so stark mad as to build an Ark and take all manner of Beasts and Fouls into it out of a fantastical Fear that he should be drowned upon the dry-land you must confess he did it by virtue of a Supernatural Revelation S. Have you any other instance of the like nature L. Yes more than I shall at present take pains to enumerate but however I will gratifie your curiosity with two or three which will abundantly shew the falsity of your A s so much boasted Proposition We read in the 18th Chap. of Gen. that Sarah was informed by the Angels 10th ver That she should have a Son But who except Spinosa will say that this Prediction was accomodated to the capacity of Sarah or her Lord Abraham when Moses tells us in the 11 th and 12 th ver That Abraham and Sarah were old and well stricken in age and it ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of Women Therefore Sarah laughed within herself saying After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure my Lord being old also S. A Woman might easily imagin what she earnestly desired L. If you except against a Woman let us consider the Revelation made unto Moses which you will find to be directly contrary to the Apprehensions and above the Natural Conceptions of that mighty Prophet I would feign learn how it was at all agreeable to the natural Conception of Moses that the lifting up his Rod should be able to work all those Signs and Wonders which it did in the Land of Egypt S. Tho it was not a Conception agreeable to reason yet it might be to his Fancy and we all know the strength of Fancy in producing wonders L. Imagination without doubt has very great force upon the imagining Person but that it should be able to have force upon Objects placed without him so as to work any visible effect upon them is to me till I am better inform'd a very absurd supposition I know some of the Ancients have been possessed with an Opinion that the very Eyes of an Envious Person do dart a Kind of Poyson upon those who are in a Great Station And the Poets presum'd they had the same or like effect upon other Animals Nescio quis Teneros oculus mihi fascinat agnos And my Lord Bacon says something to solve this Phaenomenon by the Effluviums of the Animal Spirits And if the matter of it were true which I do very much question his Lordships solution of it would be the best that could be given But supposing it true yet such weak Effluvia's as are engendered by the strength of imagination whatever impression they can make on the tender parts of humane Bodies yet you cannot without Madness suppose them able to turn Aarons Rod into a Serpent or to make it more like a Living Creature or turn a whole River into Blood to divide the Red Sea slay all the first Born of Egypt and do works of the like stupendious Nature S. Did not Pharaohs Magicians do something very like it L. All you can infer from thence is only this viz. that they were assisted by some invisible Powers which is more than Men of your Principles are willing to grant who deny their existence or at least their intermedling with humane Affairs S. But suppose such things done as you Divines call it by invisible Powers how shall a Man know whether those Powers are Good or Evil. L. God being the Fountain of all Goodness no Revelation is made or confirmed by him that is repugnant to the immutable Law of Nature which consists in unfeigned Love to God and to our Neighbour The Pagan Priests made great pretences to Prophesie and Miracles but it was to confirm a superstition contrary to Natural Light and therefore those seeming Signs and Wonders are justly ascribed to the Operation of Lying and Deceitful Spirits For these are known Maxims that Good cannot proceed from Evil and that a Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand and we may as well conceive that light can be the Fruitful Mother of Darkness as that Satan can be the Author Abetter or Confirmer of the Precepts of the Decalogue or the most Holy Rules of Practice deliver'd by our Blessed Saviour S. Does not your own Apostle say that Satan can transform himself into an Angel of Light L. We don't say that Evil Spirits do never Encourage a seeming Sanctity that is gross Wickedness in a Religious dress but that they can't be Abetters or Promulgers of that real and genuine Sanctity which is prescribed by the Mosaick and Christian Religion and of the excellence of which we have as clear Perception as we have of the Truth of any Mathematical Proposition But to pass by Moses and descend to the other Prophets What Pre-conception by Nature could Isaiah have that Cyrus should be King of Persia that Jerusalem should be destroyed by the Chaldeans and that that very Cyrus See Isa 44. 28. Should rebuild the Temple saying to Jerusalem thou shalt be built and to the Temple thy Foundation shall be laid If Revelation was adapted only to the Capacity of the Prophet certainly Isaiah was a Person of the largest Natural Capacity that ever yet was Born into the World or as I believe ever will be Born hereafter S. You keep to instances in the Old Testament it would be more to my satisfaction to hear something of this Nature to be alledged out of the New L. What think you of the Doctrine of the Incarnation of the Son of God and of the Holy Trinity which are founded upon Divine Revelation These could not be adapted to the Capacity or Opinions of any one inspired Author since they are above the conception of all Mankind S. I fear you mistake this Author His meaning is not that nothing is taught in Scripture which exceeds humane conception for as he shews p. 28. The Prophets were ignorant of speculative things and were of contrary Opinions amongst themselves and therefore they might give Vent to some odd Opinions which are altogether irreconcilable to the reasonable conceptions of other Men. L. I have already examined all those places of Scripture upon which he would ground this wild assertion and I hope have plainly shewed that no such thing can be deduced from them But to come closer to the purpose Your Author must Acknowledge either that the Prophets as he calls all Divinely inspired Authors were assisted and taught by God or that they were guided by their Natural Fancy Reason and Judgment If Prophecy does come from God and if it be according to his own Definition in the very first Words of his Book the certain Knowledge of some things reveal'd to Men by God he cannot overthrow the certainty of it in Speculations as well as Practicks untill he can destroy the very Idea which all rational Men do entertain of God He must suppose him either to be nothing else but the settled course and order of Nature and then he and his
