at all Another very good Argument That the Notion of a God did not take its first Original from Fear only may be drawn from hence That those that do believe and know most of God are the least Subject to that servile Passion If Fear only occasioned Mens Notion and Belief of a God the consequence must be that where the Notion of a Deity is most strong and vivid there Men must be most timorous and apprehensive of Danger there the greatest distrust suspicion and anxious sollicitousness about the Events of Futurity would be always found But this is so far from being true in Fact that no one is so free from those Melancholy and Dreadful Thoughts and Apprehensions as he that truly believes in and Fears God For he can find always in Him Almighty Defence and Protection he can cast all his care on God who he knows careth for him When all the treacherous Comforts of this World leave him and when nothing but a gloomy Scene of Affliction Distress and Misery presents its self here yea even when Heart it self and Strength begin to fail God will be he knows the Strength of his Heart and his Portion for ever and even in the vast Multitude of his Afflictions God's Comforts will refresh his Soul But 't is far otherwise with the miserable Wretch that hath no Belief of nor any Knowledge of God if he fall into Affliction Trouble or Misery he hath nothing to support him He is the most abject and dispirited of all Mankind his whole head is sick and his heart is faint and his Spirit cannot sustain his Infirmity for he hath not only no Power and Ability to bear the present load of Misery but he expects yet much worse to come and notwithstanding all his former Incredulity and Bravery he now as the Devil himself doth believes and trembles And therefore though as Plutarch observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it be the chief Design of Atheism to give Men an Exemption from Fear yet 't is a very foolish one and falls very far short of answering its End for it deserts and fails its Votaries in their greatest Extremities and Necessities and by depriving them of all just Grounds for hope must needs expose them to the most dismal Invasions of Fear And thus I think it is very plain That the Notion of a God could not take its first Original from Fear As to the Ignorance of Second Causes which is sometimes alledged as another Occasion of the Notion of a Deity the Modern Atheists do not much insist upon it and therefore I need not do so in its Refutation I have shewed already whence they had it and I think it sufficient to observe here that there are no Men so Ignorant of Second Causes nor any that give so poor and trifling Accounts of the Phaenomena of Nature as these Atheistical Philosophers do And therefore Ignorance ought rather to be reckoned among the Causes of Atheism and Infidelity than of the Idea of God and Religion for I am very well assured that a through insight into the Works of Nature and a serious Contemplation of that admirable Wisdom excellent Order and that useful Aptitude and Relation that the several Parts of the World have to each other must needs convince any one that they are the Products of a Divine and Almighty
Power The Invisible things of God may be understood by the things that are made and his Eternal Power and Godhead discovered by this means as hath been excellently demonstrated by the learned Dr. Cudworth Dr. Bentley Mr. Ray and many others And these kind of Gentlemen have betrayed their shallow and superficial Knowledge of things by nothing more than by pretending to give an Account of the Original of the World the Motion of the Heavenly Bodies of Gravity and several other Phaenomena of Nature without having recourse to a Deity as I shall hereafter more particularly observe But I now hasten to Refute that which they make their Great and most Common Objection against the Being of a God And to shew 2. That the Notion of a God did not nor could not arise from Cunning and Contrivance and that it was not invented by any Crafty and Politick Person Though that it did do so is the constant Assertion of these Gentlemen and they do it with as much assurance as if it were a Self-evident Proposition In all Companies they will nauseously tire you with this Battology over and over again That All Religion is a Cheat and the greatest Cheat of all is Religion But this themselves have happily discovered and therefore they Scorn to be imposed upon by Priest-craft they will neither be ridden by Priests nor lead by them they can go without Leading-strings and won't be put to the Temporal Charge of a Spiritual Guide and they have quitted the Thoughts of going to Heaven by the same means as they go to the Play-house i. e. by giving Money to the Door-keepers As the Translator of Philostratus insolently expresses it Now after all this bold and repeated Exclamation against Priest-Craft and Holy Shams c. Would not one think that they had some demonstrative Ground to prove that the Notion of God and Religion is all a Cheat and Imposture Would not one suppose that they could name the very Person that first Invented this Fourbe tell us when and where he lived and plainly prove by what means he came to impose so grosly on Mankind and how they came to be such Fools as to take it and dully to submit to it ever since Nothing sure that is less than a direct Demonstration ought to protect a Man under so rude a Liberty as these Gentlemen take of ridiculing all the Sacred Laws of God and Men. But have they any such Proof ready or have they ever yet produced it No nor is it possible they ever should as appears plainly from the Ancient Histories of all Nations in the World In no one of these do we ever find the least mention made of any one that Invented the Notion of a God 'T was a Thing taken for Granted by all the Ancient Law-givers that there was a God This they never