Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

oiples, no one act of choice would be free, but every one necessary; because, every act of choice being the effect of a foregoing act, every act would be necessarily connected with that foregoing cause. For Mr. Chubb himself says, p. 389, "When the selfmoving power is exerted, it becomes the necessary cause of its effects." So that his notion of a free act, that is rewardable or punishable, is a heap of contradictions. It is a free act, and yet, by his own notion of freedom, is necessary; and therefore by him it is a contradiction to suppose it to be free. According to him, every free act is the produce of a free act; so that there must be an infinite number of free acts in succession, without any beginning, in an agent that has a beginning. And therefore here is an infinite number of free acts, every one of them free; and yet not one of them free, but every act in the whole infinite chain a necessary effect. All the acts are rewardable or punishable, and yet the agent cannot, in reason, be the object of reward or punishment, on account of any one of these actions. He is active in them all, and passive in none; yet active in none, but passive in all, &c.

V. Mr. Chubb does most strenuously deny, that Motives are causes of the acts of the Will; or that the moving principle in man is moved, or caused to be exerted by Motives.... His words, pages 388 and 389, are, "If the moving principle in man is MOVED, or CAUSED TO BE EXERTED, by something external to man, which all Motives are, then it would not be a selfmoving principle, seeing it would be moved by a principle external to itself. And to say, that a selfmoving principle is MOVED, OF CAUSED TO BE EXERTED, by a cause external to itself, is absurd and a contradiction," &c. And in the next page, it is particularly and largely insisted, that Motives are causes in no case, that they are merely passive in the production of action, and have no causality in the production of it; no causality, to be the cause of the exertion of the Will.

Now I desire it may be considered, how this can possibly consist with what he says in other places. Let it be noted bere,

[blocks in formation]

1. Mr. Chubb abundantly speaks of Motives as excitements of the acts of the Will; and says, that Motives do excite volition, and induce it, and that they are necessary to this end; that in the reason and nature of things, volition cannot take place without Motives to excite it. But now, if Motives excite the Will, they move it; and yet he says, it is absurd to say, the Will is moved by Motives. And again, (if language is of any significancy at all) if Motives excite volition, then they are the cause of its being excited; and to cause volition to be excited, is to cause it to be put forth or exerted. Yea, Mr. Chubb says himself, p. 317, Motive is necessary to the exertion of the active faculty. To excite, is positively to do something; and certainly that which does something, is the cause of the thing done by it. To create, is to cause to be created; to make, is to cause to be made; to kill, is to cause to be killed; to quicken, is to cause to be quickened; and to excite, is to cause to be excited. To excite, is to be a cause, in the most proper sense, not merely a negative occasion, but a ground of existence by positive influence. The notion of exciting, is exerting influence to cause the effect to arise or come forth into existence.

2. Mr. Chubb himself, page 317, speaks of Motives as the ground and reason of action BY INFLUENCE, and BY PREVAIL. Now, what can be meant by a cause, but something that is the ground and reason of a thing by its influence, an influence that is prevalent and so effectual.

ING INFLUENCE.

3. This author not only speaks of Motives as the ground and reason of action, by prevailing influence; but expressly of their influence as prevailing FOR THE PRODUCTION of an action, in the same page 317: Which makes the inconsist ency still more palpable and notorious. The production of an effect is certainly the causing of an effect; and productive influence is causal influence, if any thing is; and that which has this influence prevalently, so as thereby to become the ground of another thing, is a cause of that thing, if there be any such thing as a cause. This influence, Mr. Chubb says, Motives have to produce an action; and yet, he says, it is absurd and a contradiction, to say they are causes.

4. In the same page, he once and again speaks of Motives as disposing the agent to action, by their influence. His words are these: "As Motive, which takes place in the understanding, and is the product of intelligence, is NECESSARY to action, that is, to the EXERTION of the active faculty, because that faculty would not be exerted without some PREVIOUS REASON to DISPOSE the mind to action; so from hence it plainly appears, that when a man is said to be disposed to one action rather than another, this properly signifies the PREVAILING INFLUENCE that one Motive has upon a man FOR THE PRODUCTION of an action, or for the being at rest, before all other Motives, for the production of the contrary..... For as Motive is the ground and reason of any action, so the Motive that prevails, DISPOSES the agent to the performance of that action."

