صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

SECTION VI.

THE PRINCIPAL OBJECTIONS ANSWERED; AND SOME CONSIDERATIONS, ADAPTED TO RELIEVE THE MIND, RESPECTING THE DIFFICULTIES WHICH ATTEND THIS GREAT. MYSTERY.

CHAP. L

Divine Revelation, not depraved Reason, to be our Guide in all inquiries of this nature.

HAVING eftablished the truth, by argu

ments drawn from the Records of Infpira-tion; our next bufinefs is, to answer the principal objections, which are made by our opponents. They argue against us both from reafon and Scripture: but while we are firmly perfuaded that neither found reason, nor the Holy Scriptures, rightly understood, will afford any real objection againft us; we cannot forbear obferving, that our oppofers lay more ftrefs on arguments drawn from reason, than on those derived from Divine Revelation. Strange as this conduct may appear to fome, who are not verfed in these controverfies, we cannot easily question the fact,. if we confider the language of their most celebrated writers.-Smalcius, for inftance, is not afhumed thus to exprefs himself: We believe, that though we fhould find it, not ONCE, nor " TWICE, but VERY FREQUENTLY AND MOST EXPRESSLY written in the Scripture, That God was made man; it would be much better, as it is an abfurd propofition, ENTIRELY CONTRARY TO SOUND REASON, and full of blafphemy, to invent fome way of fpeaking, which

[ocr errors]

might render it fafe to be affirmed of God, • rather than to understand it in the literal fenfe (e)." As if he had faid, We are determined to regulate, not our theological fentiments, by the Scriptures; but the Scriptures, by

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

our

(e) Thefe are his words: Credimus, etiamfi non femel atque iterum, fed SATIS CREBRO ET DISERTISSIME SCRIPTUM extaret, Deum efse bominem fa&tum, multo fatius effe, quia hæc 6. res fit abfurda, ET SANAE RATIONI PLANE CONTRARIA, et in Deum blafphema, MODUM ALIQUEM DICENDI COM"MINISCI, quo ifta de Deo dici poffint, quam ifta fimpliciter ita ut • verba fonant intelligere.' SMAL. Homil. VIII, ad Cap. Job.

To thefe bold affertions of SMALCIUS, in oppofition to the doctrine of the incarnation, may be added the no less unwarrantable declarations of SOCINUS and SCHLICHTINGIUS: the former, in reference to the fubftitution and atonement of Chrift; the latter, relating to the efficacy of Divine grace and the freedom of the human will. Ego quidem, faith SoCINUS, etiamfi non femel fed SAIPE id in Sacris Monumentis fcriptum extaret, non idcirco tamen, rem ita prorfus fe habere crederem, ut vos opinamini. Quum

[ocr errors]

ea quæ fieri non poffe aperte conftat, Divinis etiam Oraculis ea fuiffe in fpeciem atteftantibus, nequaquam admittantur; et idcirco facra verba in ALIUM SENSUM quam ipfa fonant per INUSITATOS ETIAM TROPOs quandoque explicantur.' De Servat. Part. III. Cap. VI. That is, Though it [the doctrine of the atonement and fatisfaction of Chrift] were found, not only once, but FREQUENTLY WRITTEN in the Holy Scriptures; I, indeed, would not therefore believe it to be entirely as you fuppofe. Though the Divine Oracles may atteft things to be fo, in ap.. pearance; yet they cannot, by any means, be admitted, because they are very evidently impoffible: and, therefore, the facred words are fometimes explained, EVEN BY UNUSUAL TROPES, to a SENSE DIFFERENT from their literal fignification.

The following are the words of SCHLICHTINGIUS: 'Itaque non quia utrumque Scriptura dicat propterea hæc inter fe non pugnare concludendum eft; fed potius quia hæ inter fe pugnant ideo ⚫ alterutrum a Scriptura non dici ftatuendum eft.' Ad Meifn. Def. Sacin. p. 102.-That is, We cannot conclude, because the Scripture affirms them both, [i. e. the energy of Divine grace, and the freedom of the human will] that therefore they are not repugnant the one to the other; but, as these two things are inconfiftent, we ought rather to conclude, that one of them is not mentioned in Scripture.

The above quotations from Smalcius and Socinus, with many judicious remarks on the Ufe and Abuse of Reafon, relating to the Myfteries of Faith, may be found in the learned, accurate, and evangelical WITSIUS, Šee his Mifcell, Sac.Tom. II. Exercit, XVII,

our preconceived opinions. But let us confider this point a little more particularly.