because it takes away from Trade the freedom of lying and cheating and defrauding which some perhaps think essential to it But if you Gentlemen desire a Commonwealth that you may barter away our Religion for a Free Trade I say pray God bless the Monarchy of England Scep Prithee don't think we desire to take away your Religion Your Reason ought to be your Only Religion and that I am sure no man desires to take from you My Author's Design is only to take off those Prejudices which the Vulgar entertain of the Scriptures who despise Reason and think that the Scriptures are the Only Oracles of Truth In order to this my Author promises to demonstrate That Prophecy or Revelation is nothing else but strength of Fancy That the Ancient Prophets were only Men of a strong Imagination and of a weak Reason That the Divine Law is nothing else but fatal Necessity That Miracles are only those Works of Nature of whose Cause we are ignorant That the true way of interpreting those Books you call Scriptures does shew that they are of Humane Invention and that every individual man has a Right and Authority to interpret Scripture as he pleases And that Log. No farther I beseech you this is Task enough for one time Let us therefore leave his Preface and proceed to the Book it self that we may see Quid dignum tanto feret hic promissor hiatu Scep With all my heart And first let 's begin with his Definition of Prophecy and so orderly examine the strength of all his Invincible Arguments Log. I am content and also further promise That if he brings any Objections against Revealed Religion which I cannot answer I will then become of his Opinion and subscribe to whatsoever you will have me Scep It is as fair as I can wish it to be Thus therefore he begins Explicit Praefatio incipit hoc loco primum DE PROPHETIA A. PRophecy or Revelation is the certain Knowledge of something or Things revealed unto Men by God How do you like this Definition The. Very well provided the Author thinks as he speaks and does not impose upon us as his Custom is by ambiguous Terms A. Well then Mind the Consequence All Natural Knowledge may properly be called Prophesie for those things which we know by Natural Light depend upon the sole knowledge of God and his Eternal Decrees But our Mob-Divines that stand gazing with their Mouths open to Heaven to catch Wonders exclude Natural Reason from Prophecy as if the one descended from Heaven and the other sprang from Earth onely And yet humane reason is Divine in as much as the very faculties were by God Created and it is only excelled by Prophesie in two things First that Prophesie extends its bounds further And Secondly it cannot be caused by the Laws of Nature The. And Pray Sir what Charms can you see in such a Jargon of Discourse as should draw your minds away one step from reveal'd Religion For here is a very absurd confusion of Natural Knowledge and that which proceeds from Divine Revelation No Man that apprehends the necessary Connexion of two Terms was ever yet call'd a Prophet by any but this A. If Natural Knowledge might properly be called Prophesy then every Man that by his Natural Reason could comprehend all the necessary Properties of a Triangle or the undoubted certainty of Mathematical Axioms or those self-evident Propositions which are known by a bare perception of the Terms would be a Prophet and so not only all the Lord's People would be Prophets but all the Devil's People too for as much as some Propositions by the sole Light of Reason are evident to all Mankind A. You mistake my Author for he tells you page 2. That tho Natural Knowledge is Divine yet the Teachers of it cannot be called Prophets Because whatever they Teach others without the help of Faith or Credulity may know as well as themselves T. This only shews with how much Confidence and Stupidity your Infallible Author contradicts himself for p. 1. he asserts Ex traditâ definitione sequitur cognitionem naturalem Prophetiam vocari posse What more evident than that he may be called a Prophet who is endowed with natural Knowledge if natural Knowledge may be called Prophecy A. That is but a small mistake His true meaning is That Reason is not less certain and Divine than Revelation its self T. Natural Things are called Divine upon a Threefold Account as they are the Workmanship of God and in this sense all things that have a real Subsistance may be called Divine as they are the Works of God But the word Divine is not frequently used in this signification because it is too general and comprehends so much that it determines too little Or 2. Things are more frequently called Divine that for their Excellence seem to have some resemblance of the very Nature and Perfections of God This Homer stiles his Hero 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Grace is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Apostle And indeed in this Sense the rational Faculties of the Soul may not be improperly called Divine forasmuch as they were not only given us by God but do still bear his Image and Inscription upon them But 3dly and lastly Those things are most properly stiled Divine which are immediately produced by the Power of God not according to the regular Laws of Nature but in a manner altogether superior to them And in this most proper signification Creation Prophecy and Miracles are the Works of God and bear all the Characters of Divinity upon them because the First Cause is only concerned in the Production of them without the Concurrent Efficacy of Inferior Agents Hence it is that the Evangelist reckoning up the Genealogy of our Blessed Saviour names the other Patriarchs as Sons of Men because they came into the World according to the usual manner of Generation But Adam he calls the Son of God for tho his Body was out of preceeding matter yet it was formed by the immediate Power of God without Observation of the regular Course of Nature The very Magicians could say when they saw Lice miraculously produced by Aaron's Rod That this was the very Finger of God because they knew it was not within the Bounds of the Power of Nature and that it could not be done by those Inferior Invisible Powers which they invoked And the Prophets call their inspired Writings The Word of the Lord because not deduced from the setled Course and Order of things but delivered to them immediately by God himself in respect to which it is called by St. Peter the Sure Word of Prophecy A. What do you infer from hence T. That your Author trifles when he equals Humane Reason to Divine Inspiration saying very boldly That Aequali jure ac alia cognitio quaecunque illa sit divina vocari potest when it is evident That the one is founded on the