went about to prove nor had they any need so to do or to feign it for they found it universally and naturally stamp'd upon the Minds of Mankind This Moses himself doth not so much as attempt to teach the Jews as knowing very well that it was what they had a general Notion and Idea of before And Homer speaks every where of the Gods as of Beings universally known and believed and never goes about to prove their Existence The same thing appears in Hesiod and in the Fragments that we have of all the Ancient Greek Poets And though it be not true in Fact yet 't is a good Argument ad Hominem against the Atheists that Lucretius pretends to tell you when Atheism began and who was the first Bold Man that disputed and denied the Being of a God This he saith was Epicurus But he cannot deny but that in so doing Epicurus contradicted the common Sentiments of all Mankind and broke through those Fears and Obligations that the generality of Men were under to a Divine Power But to Refute a little more Methodically this trite Objection I say that the Notion of a God could not derive its Original from the cunning Invention of any Politick Person for these Reasons 1. Because the pretended Inventor himself could never possibly have come by such a Notion had there been no such Being as a God Sextus Empiricus observes very well That though 't is pretended that Law-givers and Politicians invented the Notion of a God yet the Asserters of it are not aware of an Absurdity that arises thence for if it should be asked how they themselves came by such a Notion they must be at a loss they will not say they had it from others nor can they account how they came by it and therefore it must have been from the beginning and so all Men must have a Notion of God though not all after the same way And indeed 't is not possible to imagine that such a Notion could ever have come into any one's Head had there been no such Being as a Deity Were he an absolute Non-entity and really Nothing at all 't is unconceivable how any one could ever attain an Idea of God or have coined any word that should so have expressed that Idea as to render it intelligible to any one else The Mind of Man cannot invent or make any new simple Idea or Cogitation it cannot possibly make a Positive Conception of that which is really nothing at all Which way soever we come by our Idea's we cannot have one of what is absolutely a Non-entity for what is absolutely Nothing can neither come into us by our Senses nor be innate in our Minds And therefore if there were no God we could never have had any Idea of Him nor could any one ever possibly invent or frame such a Notion in his Mind I know the compounding ampliating and feigning Power of the Mind will here be alledged and it will be said that we may by that means frame Notions of things which perhaps did never nor ever will Exist Thus we may gain the Notion of a Flying Horse of a Creature half a Man and half a Horse a Man of a Thousand Foot high c. and therefore say they why might not the Mind of Man by this compounding and ampliating Power feign as well the Notion of a Deity To which I answer That this Power in our Minds doth not nor cannot extend so far All that we can do by it is to connect together two or more possible and consistent Idea's or to Ampliate or Enlarge any one or more of them in point of Time Extent c. Thus as was before said by connecting the Idea's of Wings and a Horse or of a Horse and a Man we may feign a Pegasus or a Centaure and I can imagine either of these Creatures or any other to live Five Thousand times as long or to be Fifty thousand times as big as is usual But all this is still short of what 't is brought for and will give no account at all of the Invention of the Idea of a God
accountable to God as well as they 't is to teach them that the Power he hath is but a Trust committed to him by God which he is to discharge for his Subjects Good and Advantage and not only to gratifie his own Will and Humour And this Notion might induce the Subjects of an Arbitrary and Tyrannical Prince to ease him of the Trouble of a Government that they perceived involved him in a great deal of Guilt and would proportionably encrease the Account that he must one day give of his Stewardship But 2. As the Idea and Notion of a God cannot possibly have been invented by any one so neither could it have been understood or believed by Mankind if it had been so Had there been only one Person that had coined the Idea of a God and no manner of Notion at all of any of his Attributes or Perfections previous to this in the Minds of Men what would it have signified to tell them that there was a God how could they understand the meaning of a meer Arbitrary word that had no manner of foundation in Nature nor any Idea or Notion answering to it Words are but Marks of Things or Signs to know them or distinguish them by and therefore a Word that is the Sign of what is absolutely Nothing or a Non-Entity must needs be nonsense and unintelligible And consequently he that should attempt to awe Mankind with an empty Sound that had no Signification would certainly be exposed to contempt and instead of affrighting others would only be laughed at himself The Author of Anima Mundi saith That to tell a Prophane Rabble of an Invisible Deity and of a Future State of Rewards and Punishments will signifie nothing at all and That Men will not for such Metaphysicks forbear any manner of Pleasure or Profit how base soever How then could the Figment of a Deity gain admittance into the Minds of Men at first What would it signifie to tell Men of an Invisible Power that presides over and governs the World when according to the Atheist's Supposition they had no manner of Notion of any such Being before and consequently could not know what was meant by such Words and Expressions Should you tell them