Now, if Motives dispose the mind to action, then they cause the mind to be disposed; and to cause the mind to be disposed is to cause it to be willing; and to cause it to be willing is to cause it to Will; and that is the same thing as to be the cause of an act of the Will. And yet this same Mr. Chubb holds it to be absurd, to suppose Motive to be a cause of the act of the Will.

And if we compare these things together, we have here again a whole heap of inconsistencies. Motives are the previous ground and reason of the acts of the Will; yea, the necessary ground and reason of their exertion, without which they will not be exerted, and cannot, in the nature of things, take place; and they do excite these acts of the Will, and do this by a prevailing influence; yea, an influence which prevails for the production of the act of the Will, and for the disposing of the mind to it; and yet it is absurd to suppose Motive to be a cause of an act of the Will, or that a principle of Will is moved or caused to be exerted by it, or that it has any causality in the production of it, or any causality to be the cause of the exertion of the Will.

[ocr errors]

A due consideration of these things which Mr. Chubb has advanced, the strange inconsistencies which the notion of liberty, consisting in the Will's power of selfdetermination void

of all necessity, united with that dictate of common sense, that there can be no volition without a Motive, drove him into, may be sufficient to convince us, that it is utterly impossible ever to make that notion of liberty consistent with the influence of Motives in volition. And as it is in a manner selfevident, that there can be no act of Will, choice, or preference of the mind, without some Motive or inducement, something in the mind's view, which it aims at, seeks, inclines to, and goes after; so it is most manifest, there is no such liberty in the universe as Arminians insist on; nor any such thing possible, or conceivable.

SECTION XI.

The Evidence of GOD's certain Foreknowledge of the Volitions of moral Agents.

THAT the acts of the Wills of moral agents are not contingent events, in that sense, as to be without all necessity, appears by God's certain foreknowledge of such events.

In handling this argument, I would in the first place prove, that God has a certain foreknowledge of the voluntary acts of moral agents; and secondly, shew the consequence, or how it follows from hence, that the volitions of moral agents are not contingent, so as to be without necessity of connexion and consequence.

First, I am to prove, that God has an absolute and certain foreknowledge of the free actions of moral agents.

One would think, it should be wholly needless to enter on such an argument with any that profess themselves Christians But so it is; God's certain foreknowledge of the free acts of moral agents, is denied by some that pretend to believe the scriptures to be the word of God; and especially of late, I therefore, shall consider the evidence of such a prescience in the Most High, as fully as the designed limits of this essay

1

will admit of; supposing myself herein to have to do with such as own the truth of the Bible.

ARG. I. My first argument shall be taken from God's prediction of such events. Here I would, in the first place, lay. down these two things as axioms.

(1.) If God does not foreknow, he cannot foretell such events; that is, he cannot peremptorily and certainly foretell them. If God has no more than an uncertain guess concerning events of this kind, then he can declare no more than an uncertain guess. Positively to foretell, is to profess to foreknow, or to declare positive foreknowledge.

(2.) If God does not certainly foreknow the future volitions of moral agents, then neither can he certainly foreknow those events which are consequent and dependent on these volitions. The existence of the one depending on the existence of the other; the knowledge of the existence of the one depends on the knowledge of the existence of the other; and the one cannot be more certain than the other.

Therefore, how many, how great, and how extensive soever the consequences of the volitions of moral agents may be; though they should extend to an alteration of the state of things through the universe, and should be continued in a series of successive events to all eternity, and should in the progress of things branch forth into an infinite number of series, each of them going on in an endless line or chain of events; God must be as ignorant of all these consequences, as he is of the volitions whence they first take their rise: All these events, and the whole state of things depending on them, how important, extensive and vast soever, must be hid from him.

These positions being such as, I suppose, none will deny, I now proceed to observe the following things.

1. Men's moral conduct and qualities, their virtues and vices, their wickedness and good practice, things rewardable and punishable, have often been foretold by God. Pharaoh's moral conduct, in refusing to obey God's command, in letting his people go, was foretold. God says to Moses, Exod. iii. 19. "I am sure, that the king of Egypt will not let you go."

« AnteriorContinuar »