On this page
-
Text (1)
-
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
was never predestinated to salvation , and that whatever good I might have done -would hare been to no purpose . " —P . 34 . Milton ' s reason as well as feelings led him to assert the libertarian
hypothesis , and to took with no friendly eye upon the opposite doctrine . It must be admitted , however , tfaat lie treats the subject ia a religious , more than in a philosophical sense .
To comprehend the whole matter in a few words , the sum of the argument may be thus stated in strict conformity with reason : God , of his wisdom deter ^ mined to create men and angels reasonable beings , and therefore free agents ; at the same time he foresaw which way the bias of their will would incline , in the exercise of their own uncontrolled
liberty . What then ? Shall we say that this foresight or foreknowledge on the part of God imposed on them the necessity of acting in any definite way ? No more than if the future event had been
foreseen by aqy human being . For what any human being has foreseen as certain to happen , will not less certainly happen than what God himself has predicted * Thus Elisha foresaw how much evil
Hazael would bring upon the children of Israel in the course of a few years , 2 Kings viii . 12 . Yet no one would affirm that the evil took place necessarily on account of the foreknowledge of Elisha ; for had he never foreknown it , the event
would have occurred with equal certainty , through the free-will of the agent . So neither does any thing happen because God has foreseen it ; but he foresees the event of every action , because he is acquainted with their natural causes , which , in pursuance of his own decree , are left
at liberty to exert their legitimate influence . Consequently the issue does not depend on God who foresees it , but on him alone who is the object of his foresight . Since , therefore , as has before
been shewn , there can be uo absolute decree of God regarding free agents , undoubtedly the prescience of the Deity ( which cati no more bias free agents than the prescience of man , that is , not at all , since the action in both cases is
intransitive , and has no external influence ) can neither impose any necessity of itself , nor can it be considered at all the cause of free actions . If it be so considered , the very name of liberty must be altogether abolished as an unmeaning sound ; and
that not only in matters of religion , but even in questions of morality and indifferent things . There can be nothing but what wfll happen necessarily , since there is nothing but what is foreknown by God ,
Untitled Article
" That this long discussion may he at length cotfcHftfed by a tftlef snounary Of the whole matter , we must Hold that ' God foreknows all future erents , bat that Jie has not decreed them all absolutely : ) est all sin should be imputed to the Deity , and evil spirits and wicked men should be
exempted from blame . Does my oppo nent avail himself of this , and think the concession enough to prove either that God does Dot foreknow every tiling , or that all future events must therefore happen necessarily , because God has foreknown them ? I allow that future events
which God has foreseen , will happen certainly , bttt not of necessity . They will happen certainly , because ; the ¦ divine prescience cannot be deceived , but they will uot happen necessarily , because prescience can have no influence on the object foreknown , inasmuch as it U only an intransitive action . What therefore
is to happen according to contingency and the free-will of man , is not the effect of God ' s prescience , but is produced by tfoe free agency of its own natural causes , the future spontaneous inclination of jvhich is perfectly known to God . Thus Crod foreknew that Adam would foil of his
own free-will ; his fait therefore Was certain , but not necessary , since it proceeded from his own free-will , which is incompatible with necessity / V-Pp . 40—42 . The following quotation will explain Milton ' s drift in his argument , and also the zeal with which he
maintains it : u There are some who in tl ^ eir zeal , to oppose this doctrine do not hesitate even to assert that God is himself the cause aud origin of sin . Such men , if they are not to be looked upon as misguided
rather than mischievous , should be " ranked among the most abandoned of all blasphemers . An attempt to refute then :., would be nothing more than an argument to prove that God was not the ¦ ' evil spirit . —P . 43 .
Milton opens Chap . IV ., which is entitled , "Of Predestination , " with a definition of the " principal special is
decree of God relating to man . " Th , he says , is termed ""Predestination , whereby God in pity to mankind , though foreseeing that they would Fall of their own accord , predestinated to eternal salvation before the foundation
of the world those who should believe and continue in the faith ; for a manifestation of the glory of-his . mercy , grace , and wisdom , according to his purpose in Christ . "
Untitled Article
688 Review . ' - —Miltons Treatise of Christian Doctrine .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Nov. 2, 1825, page 688, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2542/page/48/
-