indeed of a potent Neighbour that was coming strongly armed to take away their Life or Goods they would look about them and endeavour by flight or force to secure themselves But to tell them of a Power that they never saw nor heard any thing of before and which they are told withal is impossible to be seen or heard or any way rendred an Object of their Senses could make no impression at all on Mankind or suppose that it could make some impression and frighten some Men at its first proposal how long would this last No longer at farthest than till they were by Experience convinced that it was false and precarious and that there was no Ground nor Reason to believe any such thing And this they must arrive at in a small time if the Thing were false 'T is impossible such a Cheat as this which it would have concerned every one to have examined could long have maintained its Ground Time discovers and certainly lays open all impostures and that the sooner the more are concerned to enquire into it And therefore had this Notion and Belief of a Deity had no other Original and Foundation than what the Atheists pretend 't is impossible it could have continued so long in the World and much more so that it should have gained ground as we know it hath continually done and be established on better Principles the more it hath been considered and understood Opinionum commenta delet dies naturae judicia confirmat saith Cicero Besides It cannot well be imagined that any Man should have the vanity to believe that a thing which he knew he had invented himself and which had no manner of ground nor foundation to support it from the Nature of the thing could ever impose upon and delude Mankind or indeed find any admittance in their Belief He must needs think that others would be as sagacious to discover the Cheat as he could be to contrive it and that among so many Heads some one would soon detect the Forgery of what must necessarily appear false and precarious to the common Sense and Reason of all Men. But 3 dly and lastly The Universality of the Notion and Belief of a God is also a most demonstrative Argument that it could not arise from the Invention of any Cunning and Designing Person That there is such an Universal Notion of a Deity cannot I think be denied by any one and I doubt not but farther Discoveries will satisfie us that there is a Notion of God even among those Barbarous and Savage People that are said to have no manner of Idea of Him by a late Ingenious Author But supposing that it were so that the Knowledge of a God were quite lost in three or four dark and uncultivated parts of the Earth whose Inhabitants are so brutish as scarce to think at all this is no more an Argument against the Belief of God's being Universally diffused throughout the World than Monsters and Fools are that Men have not generally a Humane Shape and Reason There are some Anomalies Irregularities and Exceptions in all Things and Cases which yet are not by any accounted of force enough to over-turn a general Rule I shall not say much to this Point it having been so largely and frequently handled already only I cannot omit the Testimony of some of the Ancient Writers who are very express that there is an Universal Notion of a God among Mankind and which they looked upon to be Natural or by way of Anticipation There is saith Cicero a Notion of a God impressed on the Minds of all Men. And in another place saith he What kind of Nation or People is there any where to be found who have not without learning it from others a Prolepsis or Anticipation of a Deity And in two other places he tells us That there is no Nation so barbarous and wild who do not acknowledge the Being of a God and some how or other revere and worship him Seneca in his Epistles frequently saith the same thing Sextus Empiricus owns also That all Men have a common Notion of God by way of Prolepsis and believe Him to be a most Blessed and Happy Being Incorruptible Immortal and uncapable of any kind of Evil. And he concludes That 't is unreasonable to assert that all Men should come to attribute the same Properties to God by Chance and not rather be induced thereunto by the Dictates of Nature Maximus Tyrius hath a very plain Passage to prove this common Notion of a God Though saith he there be so much quarrelling difference and jangling in the World yet you may see this agreed in all over the Earth that there is One God the King and Father of
it from some Difficulties and Perplexities which our Adversaries have designedly clouded it withall Say they whatever is the Object of any Man's Desires that he calls Good as also whatsoever is in any respect Beneficial and Advantageous to him And on the other hand that which is hurtful and prejudicial to him and is the Object of his Hatred and Aversion that he calls Evil and so doubtless it is to him Now say they further Since that which may be Good to one Man or desired by him now may be Evil to another or may by the very same Person be hated and shunned at another Time it plainly follows that the Nature of Good and Evil is perfectly precarious and will be as various and changeable as the different Humours and Inclinations of Mankind can make it And thus Mens Actions will be denominated accordingly Every one accounting that a Good one which he likes which promotes his Interest and is conducible to his Advantage And calling that an Evil one which he disapproves of and which is contrary to his Interest and Inclination To all which I say that these Men run their Argument a great way too far and conclude much more from it than the Nature of the thing will bear For allowing as a first Principle that all Men desire Good and that they cannot do otherwise Allowing also that Apparent or seeming Good hath the same Effect as real Good while it is the Object of any particular Man's Desires Nay allowing