of humane reason have asserted that God is ignorant of those future contingents which depend upon the free will of Man and if this be true Moses interpreted by your Author had as true a Notion of God as many of the Ancient Philosophers or some of the Modern Arminians Socinians and Preists themselves tho it is clear by the Holy Scriptures that God by his Prophets has foretold those Actions which depend upon the free will of Man S. And is this all you have to say L. No I will add that tho God had told Moses ver 18. of the 3d Chapter That the Children of Israel would hearken to his Voice Yet at the same time he inform'd him ver 20. That he would stretch out his Arm and Smite Egypt with all his Wonders The Words therefore of Moses Behold they will not believe me nor hearken to my Voice imply no contradiction to those words of God himself v. 18. Chap. 3. Because they relate to a different time It was true what God told Moses that the children of Israel would hearken to his Voice when it was confirm'd by Signs and Wonders which were wrought in the Land of Egypt and it was true what Moses said to God that they would not believe him nor hearken to his Voice before those Signs and Wonders were wrought before them It does not appear from hence that Moses doubted of the Knowledge of God but only longed for that assistance of his Power by which God had told him he would free the Israelites from the slavery of Bondage and Error Besides Ex. 4. 8. God was revealed to Moses as foreknowing that tho the Israelites might at first despise yet at last they would hearken to the voice of Moses S. All this seems to me to be nothing but Evasion Moses himself had wrong Notions of the Nature of God He look'd upon him as a Being that always was is and ever shall be and for that reason call'd him Jehovah but he taught nothing of his Nature but that he was Merciful Living and very Jealous of Tranferring his Honour p. 24. to another L. If Moses conceived no right notion of a God Pray let us know your Authors Opinion upon that Subject S. My Author gives no Definitions but it is plain from the 26th page that he looks upon Moses Conceptions of Love and Mercy and Jealousy which are humane passions when ascribed to God to be very erroneous mean and vulgar L. They cannot be conceived erroneous unless you can prove that Moses thereby ascribes something to God that is imperfect or vicious in its own Nature which I presume you will never be able to do Love as it is a humane passion may be vicious when placed upon a wrong object as when we love those things which are forbidden or when it is too remiss or too vehement in respect of those objects upon which it is placed But as it is a Principle of doing Good and Fruitful of Beneficial Emanations to Men and Angels it is the Perfection and Glory of the Divine Nature in so much that the Apostle is not affraid to say that God is Love it self S. But what think you of Pity Mercy Jealousy are those passions worthily ascribed unto God L. Yes very worthily provided you remove from thence those imperfections which unavoidably arise from the Nature of a humane Soul and the contexture of a humane body All our Affections are accompany'd with some violent perturbation of the body which cannot be in God who is an incorporeal Being Wherefore tho Pity Jealousy and Anger be attributed to God for want of proper and intelligible Names to express something that is like them in the Divine Nature yet we cannot conceive Moses so stupid as to think that God felt the same perturbations that Men are sensible of in their afflictions The Scripture represents God as resolved to punish unrepenting sinners and this Resolution it calls his Anger and it shews us that God is ready to succour the afflicted and to extend his Pardon to some who according to strict Justice are unworthy of it and his Propensity to those voluntary Favours Moses calls by the Name of Mercy and his Eternal Decree That his Honour should not be given to his Creatures by an easy Metaphor is stiled Jealousy But all this includes no Erroneous Apprehensions of God it onely expresses these attributes which are known by the light of Nature in such words as are most intelligible to all the different Degrees of Men in the World S. You may fancy what Figures you please but can you shew any good reason why Moses must be understood to speak in a Figurative sense L. Because in this Life we all see God darkly as through a glass and therefore cannot in all things speak properly of him as he is but must be compelled by necessity to transfer some words from those things we more perfectly understand to signfie those Perfections in God which are less perfectly understood by us S. I wonder you will deny That the Revelation was adapted to the Capacity of the Prophet when so many Instances of it are brought by this Author extracted from your very Bibles Moses thought God was in a peculiar manner Governour of the Jews but that the Government of other Countries was left to inferiour Deities who were called the Gods of other Nations See for this Exod. 15. 11. and 2 Chron. 32. 19. He also absurdly dreamed That God who is every where was confined to live in Heaven For this see Deut. 33. 27. Jonas presumed himself able to fly from the very presence of God Solomon dispis'd all the Laws prescrib'd to a King tho he was esteemed the wisest of all the Jewish Nation The Doctrin of Ezekiel is directly opposite to the Doctrin taught by Moses as you will find if you compare his 18 Chap. with the 7th Ver. of the 31 of Exod. or the 18th of the 22d of Jeremiah Samuel believed that God never repented of his Decree See 15. Sam. ver 29. Jeremiah taught that God upon condition of Repentance did reverse his Decree of Judgment against notorious Sinners It appears from Gen. 4. v. 7. That Man has power to resist Temptation but St. Paul teaches That Man has no Government over his own Thoughts or Actions but by the singular Calling and Grace of God See the 9th to the Romans And when he ascribes Justice to God he Corrects himself by saying He spoke after the manner of Men. From whence it is as clear to me as the Sun that what you call Divine Revelation or Divine Inspiration never made any man wiser than he was before but either left him or confirm'd him in those very Prejudices of Opinion in which at first it found him Unless in matters of Morality for therein the Prophets were guided by known and undeniable Maxims L. You muster up the whole strength of your Author's Forces which consists more in number than in true Worth and
