On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
ported ; so that , without engaging inyseff in long deductions , he will easily perceive whether they are well or illfounded . I cannot help remarking his exact judgment in the orderly arrangement
of his propositions , and it is true , as lie well observes , thatf in putting the third in the place of the second , divines , philosophers , and even Descartes himself , assume the Unity of God instead of proving it .
If , when the question was first proposed to me , I had comprehended , as 14 iow do , the intention of that learned person , I should not have offered him trie reply which I seut you , but one Vnore concise and better suited to the order of nature and reason , each article appearing in its proper place .
I think that whoever turns his thoughts upon himself , must assuredly know , without being able to hesitate , that there has been , from all eternity , an intelligent Being * I also believe , that it is evident to every reflecting person that there is also an infinite
Being . But I say , that as there must be an infinite Being , so that infinite Being must be eternal , because that which is infinite , must have been infinite from all eternity , for any additions
made in time , could not render any thing infinite , if it were not so in itself , and of itself , from all eternity ; such being the nature of infinite , that nothing can be added to , or taken from it . Whence it follows , that
infcnite cannot be distributed into more than one , and must remain in one alone . This , in my judgment , is a proof < fc priori , that the eternal , independent
Being is only one , and if we add the idea of all possible perfections , we have then the idea of a God eternal , infinite , omniscient and omnipotent ,
If this reasoning should accord with the opinion of the excellent person who will examine it , I shall be very much gratified . And if it should not appear to him satisfactory , I shall
esteem it a great favour if he will communicate to me his mode of argument , which I will either conceal or divulge as he may choose . Pray assure him of my profound respect . I am , &c . J . LOCKE .
Untitled Article
* The Correspondence between . Locke and Limborch , translated * & 10
Untitled Article
No . 42 . ' ; Philfp & Limborch to John Locket \ Amsterdam , CaL Jul . 1698 * My dear Fbienu , YOUR last letter I communicated to that eminent person , who is much obliged by your exertions , in compliance with his request , though he does
not fully acquiesce in your mode of reasoning . His own method is to prove , in the first place , that there must be some Being self-existent and self-sufficient ; then that such a Being is only one ; and in the third place , that such a Being contains in himself all perfeciions , and is , therefore , God . But
you , in your tram of argument , presume , as evident to every man of serious consideration , that there must be an infinite Being , as to whom , nothing can be added or taken away . This appears to him the same as to
take for granted that there is an allperfect Being , which is the third proposition of his Thesis . And thus , by anticipating this third part of his Thesis , you prove the second . Yet the second should rather have been first proved , from whence the third might then have been concluded . For this
reason I submitted to your consideration , whether his order might not be advantageously changed , and then his third would become his second proposition * But as the reasoning proceeded in the other order , the proposition ought not to have been
presumed , but rather proved from the first proposition . Or , adopting his method , it ought first , from the acknowledged existence of an eternal and self-sufficient Being , to be proved that he is one ; and then from this
proof it might be deduced that such a Being must be infinite or all-perfect . He has not yet communicated to me his method , and I very much doubt whether he will . His scruples are the same as yours . He fears the severe censures of the divines who set
a black mark on whatever does not proceed from their own school , and allow themselves to traduce it as the vilest heresy . I will try , however , whether , in a longer conversation
which he has promised to afford me , 1 may not discover something , which I will endeavour to send you . Farewell , my most worthy friend . Yours affectionately , lVaLIMBOR € H .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1819, page 219, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1771/page/7/
-