also this Apparent Good to be a very precarious Thing and to depend very much on the different Humours Tempers and Inclinations of Mankind which is the whole Basis on which these Writers found their Argument I say Granting all this it doth not come up to the Question between us nor form any Real Objection against the natural difference between Good and Evil and the Eternal Obligation of Morality for the Point in dispute is not whether such an Essential and Immutable Difference as this now spoken of be discernible in all the Actions of Mankind for 't is readily allowed that there are a great many Indifferent and which are neither good nor bad in their own Natures but may be either as Circumstances determine This I say is not the Case but whether there be not some such Actions as do plainly discover themselves to the Unprejudiced Judgment of any Rational Man to be Good and Evil in their own Natures antecedent to the Obligation of any Human Laws Or in other Words whether there be not some Actions which do carry along with them such a clear and unalterable Reasonableness and Excellency as that they do approve themselves to be Good and Lovely to any Unprejudiced Mind and consequently Mankind must be under an Universal and Eternal Obligation to perform them and to avoid and shun their Contraries As also whether we have not all the reason in the World to believe that those Actions which the Mind of Man can thus discover to be Morally and Essentially Good are agreeable to the Will of God and directed by it And to conclude that the Deity also acts and proceeds in all Respects according to the same Universal and Eternal Dictates of Reason and is Just and Good Equitable and Righteous in all his Dealings with his Creatures and that he exerciseth these things in the Earth This I take to be the true state of the Case and this is what we Assert and our Adversaries Deny and what I shall now endeavour to prove In order to which it must be allowed in the 1. Place That Man is a thinking Being and hath the Power of Reasoning and Inference It must be allowed also that we are capable of Knowing this and do most evidently discover such a Power in our selves And since all Intelligent Creatures do naturally desire to be happy we must do so too and consequently endeavour to obtain that Kind of Happiness which is agreeable to our Natures and Faculties i. e. a Happiness that shall relate to our whole Natures and not to the Body only Now the Happiness of any Being consisting in the free and vigorous Exercise of its Powers and Faculties or in the Perfection of its Nature and the Nature of Man being Reason the Happiness of Mankind must consist chiefly in the free and vigorous Exercise of his Reasoning Faculty or being in such a Condition as that we can do all things that are agreeable to and avoid all such things as are disagreeable to it Now all this supposed and granted as I think none of it can be denied it will plainly follow that all such Actions as do Universally approve themselves to the Reason of Mankind and such as when duly examined and considered do constantly and uniformly tend towards and promote the Happiness of Man considered as to his whole Nature and chiefly as to that part of him in which his Nature doth more properly consist which is his Rational and Understanding Faculty Such Actions I say must necessarily be said to be in their own Nature Good and their Contraries must be denominated Evil after the same manner for whatsoever is universally Approved is universally Good to call a thing Good being nothing else but to declare its conducibility to that end it was designed for Now according to our Adversary's Assertion Men call that Good which promotes their own Advantage and Happiness and so no doubt it ought to be esteemed all that they mistake in being that they don't understand wherein their true Happiness consists And therefore if a Thing doth in its own Nature approve it self to the impartial Reason of Mankind and can on due Examination manifestly appear to conduce to the Interest Advantage and Happiness of Human Nature such a thing must by all Rational and thinking Men be pronounced naturally and morally Good and its Reverse Evil in the same manner And that this is the case in Reference to that which is commonly called Moral Good and Evil will appear plain and evident when we shew 2. That there are some Things and Actions which the Free and Unprejudiced Reason of all Mankind cannot but acknowledge to be Comely Lovely and Good in their own Natures as soon as ever it considers them and makes any Judgment about them And this is what is apparent to the Observation of all Men to have been ipso facto done and the Truth of it cannot be denied For have not all Nations in the World agreed in paying some kind of Worship and Veneration to the Deity Was there ever any Place where or Time when Obedience to Parents Gratitude for Benefits received Acts of Justice Mercy Kindness and Good Nature were not accounted reasonable good and decent things I know some Persons have boldly told the World that 't is quite otherwise and that there are some whole Nations so Savage and Barbarous as to have no Notion of any Deity who have no manner of Religious Worship at all and who have no Notion or Idea of Moral