Natural Order of things and therefore subject to those Imperfections which are common to all the Works of Nature The other comes immediately from God and has no imperfection in it Our Reason tho first given us by God yet is corrupted by our selves The Idolatry and Superstition of the first Ages of the World do abundantly shew how much Natural Reason is subject to be led aside into Error by Sense Passion Interest and Example in the things that belong unto God There is a Light of Nature but it is no more than a glimmering Light which discovers some but not all things that are necessary to be known so clearly and distinctly as may make it compleatly beneficial to Mankind Besides it is often darkned by Inadvertency Lust and Male-Organization of the Body and a thousand other Impediments But Revelation is such an impression upon the Mind of the Prophets as gives a discovery of something unknown before for to reveal is to detect something that before was cover'd and always creates a threefold certainty in all inspired Authors 1. It renders them sure that it is God who speaks to them 2dly That they rightly apprehend what he means 3dly That whatever he reveals is infallibly sure For that God will not deceive is the very Basis of all Humane and of all Divine Knowledg Your Author therefore very truly asserts That Revelation exceeds the Bounds of Humane Reason because it extends it self to the hidden things of God viz. The Knowledge of a future Happiness and the ways and means by which we may gain the same as also because it cannot be caused by the regular Order of Nature but must proceed immediately from God but then he very absurdly endeavours to equal Humane Reason to it when in the same breath he confessed that it is exceeded by Divine Revelation A. You talk of Certainty in Divine Revelation but for my part I have no Idea how a Mortal Man can be certain what or when God speaks to him T. Prophecy being â— complex Idea as signifying the discovery of something made unto Man by the immediate Power of God we can have no distinct Knowledge of its manner of producing Certainty in the Mind of Man unless all the simple Idea's which compound the same extend into our Understanding by our Senses or were obvious to it by a simple intuition But the Manner of God's speaking to Man by Revelation being altogether Supernatural it cannot be compleatly understood by those who have had only Experience of the use of Natural Faculties Suppose a Man born into the World with a Sixth Sense whereby he could discern the Properties and Differences of External things it would not follow that because other men had not a compleat Idea how he perceiv'd the differences of things that therefore he had no perception at all A man so framed by God might have clear and distinct perception and yet not be able by any force of Words to make his Neighbours understand the manner of it For the Words that now are do signifie some Idea's which have already been common to Mankind but where the thing it self was always unknown there Words whose signification extends no further than to things that are already known can never explain them to us A man that never had the Experience of the Illumination of a Prophetick Spirit can no more have a compleat Idea of what it is than a blind man can have of Colours he may be taught by rote to give definitions but all the definitions that can be given will never give him the true Idea of Light or Colour A. Then Prophetical Light is something but you don't know what T. Yes We know as much of the Nature of Divine Revelation as is necessary for us to know and he that enquires after more ought not to be gratify'd in his needless curiosity We know from the Nature of God and the Constitutiou of our own Souls that it is not impossible for God to communicate his Will and Pleasure to whomsoever he pleases for it would be strange indeed if God who made the Soul capable of understanding every thing else should not be able to make it capable of understanding himself whenever he should vouchsase to speak to it For why should not Man be as capable of knowing when God speaks to him in a supernatural way as when his Neighbour speaks to him according to the usual course of Custom and Nature All things are possible with God that do not imply a contradiction in the Terms or are not directly repugnant to the essential Purity of the Divine Nature but it is no more a contradiction tho more unusual for God to speak to Man than it is for one Man to speak to another nor is it repugnant to the Divine Purity to teach Man his Will to obey which is Man's utmost perfection We also know from as Authentick Records of Antiquity as any are now extant That some Men Eminent for Wisdom Learning and Vertue have affirmed That God has spoken to them and we have Reason enough to believe that they were certain of it because they exposed their Lives and Fortunes and all that is dear to Flesh and Blood in compliance to the Doctrines they receiv'd from God and that no room might be left for doubt the same God that thus spake to them gave them power to do such things as quite surpassed the power of Nature and to foretel such Events as were not possible to be guess'd at by any humane Understanding If therefore we who by Faith believe the Doctrines taught by these inspired Authors are deceived we are deceived by God himself who alone could give such Gifts of Prophecy and Miracles to the Sons of Men And if our Faith is deceived by God we know not but that our Reason is deceived too For if God can deceive in one why may we not think he may do it in the other And then our A is so far from being certain to get the Victory by such Disputes over Revealed Religion that he cannot be certain that he disputes at all A. What Mathematical Certainty have you that the Records of these mens Prophesies are true T. Matters of Fact are never the less true for not being capable of Mathematical Demonstration It is as true that Julius Caesar came into England as it is that the whole is equal to all its parts tho the Truth of his coming hither cannot be demonstrated by any Problem in Euclid A. I have heard with great patience your long discourse of God's speaking unto Men and the wonderful and unintelligible Certainty from thence arising But what as our Author tells you if this Notion of God's speaking unto Men prove a meer Fancy proceeding from a mistaken Hebraism I hope you will be judg'd by the Scriptures themselves T. Yes upon these Conditions 1. That the Authority of Scriptures may be as well urg'd for as against themselves 2. That every difficulty in those Sacred Writings