If human reafon had not been corrupted by. fin, we might have placed a great degree of dependence upon it; yet even then it would. not. have been rational, to rely more on the powers of our own understanding, than on the light of Divine Revelation, fuppofing fuch a Revelation to have been enjoyed: because the knowledge of man, when his reafon was unimpaired, was limited; but the knowledge of God is infinite. What a disparity, then, muft there be, when the human understanding is not only limited, but corrupted; when the unavoidable commerce between a man's thoughts and his depraved paffions, fills his mind with a multitude of prejudice, which have a tendency in various ways to difguife, or conceal, the truth!-Were we bound. to believe nothing but what appears conformable to reafon, in its prefent ftate, we might foon reject the great objects revealed in the gospel, in general. For, after all the strenuous efforts of our adverfaries, to remove the grand difficulties attending the Christian religion; there are, and there always will be, fuch depths in it, as are unfathomable by the plummet of human reafon. On this account, the apoftle of the Gentiles calls the gospel foolishness. If the doctrines of Christianity had nothing myfterious and inexplicable in them, there would be no difficulty in believing; nor would faith be any more the gift of God, than the perfuafion we have of natural truths. Confequently, there would be no more occafion for the agency of the Holy Spirit, in order to our believing the truths of the gofpel,. than there is to our understanding the problems of geometry..

To

6

To act on this principle of our oppofers is to treat God, as if he were lefs worthy of credit than an honest man. A fallible mortal, who has not forfeited his character, as a perfon of - veracity, would take it deservedly ill, if, when - fpeaking of any extraordinary fact, of which he was an eye-witnefs, he was to fay, Take my word for it; it is as I affert : and we should reply, • We must confider what you fay. If we find it agreeable to our reason, we will believe you; if not, we fhall entirely reject your tef'timony.' If, then, fuch language would be reckoned indecent towards a fellow-worm'; what muft we think of a fimilar conduct, in regard to God, who is equally incapable of deceiving us, as he is of being deceived?

[ocr errors]

But all divines have ufed the fame prudence, in matters of lefs importance to the glory of God. They have thought themselves warranted to understand, not in a literal, but a figurative fenfe, all fuch paffages of Scripture as would otherwife appear inconfiftent with the perfection and glory of the Divine Majefty. As for example, when it is faid, "God came "down; God was wroth :" and when fuch expreffions are used, as attribute the members of

[ocr errors]

a human body to the Supreme Being.'--To which I reply; The inftances adduced are far from being parallel. The doctrine of the incarnation is not incompatible with the glory of the Divine Majefty, as is the opinion of the Anthropomorphites: for we cannot afcribe to God the parts of a human body, without supposing bounds, mutability, and imperfection in him. But the doctrine of the incarnation infers no fuch impious abfurdities. The Divine nature undergoes no alteration, by its union with the human nature. Nor do the expreffions of Scripture, understood

understood in their most natural sense, and compared one with another, impofe a neceffity upon us of being Anthropomorphites; or to attribute our weakneffes and imperfections to God. For nature and reafon do not speak louder than Divine Revelation, that God is unchangeable-That the heaven of heavens cannot contain him-That he is not like a man, nor any of his creatures.

[ocr errors]

If reason were to be the rule of our faith, Revelation would be fuperfeded. For, to what. purpose should God make known the counsel of his will, if reafon were allowed to fay; This is not the counsel of God. It cannot be, for I do not comprehend it?' Thus the confcience would be influenced, not by Revelation, but by the doubt which reafon had raifed upon it.Befides, if it were lawful for human reafon to fit in judgment on Divine Revelation, the darknefs introduced on our minds, by fin, could never be diffipated.. For how fhould reafon, proud of her own pretended abilities, and refolved to correct Revelation itself, be enlightened? According to this arrogant and felf-fufficient notion, faith in the Divine teftimony is entirely fet afide; reafon being refolved on following her own light, in preference to that of God in the Scriptures. So that, instead of faying, I believe fuch a propofition, how incredible foever it may feem, becaufe God has revealed it; we must say, Though God has revealed it in the moft plain and express terms, we will not believe it, because it appears incredible to us.-Again: Were we thus to exalt reason, what is ufually called Divine faith, would be much inferior to that which is human: because we fhould not pay fo great a regard to the declarations of GOD, as to thofe of our parents, mafters, and tutors; on whofe bare

authority

« السابقةمتابعة »