all things must be governed by absolute Fatality and be in every respect Physically necessary there can then be no such thing as Contingency or any Voluntary Actions and if we were sure of this 't is indeed the greatest Ignorance and Folly in the World to pretend to talk any thing about it But on the other hand if there be a Deity who is an Infinitely perfect Being distinct from Nature who Created all things by the Word of his Power and for whose sole Pleasure they are and were Created then none of those Consequences will follow but it will appear very reasonable to believe that God hath still a Care and Providence over that World which he made at first and that he delights to exercise loving Kindness Judgment and Righteousness in the Earth as the Prophet here speaks That he hath made some Creatures capable of Knowing and Vnderstanding this and who consequently have a free Power as in other things so of giving Praise and Glory to so Great and Wonderful a Being nay and of Glorying themselves in being capacitated to attain so Excellent a Knowledge And that Man hath such a Power or Freedom of Will in his Nature is what I shall now proceed in the last place plainly to prove 1. And the first Argument I shall make use of to demonstrate this shall be the Experience of all Mankind And this one would think should be of great Weight and turn the Scale against all the Atheistical Metaphysicks in the World and so no doubt it would were it not wicked Mens Interest to advance the contrary Notion Now that we have a free Power of deliberating in many Cases which way 't is best for us to proceed that we can act this way or that way according as we like best and that we can often forbear whether we will Act at all or not is a Truth so clear and manifest that we are I think almost as certain of it as we are of our own being and Existence and 't is an unimaginable thing how any Man can be perswaded that he hath no such Power Indeed one may by Sophistical words Metaphysical Terms and abstruse Unintelligible Banter be perhaps a little amused and confounded for the present But that any one should by such a Jargon be persuaded out of his Senses his Reason and his Experience and continue in that Opinion is what I do believe never yet befel any Rational and Thinking Man When Zeno brought his silly Sophisticals Argument to prove there was no such thing as Motion his Antagonist thought it to no purpose to return an Answer to what plainly was contradictory to the common Sense of Mankind and therefore convinc'd him only by getting up and Walking And the very same Return will baffle and expose all the Pretended Arguments for Necessity For 't is plain He had a Power first whether he would have walked or not he could have walked Five Turns or Fifty he could have gone across the Room or length-wise round it or from Angle to Angle And I dare say no Sophistry or Metaphysicks whatever would have convinced him that none of these were in his Power when he plainly found them all to be so any more than he was convinced a Body could not move out of its place when he had seen and tried a Thousand times that it would 'T is the same thing in reference to the Thoughts of our Minds as it is in the Motions of our Bodies We plainly find we have a Power in abundance of Cases to preferr one thought before another and to remove our Contemplation from one Notion or Idea to another We can in our Minds compare and revolve over the several Objects of our Choice and we can oftentimes choose whether we will do this or not and this Internal Freedom in Reference to our Thoughts and Idea's we do as plainly perceive and are as sure of as we are that we can voluntarily move our Body or any part of it from place to place And as I have plainly shewed you above our Adversaries do grant and allow this when it is for their Turn But they will say tho' we seem to be free and do think and perceive our selves to be so yet in reality we are not and it is only our Ignorance of Things and Causes which induces us to be of this mistaken Opinion and the Idea of Liberty which Men have is this that they know no Cause of their Actions for to say they depend on the Will is to talk about what they do not understand and to use words of which they have no Idea's at all To which I say that I cannot but be of the Opinion that it is a good Rational way enough of Proceeding to pronounce of things according as we do experience them to be and to declare them to be that which we have all the Reason in the World to think and believe that they really are And I think we may well enough own and be contented with the Charge of Ignorance here laid upon us For the Case is thus We think our selves free because we plainly find and experiment our selves to be so in a Thousand Instances and this also these Penetrating Gentlemen sometimes as I have shewed do kindly allow and we are indeed wholly Ignorant of any Causes that do absolutely determine us to Action or which do necessitate us in what we do previous to that free Power which we find in our selves so that plainly perceiving our selves to have this free Power and being Ignorant of any true Reason why we should believe we are mistaken in what we perceive and know we do indeed such is our Ignorance and Weakness embrace the Opinion that there is a Liberty of Action in Human Nature And this free Power or Liberty which we find in us we not being deep Metaphysicians call the Will by which we understand as I have shewed before not any Particular Act of Volition but the Power or Faculty of Willing And since we plainly perceive that in many cases we are not determined to Action by any thing without us but do choose or refuse act or not act according as we please and being withal grosly Ignorant of any Cause these Actions have but what we find and perceive them to have we call our free Will the Cause of these Actions and say they depend on it and yet after all do we not find out that we talk about what we do not understand and use words that we have no Idea of But our Adversaries it seems have a quite different rellish of things they soar in a higher and more subtle Region they will not condescend to speak common sense in this Matter Tho' they plainly understand as they tell us that they are really free as to many Actions and can deliberate whether they will do them or not purely because they have a free Power so to do tho' they are satisfied that they can act if they will