dependance upon it Tho the Scripture therefore represents God as walking in the Garden c. Yet this may well be understood of some Angel sent by God upon that message it being familiar with the Scriptures to ascribe some things to God which were apparently done by the Ministry of his Holy Angels Nor does it follow that Adam thought God to be ignorant of humane Affairs because he endeavoured to hide himself from him For all Fear and especially that which has Guilt for its Parent is apt in its own Nature to disorder Mens Reason and to make them do absurd things for which no sufficient Reason can be given If a man for Fear whether real or imaginary should to avoid the Sword of his Enemy throw himself down a precipitating Rock into the Waves of the Sea or run into the Flames of a devouring Fire it does not follow that this man thought that the Water could not drown nor the Fire burn nor the Rock dash him to peices but we may rather conclude that the imagination of some impending danger made such violent impressions upon his Brain as for the present drove thence the use of clear and impartial Reason Adam was sensible of Guilt and the Fear of Punishment threw him into absurd and ridiculous measures to escape it but we must not ascribe that to his Reason which was manifestly an Effect of his Fear and Terror Besides whatever your Author observes of the Ignorance of Adam or Cain c. reflects nor Diminution upon revealed Light but rather upon his adored Light of Nature For if Adam thought God was not Omniscient or Omnipresent it was because the Light of Reason gave him no truer a Notion of a God Your Author indeed would insinuate That God was revealed to him as ignorant of Humane Affairs but then it must be in some Bible that lies under the Author 's sole possession for no such thing is mentioned in any of those which I have hitherto seen in the World S. But was not God revealed as ignorant of Humane Affairs to Cain when he ask'd him Gen. 10. 8. Where is Abel thy brother L. No the direct contrary is more apparent for when Cain deny'd the Murther in a very surly Dialect viz. Am I my Brother's Keeper He was made to understand that tho his Murther was hid perhaps from Man it was open to the sight of God S. But does not his Question suppose he thought otherwise L. Wicked Men may think as they please but their thoughts throw less Aspersion upon revealed Light than they do upon the Light of Nature Cain committed Murther upon Abel will your Author therefore conclude that God was revealed to Cain as approving Murther or that Murther is agreeable to the Light of Nature And yet Cain's speaking against Natural Light in seeming to disown the Omniscience of God is no more an Argument that he thought God not to be Omniscient than the killing his brother was an Argument that he thought God to be a lover of Injustice or an approver of the shedding of innocent blood Wicked men will corrupt their natural Notions of moral good and evil as well as the more speculative Idea's of the Attributes of God but all that we can conclude from thence is the necessity of Divine Revelation to prevent Atheism Deism and Idolatry or Polytheism and to ensure the most binding Sanctions of Rewards and Punishments upon the immutable Laws of Nature S. Some Men will deny Motion when their Tongues are running so fast that no Man can be heard but themselves Was not Abraham ignorant that God was Omnipresent and Omniscient when he begg'd of him not to execute his Sentence of Vengeance till he knew whether all were worthy of that punishment or no And does not God himself speak thus at least in the Imagination of Abraham Gen. 18. 20. Because the Cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great and because their sin is very grievous I will go down and see whether they have done altogether according to the Cry of it which is come unto me and if not I shall know L. Abraham's words to God viz. Peradventure there be Fifty righteous in the City contain no more than a Petition that God would spare a great number of wicked persons for the sake of a few righteous therein He does not presume that God did not know how many righteous there were there but he prays that if Fifty were found all the wicked might for their sakes escape their intended destruction In v. 20. we have an Assertion That God had knowledge of the sin of Sodom for the Cry was great before him And what we read v. 20. of God's descending to know whether it was so or no is but the continuation of a Metaphor drawn from the like Actions in Men a Figure us'd in most Authors and not unfrequent in the holy Scriptures where we often read of his Hand his Arm or his Eyes and yet the Jews were never so stupid as to worship God under the Sculpture of any such Corporeal Representations S. If you would read the 3d and 4th Chapters of Exodus impartially you would find that Moses himself had no adequate Notion of a God For God was reveal'd to him as ignorant of humane Actions For tho God told him Chap. 3. v. 28. That the People of Israel would hearken to his Voice Moses Chap. 4. v. 1. Answer'd Behold they will not believe me nor hearken to my Voice for they will say the Lord hath not appeared unto thee L. Believing being an Act of the understanding and the will jointly co-operating together none but God can foresee which way the will of Man when left to its Native liberty will incline it self As for Men they can onely make probable Conjectures of it from reason and experience in humane Affairs But Moses could not conceive from either of these how it was likely or possible that the children of Israel should believe him upon his bare word that he was sent by God to deliver them from Egyptian Slavery his assertion therefore Behold they will not believe me proceeded not from his ignorance of the Nature of God but from his knowledge of the manners of Men and especially the children of Israel who he easily conjectur'd would not believe him without a Miracle nor indeed was it at all reasonable that they should have been so Prodigal of their assent to one that had no Commission sign'd from Heaven by the Power of working Signs and Wonders But how does his suing for the Power of Miracles at all argue that he had no true Notion of God Or how do errors provided they were such tho indeed they were not occasioned by the deficiency of Natural Light reflect any Aspersion upon the plenitude of Divine Revelation For whatever Moses might say to God we don't read that God ever said unto Moses that he was ignorant of humane Actions Some Divines indeed who with your Author pretend to the highest adoration
