The works of John Dryden, now first collected in eighteen volumes. Volume 17Dryden, John
General
The works of John Dryden, now first collected in eighteen volumes. Volume 17
Dryden, John
English literature
I have ever thought, that the wise men in all ages have not much differed
in their opinions of religion; I mean, as it is grounded on human reason:
for reason, as far as it is right, must be the same in all men; and truth
being but one, they must consequently think in the same train. Thus it
is not to be doubted but the religion of Socrates, Plato, and Plutarch,
was not different in the main; who doubtless believed the identity of
one Supreme Intellectual Being, which we call GOD. But because they who
have written the Life of Plutarch in other languages, are contented
barely to assert that our author believed one God, without quoting those
passages of his which would clear the point, I will give you two of
them, amongst many, in his “Morals.” The first is in his book of the
Cessation of Oracles; where arguing against the Stoics, (in behalf of
the Platonists,) who disputed against the plurality of worlds with this
argument,—“That if there were many worlds, how then could it come to
pass that there was one only Fate, and one Providence to guide them all?
(for it was granted by the Platonists that there was but one;) and why
should not many Jupiters or gods be necessary for government of many
worlds?” To this Plutarch answers,—“That this their captious question
was but trifling; for where is the necessity of supposing many Jupiters
for this plurality of worlds, when one excellent Being, endued with
mind and reason, such as he is, whom we acknowledge to be the Father
and Lord of all things, is sufficient to direct and rule these worlds;
whereas if there were more Supreme Agents, their decrees must still be
the more absurd and contradictious to one another.” I pretend not this
passage to be translated word for word, but it is the sense of the whole,
though the order of the sentence be inverted. The other is more plain;
it is in his comment on the word EI, or those two letters inscribed on
the gates of the temple at Delphos; where, having given the several
opinions concerning it, as first, that ἐι signifies _if_, because all
the questions which were made to Apollo began with _If_; as suppose
they asked,—_If_ the Grecians should overcome the Persians,—_If_ such a
marriage should come to pass, &c.; and afterwards, that ἐι might signify
_thou art_; as the second person of the present tense of ἐιμὶ, intimating
thereby the being or perpetuity of being belonging to Apollo, as a god
(in the same sense that God expressed himself to Moses,—_I AM hath sent
thee_;) Plutarch subjoins, (as inclining to this latter opinion,) these
following words:—“ἐι ἔν (says he) signifies, _thou art one_, for there
are not many deities, but only one:” Continues, “I mean not one in the
aggregate sense, as we say—one army, or one body of men, constituted of
many individuals, but that which is, must of necessity be one; and to be,
implies to be one. One is that which is a simple being, uncompounded, or
free from mixture; therefore, to be one in this sense, is only consistent
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account