A Theodicy, or, Vindication of the Divine Glory. Albert Taylor Bledsoe

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ III.

       The sufferings of Christ consistent with the divine goodness.

       Section IV.

       The eternity of future punishment consistent with the goodness of. God.

       Section V.

       The true doctrine of election and predestination consistent with the. goodness of God.

       Section VI.

       The question submitted.

Part I.

       Table of Contents

The Existence Of Moral Evil, Or Sin, Consistent With The Holiness Of God.

       Table of Contents

      [pg 032]

      What Time this World's great Workmaister did cast,

      To make all things such as we now behold,

      It seems that he before his eyes had plast

      A goodly patterne, to whose perfect mould

      He fashion'd them as comely as he could,

      That now so fair and seemly they appear,

      As naught may be amended anywhere.

      That wondrous patterne, wheresoe'er it be,

      Whether in earth laid up in secret store,

      Or else in heav'n, that no man may it see

      With sinful eyes, for feare it to deflore,

      Is perfect Beautie.—Spenser.

      [pg 033]

Chapter I.

       Table of Contents

The Scheme Of Necessity Denies That Man Is Responsible For The Existence Of Sin.

       Table of Contents

      Ye, who live,

      Do so each cause refer to Heaven above,

      E'en as its motion, of necessity,

      Drew with it all that moves. If this were so,

      Free choice in you were none; nor justice would

      There should be joy for virtue, woe for ill.—Dante.

      The doctrine of necessity has been, in all ages of the world, the great stronghold of atheism. It is the mighty instrument with which the unbeliever seeks to strip man of all accountability, and to destroy our faith and confidence in God, by tracing up the existence of all moral evil to his agency. “The opinion of necessity,” says Bishop Butler, “seems to be the very basis in which infidelity grounds itself.” It will not be denied that this opinion seems, at first view, to be inconsistent with the free agency and accountability of man, and that it appears to impair our idea of God by staining it with impurity. Hence it has been used, by the profligate and profane, to excuse men for their crimes. It is against this use of the doctrine that we intend to direct the force of our argument.

      But here the question arises: Can we refute the argument against the accountability of man, without attacking the doctrine on which it is founded? If we can meet this argument at all, it must be either by showing that no such consequence flows from the scheme of necessity, or by showing that the scheme itself is false. We cannot meet the sceptic, who seeks [pg 034] to excuse his sins, and to cast dishonour on God, and expose his sophistry, unless we can show that his premises are unsound, or that his conclusions are false. We must do the one or the other of these two things; or, whatever we may think of his moral sensibility, we must acknowledge the superiority of his reason and logic. After long and patient meditation on the subject, we have been forced to the conclusion, that the only way to repel the argument of the sceptic, and cause the intrinsic lustre of man's free-agency to appear, is to unravel and refute the doctrine of necessity.

      If we could preserve the scheme of necessity, and at the same time avoid the consequences in question, we may fairly conclude that the means of doing so have been found by some of the illustrious advocates of that scheme. How, then, do they vindicate their own system? How do they repel the frightful consequences which infidelity deduces from it? This is the first question to be considered; and the discussion of it will occupy the remainder of the present chapter.

Section I.

       Table of Contents

The attempts of Calvin and Luther to reconcile the scheme of necessity with the responsibility of man.

       Table of Contents

      Nothing can be more unjust than to bring, as has often been done, the unqualified charge of fatalism against the great Protestant reformers. The manner in which this odious epithet is frequently used, applying it without discrimination to the brightest ornaments and to the darkest specimens of humanity, is calculated to engender far more heat than light. Indeed, under this very ambiguous term, three distinct schemes of doctrine, widely different from each other, are set forth; schemes which every candid inquirer after truth should be careful to distinguish. The first is that scheme of fatalism which rests on the fundamental idea that there is nothing in the universe besides matter and local motion. This doctrine, of course, denies the spirituality of the Divine Being, as well as of all created souls, and strikes a fatal blow at the immutability of moral distinctions. It is unnecessary to say, that in such a sense of the word, neither Calvin nor Luther can be justly accused of fatalism; as it is well known that both of them maintained the spirituality of God, as well as the reality of moral distinctions prior to all human laws.

      [pg 035]

      The second scheme of fatalism rises above the first in point of dignity and purity of character. It proceeds on the idea that all things in heaven and earth are bound together by “an implexed series and concatenation of causes:” it admits the existence СКАЧАТЬ