matter are called but figuratively by the name of Laws but your A shews no Legis nomen absolute sumptum c. small plenty of ignorance when he would have the word Law to signifie absolutely corporeal necessity of Nature which properly speaking is not capable of receiving Nomen Legis per Translationemadres Naturales applicatumvidetur a Law Nay he seems to contradict himself for he says in the 44th Page that the word Law seems to be applyed to natural things by Translation and if by Translation then not absolutely or properly as in this place he so boldly affirmeth S. But what need this strife about words if we are agreed upon the thing it self Why may not my Author claim the same liberty of Speech as is allowed to Des Cartes Gassendus or others of our modern Virtuoso's L. Because he designs thereby to establish a fatal necessity in the very minds of Men which renders them uncapable of receiving a Law properly so called which always supposes a liberty of choice and is attended with the Sanctions of Rewards and Punishments for tho in the 44th Page he tells us That some Laws depend upon the free Arbitration of Men yet he adds That he must needs grant that all things are determined by the universal Laws of Nature both to Operate and to Exist in a certain and unavoidably manner and indeed if all things that are are material and the Soul its self nothing but a particle of rarefied matter and all matter is bound by the necessity of nature to such and such particular Rules it follows those Laws of Men which seem most Arbitrary are as much subject to fatal necessity as any other operation of dull and unthinking matter All the difference is that in the descending of a Stone or the ascending of the Fire we can see and understand the Concatenation and Co-ordination of necessary causes but this Chain is less visible in the determinations of the Will to what we call Moral Good or Evil. But still there is a Chain that binds a Man as strongly as if its invincibility was manifest to the Eyes of all Men and if so then he that kills his Father or Mother acts by the same necessary Laws of Nature as he that Honours and Obeys them And this is the best and truest account that I can give of your Author's Scheme of Morality S. You must needs mistake him for he has these words Dico tamen has leges ex placito Hominum pendere L. That is because your A would Monopolize the liberty of contradicting his own Assertions but observe his caution he does not say absolutely that these or any Laws do depend upon the free will of Man but that they may be said to do so First Because Man being a part of Nature whatsoever is done by the necessity of Humane Nature tho it be done by the general and irresistable force of Nature yet because they proceed immediately from Humane Power therefore the Sanctions of those Laws may be said to proceed from the will of Man But what is this to the purpose If there be a general force of Nature which determines all things even the very Soul and Will of Man to make Laws whether it will or no then the making these Laws or the paying Obedience to them are no free but necessary Acts and Men are morally good or evil not by free choice but by a necessary compulsion And this he plainly acknowledges in his second reason and onely adds that the Universal consideration of fate and concatenation of causes cannot serve us to form right conceptions of Law and that therefore tho all Actions are predetermin'd by fate yet it is better to talk of them as Free and Arbitrary S. Let us not quarrel about words but come to the Definition of the thing he tells you that a Law is a Manner of Living which a Man prescribes to himself or to others for some End best known to himself How do you like this Definition p. 44. L. I should rather have approved of it if he had defin'd it a Manner of Living prescribed by a Superior to an Inferior and always attended with the Sanction of Rewards and Punishments S. Every Man Loves the Product of his own Brains but Pray why is your Definition to be preferr'd before my Author's L. For several Reasons First because it does not exclude God from the Legislative Power which is most slily done in your Author's Definition A Law is a Rule or Manner of Living or Acting that is supposed to proceed from some Rational Intelligent or thinking Being And if your Author believes that any such Being is really existant why must he be excluded from the Legislative Power and his Creature Man onely Intitled to it S. Does not my Author expressly say p. 45. That the Law is to be Distinguished into Divine and Humane L. Yes But he tells you that by a humane Law he means such a manner of Living as is conducive to preserve our lives or the common wealth and by a Divine Law he intends no more than a Law made that has respect to the true Knowledge and Love of God So that a Law made by God to preserve a Common-wealth or the Life of Man according to his Notion is a humane Law and a Law made by Man which is referred to the Love and Knowledge of God becomes a Divine Law God is therefore absolutely excluded by him from any so much as Vote or share of the Legislative Power S. Well what is your next Exception L. I think in the 2d place that he does not accurately enough define a Law by a manner of Living prescribed by a Man to himself For Law implies Superiority in the very essential Notion of it If a Man prescribes a certain way of Living or Acting to himself it is at most but a resolution which may upon alteration of circumstances be revoked without a Sin If indeed he calls God as a Witness to such a resolution it becomes a Vow and has in Lawful matters all the Force and Virtue of a Law but that force arises from the Superiority of the Person Viz. God himself unto whom that Vow is made S. Do not Senators make Laws that bind themselves L. Yes and very justly too For the Authority of a Collective Body of Men is Superior to the Authority of any one Member of it and he or they that offend against it in all Democratick Governments are to be look'd upon out of the Senate but as Subjects to that Superior Power which is in the collected Body S. This at most is but a vain Logomachy Pray what have you more than this to object against this Definition L. I say Thirdly that he very unskilfully leaves out the Sanction of Rewards and Punishments which are essential to a Law S. Cannot a Superior prescribe a Rule to an Inferior without adding threats or promises L. Yes he may But then the obligation to
