Systematic Theology (Volume 1 of 3)Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Religion
Systematic Theology (Volume 1 of 3)
Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Baptists -- Doctrines; Theology, Doctrinal
Personality = self-consciousness + self-determination in view of
moral ends. The brute has intelligence and will, but has neither
self-consciousness, conscience, nor free-will. See Julius Müller,
Doctrine of Sin, 1:76 _sq._ Diman, Theistic Argument, 91,
251—“Suppose ‘the intuitions of the moral faculty are the slowly
organized results of experience received from the race’; still,
having found that the universe affords evidence of a supremely
intelligent cause, we may believe that man’s moral nature affords
the highest illustration of its mode of working”; 358—“Shall we
explain the lower forms of will by the higher, or the higher by
the lower?”
2. Man’s moral nature proves the existence of a holy Lawgiver and Judge.
The elements of the proof are:—(_a_) Conscience recognizes the existence
of a moral law which has supreme authority. (_b_) Known violations of this
moral law are followed by feelings of ill-desert and fears of judgment.
(_c_) This moral law, since it is not self-imposed, and these threats of
judgment, since they are not self-executing, respectively argue the
existence of a holy will that has imposed the law, and of a punitive power
that will execute the threats of the moral nature.
See Bishop Butler’s Sermons on Human Nature, in Works, Bohn’s ed.,
385-414. Butler’s great discovery was that of the supremacy of
conscience in the moral constitution of man: “Had it strength as
it has right, had it power as it has manifest authority, it would
absolutely govern the world.” Conscience = the moral judiciary of
the soul—not law, nor sheriff, but judge; see under Anthropology.
Diman, Theistic Argument, 251—“Conscience does not lay down a law;
it warns us of the existence of a law; and not only of a law, but
of a purpose—not our own, but the purpose of another, which it is
our mission to realize.” See Murphy, Scientific Bases of Faith,
218 _sq._ It proves personality in the Lawgiver, because its
utterances are not abstract, like those of reason, but are in the
nature of command; they are not in the indicative, but in the
imperative, mood; it says, “thou shalt” and “thou shalt not.” This
argues _will_.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account