Images de page
PDF
ePub

testimony, the assent to that is properly called faith. If it be the testimony of man, it is human faith, if it be the testimony of God, it is divine faith.

But, in all these cases, it is impossible to assent to that, of which we have no ideas, for that would be to believe we know not what. And, if we have credible testimony, or some other good arguments, then we have a reason for believing; otherwise we believe we know not why. And we ought, in all such cases, to suspend our belief, or withhold our assent.

Pyrrho said, I think I clearly apprehend your meaning, which I would express in my own way, and I desire you would set me right, if, in any particular, I have mistaken you.

There are two parts in every proposition, a subject and a predicate, which are united in an affirmative, or separated in a negative, proposition. Now we must have the ideas affixed to the words, which express the subject, and the predicate ; or understand the subject, and what is affirmed, or denied, concerning that subject. And we must likewise have the testimony of God, or of some credible person, for joining those two ideas together in an affirmative proposition; or separating them in a negative proposition. And without understanding the words, and having that, or some other reason for assenting to the proposition, which they express, we can neither understand nor believe anything about them.

Theophilus acknowledged, that Pyrrho had spoken exactly agreeable to his sentiments on this subject.

proposition is laid before us, and we are required to believe it, it is necessary we should understand the words in which it is expressed or delivered. Your friend Novatianus has clearly shown, that as long as it continues in an unknown language, we can neither believe nor know anything about it.

But suppose we understand the words in which any proposition is expressed, or have in our minds the ideas signified by those words, it does not follow from thence, that we must immediately believe that proposition to be true. No doctrine of divine revelation can possibly contradict any principle of reason, or be inconsistent with it. Neither can any two doctrines or propositions in divine revelation be contradictory to, or irreconcileable with, one another. In such cases, the things proposed cannot be any part of divine revelation, though some persons may assert them to be so. Or, if the words in which they are expressed be contained in the divine writings, we may depend upon it, we have not yet found out the right meaning of those words.

If a proposition be selfevident, or we perceive the truth of it by intuition ; or, if it be proved by a train of undoubted propositions, each of them ranged in a proper order, and connected with one another, which is termed demonstration; then we do not call that faith, but knowledge. If there be only probable arguments for the truth of any proposition, we call that opinion. If a proposition is supported by credible

testimony, the assent to that is properly called faith. If it be the testimony of man, it is human faith, if it be the testimony of God, it is divine faith.

But, in all these cases, it is impossible to assent to that, of which we have no ideas, for that would be to believe we know not what. And, if we have credible testimony, or some other good arguments, then we have a reason for believing; otherwise we believe we know not why. And we ought, in all such cases, to suspend our belief, or withhold our assent.

Pyrrho said, I think I clearly apprehend your meaning, which I would express in my own way, and I desire you would set me right, if, in any particular, I have mistaken you.

There are two parts in every proposition, a subject and a predicate, which are united in an affirmative, or separated in a negative, proposition. Now we must have the ideas affixed to the words, which express the subject, and the predicate ; or understand the subject, and what is affirmed, or denied, concerning that subject. And we must likewise have the testimony of God, or of some credible person, for joining those two ideas together in an affirmative proposition ; or separating them in a negative proposition. And without understanding the words, and having that, or some other reason for assenting to the proposition, which they express, we can neither understand nor believe anything about them.

Theophilus acknowledged, that Pyrrho had spoken exactly agreeable to his sentiments on this subject.

But Pyrrho was a man given to argue on all sides, in order to have a full view of the subject, or to see what could be alleged for or against any opinion. He therefore told Theophilus, that the matter must not drop thus. For, though they seemed to be agreed, there were several who would not fall in so readily with their conclusion; and therefore he desired they might further debate the matter. Theophilus asked him what he had to say against a thing, which seemed so plain and obvious ?

Pyrrho answered, that he had often heard divines say, that in Scripture several doctrines are represented as mysteries ; and that seemed inconsistent with the notion now advanced, viz. that we must understand things before we can believe them.

Theophilus with great coolness said, I acknowledge freely that the New Testament often speaks of mysteries ; but then that word, in Scripture, never signifies what is incomprehensible or unintelligible.

I have carefully examined the sense of the word mystery in all the places where it is used in the New Testament, and I am well satisfied it never signifies an unintelligible truth, but a fact which was formerly a secret, but is now made known. And when made known, it is very plain and easy to be understood. Accordingly, the Apostle speaks of a very plain and intelligible fact, when he declares, “that the Christians, who shall be found alive at Christ's second coming, shall not die, but be suddenly changed into immortal, without dying.” And, in delivering that truth, he says, Behold, I show you a mystery. And, in other places the same Apostle talks of making known the mystery of the Gospel. The truth of the case is, the Gospel is not a hidden but a revealed mystery, made known to the world to enlighten their understandings, to lead them to the practice of universal righteousness, and thereby to their true dignity, perfection, and happiness.

In the next place Pyrrho alleged, that divines had often asserted, “ that we may and ought to believe things above reason, though not contrary to it.”

Theophilus replied, that there were two senses in which this proposition might be interpreted. The one is, that faith, or what is revealed as the object of faith, contains some things which human reason alone, and of itself, could not have found out; but if known at all must be discovered by revelation. For instance, " that men are to be raised from the dead; that Jesus Christ is to judge the world.” And in this sense, I suppose, all who acknowledge divine revelation are agreed, that some of the objects of faith are above human reason ; or, in other words, that there are some things discovered in the Bible, which could not have been known to men, unless they had been communicated by divine revelation.

But there is another sense in which faith has by some been affirmed to be above reason ; viz. that men may, and ought to believe things, which they cannot

[ocr errors]
« PrécédentContinuer »