and yet should deny the invisible Power of God would you say that by how much the more perfectly he knew natural things so much more perfectly he knew the very Essence of God S. Will you deny what he so zealously asserts That the knowledge and love of God is the happiness of Man the very end and scope of all humane Actions and the chiefest Good that can be attained by us Is it not nobly said by him That we are to love God as our chiefest Good not for fear of any punishment nor for love of any thing with which we are delighted but meerly for himself L. If your Author who so often makes mention of the word God would have told us distinctly what he meant by it this 46th page would have seem'd to have had something like Natural Religion in it But if you reflect upon the preceeding words and the whole scope of his book you will find that God signifies no more in him than the whole Compages of Nature and that he who knows Natural Things knows the very Essence of God and then to know God and to love God tho splendid Terms yet in reality signifie no more than to turn Virtuoso and study the Works of Nature and to love the World and hug its Enjoyments as your whole happiness without troubling your head with the thoughts of the Joys of Heaven or the fear of Hell which your Author rejects as conceptions unworthy of a true Philosopher S. I for my part own an incorporeal Deity tho I don't believe all the Stories you Parsons tell us of him and I believe my Author is of the same mind L. I do not find it appear in any part of his Writings But this I observe that by God he understands a Being that cannot speak intelligibly to mankind but by the fixed course of Nature and that suffers us to be abused by Jugling Tricks and Impostures that Vaunt themselves as Divine Revelations and that cannot work a miracle unless your Author gives him leave and from whom you are to expect no Good and to fear no Evil. So that all his morality is reduced to the Love and Knowledge of God and that is either the Universe or an otiose unactive Being which is next to nothing S. Some men are resolved to approve of nothing Pray what can you say concerning those consequences which he draws from his Notion of the Law of Nature L. If you tell me what they are I will give you my impartial opinion of them S. He says reason is universal Revelation limited L. That the Law of Nature rightly understood is Universal will easily be granted by those who understand what humane Nature is But your Author cannot infer from hence that it is a greater Good to mankind than Divine Revelation because it is a more general good For tho a diffusive Good in respect of its diffusive Nature is to be preferred before that which is restrained and confined coeteris paribus yet it is not to be so absolutely or without exception Virtue is a greater Good than the light of the Sun even in your Authors Opinion who calls it the chiefest Good of man and yet more men receive benefit from the Light of the Sun than from Genuine Virtue if you will believe the Greek Proverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Ay but this is the great advantage of reason above Revelation that it does not require an Historical belief which can never work in us the Love of God for that is onely to be deduced from such common Notions as carry their own certainty along with them L. The great defects of History are uncertainty deficiency superfluity and impertinency when these are absent History is very completive of the intellectual faculties of man For History is nothing else as my Lord Bacon well observes but a Narration of the various Operations of Individuals circumscribed to Time and Place and its chief end is to advance memory which is as it were the great Store-House or Magazine of Knowledge Uncertain History is a Narration of such things as either never were done or have not been well attested so as to leave no room for doubt And this defect in History destroys the very end of it which is to give us a certain account of what has been done already that so we may know how to Act our selves for the future Deficient History is an imperfect collection of remarkable Occurrences wherein many things are omitted which are worthy a wise Mans observation And tho this destroys not the End of History which is certainty of knowledge yet it Answers not the Expectations of a Thirsty Soul Impertinent or Superfluous History is a Narration of such Actions or Circumstances of Action as for their turpitude or meaness deserve not to be recorded And this is a defect which can no other ways be supplied than by a total abolition of those trifling Authors S. What is it you would infer from hence L. That Faith grounded upon true and useful History may give us a right knowledge and due love of God S. How can Faith that rests upon humane Authority contend for certainty with Reason that proceeds by such common Notions which are admitted as true by all men L. Natural Reason does enable men to understand that God ought to be loved as the first cause of all those good things which his Creature Man does enjoy But then there is a certainty in Sense as well as in Reason tho after another manner And therefore if the Senses of some Men have been rationally convinced that God has bestowed other Benefits upon them than those that were bestowed at their Creation or conveyed by the invisible Hand of his Providence Why should not such a knowledge excite them to all imaginable Love and Gratitude to their great Benefactor The certainty of a Benefit received is all that every good Man requires in order to be Grateful and whether that certainty is grounded upon abstracted Reason or a true faithful Narrative of a mattter of Fact is not much to the purpose So absurdly does your A asserts Nec fides Historiarum quantumvis certa Dei cognitionem consequenter nec etiam Dei amorem vobis daâ—e potest S. He does not deny that it can't give us Motives to love God but it can't work in us the love of God whether we will or no. L. No more can his adored Reason for many of the greatest pretenders to Reason have been the most impious Men in the World S. You Divines represent God to the Vulgar as a Law-giver and his Commands you call his Laws but alas you mistake the point For Eternal Verities are the only Laws of God who Acts by the necessity of his own Nature For the Affirmations and Negations of God do always involve an Eternal verity and necessity in themselves If God had said to Adam Thou shalt not Eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil it would imply a
