Church of England -- Sermons; Conscience; Obedience; Sermons, English -- 18th century; Trinity -- Early works to 1800
Thirdly, the greatest and wisest of all their philosophers were never
able to give any satisfaction to others and themselves in their notions
of a deity. They were often extremely gross and absurd in their
conceptions, and those who made the fairest conjectures are such as were
generally allowed by the learned to have seen the system of Moses, if I
may so call it, who was in great reputation at that time in the heathen
world, as we find by Diodorus, Justin, Longinus, and other authors; for
the rest, the wisest among them laid aside all notions after a deity as a
disquisition vain and fruitless, which indeed it was upon unrevealed
principles; and those who ventured to engage too far fell into
incoherence and confusion.
Fourthly, Those among them who had the justest conceptions of a Divine
power, and did also admit a providence, had no notion at all of entirely
relying and depending upon either; they trusted in themselves for all
things, but as for a trust or dependence upon God, they would not have
understood the phrase; it made no part of the profane style.
Therefore it was that, in all issues and events which they could not
reconcile to their own sentiments of reason and justice, they were quite
disconcerted; they had no retreat, but upon every blow of adverse
fortune, either affected to be indifferent, or grew sullen and severe, or
else yielded and sunk like other men.
* * * * *
Having now produced certain points wherein the wisdom and virtue of all
unrevealed philosophy fell short and was very imperfect, I go on, in the
second place, to show, in several instances, where some of the most
renowned philosophers have been grossly defective in their lessons of
morality.
Thales, the founder of the Ionic sect, so celebrated for morality, being
asked how a man might bear ill-fortune with greatest ease, answered, “By
seeing his enemies in a worse condition.” An answer truly barbarous,
unworthy of human nature, and which included such consequences as must
destroy all society from the world.
Solon lamenting the death of a son, one told him, “You lament in vain.”
“Therefore,” said he, “I lament, because it is in vain.” This was a
plain confession how imperfect all his philosophy was, and that something
was still wanting. He owned that all his wisdom and morals were useless,
and this upon one of the most frequent accidents in life. How much
better could he have learned to support himself even from David, by his
entire dependence upon God, and that before our Saviour had advanced the
notions of religion to the height and perfection wherewith He hath
instructed His disciples!
Plato himself, with all his refinements, placed happiness in wisdom,
health, good fortune, honour, and riches, and held that they who enjoyed
all these were perfectly happy; which opinion was indeed unworthy its
owner, leaving the wise and good man wholly at the mercy of uncertain
chance, and to be miserable without resource.
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