Gods Providence nor at all prove that he takes any care of mankind is the third and last part of the Riddle which I humbly beg you would be pleased to unfold to me S. That I will and very briefly too We gather the Existence of God from known and received Notions but if there were any superiour Power that could alter these Notions it must necessarily destroy the very knowledge of a God or at least compel us to doubt of his Existence L. It is not by Miracles but by the very light of Nature that we understand that there is a Being superiour to our Faculties who can alter them for the better or the worse according as he pleases But then the same reason tells us that Truth is one of his most adorable perfections and from thence we conclude that he has given us right Faculties and will not become the Author of deceit But it seems your Author thinks that he can never be secure of the Truth of his Faculties if he should once believe that there is a God who is a Powerful and Voluntary Agent S. No there is a further reason for if any thing be repugnant to Nature it is repugnant to those first Principles from whence we conclude the Existence of Nature it self And what certainty is there if you destroy first Principles L. A Miracle is so far from being repugnant to first Principles that it is altogether declarative of them Is it not to be admitted as a first Principle in reason That there is a God who made the World S. Heavens forbid I should deny it L. And that can annihilate the World S. I see no reason to deny it L. If then alteration of some part of the Universe be less than annihilation you must grant it possible and what then is there in a Miracle that is repugnant to the first and most obvious Principles of Reason S. But he tells you that whether a Miracle be a work either which proceeds from Natural causes which cannot be explained or has no other cause than the immediate Will of God yet still it exceeds the reach of humane understanding and we can understand nothing from that which exceeds the very Standard of our Faculties L. There is nothing in a Miracle that exceeds the bounds of humane understanding but only the manner of the Divine Operation in the Production of it Our senses bear Witness that the work is done and our reason concludes that none but God could do it But we do not know the manner of the Divine Operation Nor no more do we comprehend the manner of the Divine Operation in the Creation of the World but does it therefore follow that Creation because it exceeds the bounds of humane understanding can give us no true knowledge of the Essence Existence or Providence of God S. I cannot well answer your last Argument but in the 72d page I think my Author argues very well viz. That if any thing was done above the power of Nature or contrary to Nature it would be repugnant to that Order which God has appointed by universal Laws to be eternal and the belief of such a thing would make us doubt of all things and bring us at last to Atheism L. And pray why so What do you understand by Nature but those Laws of Motion by which God does preserve the Vniverse in that Beauty and Order wherein we now enjoy it These we acknowledge to be sufficient to give us knowledge of the Existence and Wisdom of God vvhich vvould be knovvn by the Work of his hands tho there vvere no such thing as a Miracle Nor do vve say That a Miracle is absolutely necessary to punish ill men or to reward the good God can do that by his Providence and the setled Course and Order of things And though God does it by Miracles sometimes yet that is not for want of Power to do it otherwise but only that these Miracles may the more be considered as Testimonials of a Divine Mission Tho therefore the frequent interruption of the setled Course of Nature would render the Endeavours of those Vain who gave their minds to the study of Natural Philosophy yet the interruption of it at some certain Times and Seasons when God is pleased to communicate some particular message to mankind is no obstruction to the study of Nature and is a great and necessary introduction to a compleater knowledge of the Will of God For what proportion of time is there between the Miraculous Ages of Moses and our Saviour and the duration of the VVorld And how small is the Number of well attested Miracles in respect to all the other works of Nature S. Suppose there were real Miracles yet my Author proves from Scripture that they can lead us into no true Knowledge of God For a Prophet of the false Gods might work Signs and Wonders and yet deserve to be Stoned for his pains See Deut. 13. 1 2 3. Verses L. A Miracle is an appeal to our senses that what is done is not done by any Visible or Material Being But because there are Bad as well as Good Invisible Agents we are to Judge of the reality of a Miracle by the Good or ill Doctrines which it is alledged to support The Magicians of Pharaoh and the Pagan Priests in all Ages alledged Miracles to destroy the true Notion of a God and to loosen all the sacred Bonds of Morality but neither were these Miracles well attested nor were they to be regarded because they tended only to destroy and corrupt Natural Religion and Natural honesty too And indeed the Pagan Superstition seems to me to have been nothing else but a Diabolical Revelation of certain Names of Deities Rites and Ceremonies as might keep men furthest from God and corrupt that Idea of him which is easy enough to be deduced from the Light of Nature It is very plain that they knew not the Original of their own Religious Rites and Ceremonies for so says Antigone in Sophocles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sophoc in Antigone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Why should a Mortal break immortal Laws Not made by Man but by the Gods themselves That ever must remain tho none can know The Fountain whence those lasting Rivulets flow Nor indeed is it any wonder that they should not know the Original of those Rites and Ceremonies which have no Foundation in Nature nor were so much as of humane institution but shuffled into the world by the Tricks and Impostures of Evil Spirits But tho Evil Spirits may be Authors of some things that look like Prophesies Miracle or Inspiration yet they never can nor will do any thing to establish a Religion that gives a true Notion of God and Teaches a rational worship of him and tends to the good and benefit of mankind If therefore we have distinct Notions of Moral Good and Evil and of Natural Religion we must have distinct